拉贾斯坦邦焦特布尔农村妇女的家庭燃料偏好及其与呼吸困难的关系:一项横断面研究。

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Indian journal of public health Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-13 DOI:10.4103/ijph.ijph_434_24
Neeti Rustagi, Shaima Abdul Jabbar, R Ranjitha, Arun Kumar Sharma, Suman Saurabh, Ankit Mittal
{"title":"拉贾斯坦邦焦特布尔农村妇女的家庭燃料偏好及其与呼吸困难的关系:一项横断面研究。","authors":"Neeti Rustagi, Shaima Abdul Jabbar, R Ranjitha, Arun Kumar Sharma, Suman Saurabh, Ankit Mittal","doi":"10.4103/ijph.ijph_434_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Indoor air pollution is a critical global health concern and is associated with an increased incidence of respiratory infections. Despite the introduction of a subsidiary scheme, the adoption of clean fuel remains limited in rural India.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The current study investigated the fuel preferences and its association with participants characteristics, particulate matter (PM2.5) levels and respiratory complaints.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A cross sectional study was done among rural women in Jodhpur, Rajasthan. A total of 480 women aged 15 years and above were included, and 120 households were selected using systematic random sampling technique for PM2.5 level assessment. Statistical analysis was done using Chi-square test, Fischer's exact test, Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis test. Post hoc test with Bonferroni correction were used to identify differences between groups of fuel users.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study revealed that 43.1% (207 participants) primarily used biomass as their fuel of choice, while 32.5% (156) primarily preferred liquified petroleum gas (LPG). Only LPG was used by 19.7% (95) of participants, and a small proportion of 4.58% (22) relied solely on mud stoves. There was significant association between education status, family income, years of cooking and fuel preferences among the participants (P < 0.05). The PM2.5 levels were higher among biomass users than LPG users.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Study highlighted the intricate interplay between sociodemographic factors, cooking practices, PM2.5 concentration, and respiratory symptoms in rural settings, emphasizing the need for increased advocacy on LPG adoption to mitigate indoor air pollution-related health risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":13298,"journal":{"name":"Indian journal of public health","volume":"68 4","pages":"482-487"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Household Fuel Preference and Its Association with Breathing Difficulty among Rural Women in Jodhpur, Rajasthan: A Cross-sectional Study.\",\"authors\":\"Neeti Rustagi, Shaima Abdul Jabbar, R Ranjitha, Arun Kumar Sharma, Suman Saurabh, Ankit Mittal\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/ijph.ijph_434_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Indoor air pollution is a critical global health concern and is associated with an increased incidence of respiratory infections. Despite the introduction of a subsidiary scheme, the adoption of clean fuel remains limited in rural India.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The current study investigated the fuel preferences and its association with participants characteristics, particulate matter (PM2.5) levels and respiratory complaints.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A cross sectional study was done among rural women in Jodhpur, Rajasthan. A total of 480 women aged 15 years and above were included, and 120 households were selected using systematic random sampling technique for PM2.5 level assessment. Statistical analysis was done using Chi-square test, Fischer's exact test, Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis test. Post hoc test with Bonferroni correction were used to identify differences between groups of fuel users.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study revealed that 43.1% (207 participants) primarily used biomass as their fuel of choice, while 32.5% (156) primarily preferred liquified petroleum gas (LPG). Only LPG was used by 19.7% (95) of participants, and a small proportion of 4.58% (22) relied solely on mud stoves. There was significant association between education status, family income, years of cooking and fuel preferences among the participants (P < 0.05). The PM2.5 levels were higher among biomass users than LPG users.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Study highlighted the intricate interplay between sociodemographic factors, cooking practices, PM2.5 concentration, and respiratory symptoms in rural settings, emphasizing the need for increased advocacy on LPG adoption to mitigate indoor air pollution-related health risks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13298,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian journal of public health\",\"volume\":\"68 4\",\"pages\":\"482-487\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian journal of public health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijph.ijph_434_24\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian journal of public health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijph.ijph_434_24","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:室内空气污染是一个重要的全球健康问题,并与呼吸道感染发病率增加有关。尽管引入了一项附属计划,但在印度农村,清洁燃料的采用仍然有限。目的:本研究调查了燃料偏好及其与参与者特征、颗粒物(PM2.5)水平和呼吸系统疾病的关系。材料和方法:在拉贾斯坦邦焦特布尔的农村妇女中进行了一项横断面研究。采用系统随机抽样技术,选取120户家庭,共纳入480名15岁及以上女性进行PM2.5水平评估。统计分析采用卡方检验、Fischer精确检验、Mann-Whitney U检验和Kruskal-Wallis检验。使用Bonferroni校正的事后检验来确定燃料使用者组之间的差异。结果:研究显示,43.1%(207名参与者)主要使用生物质作为他们的燃料选择,而32.5%(156名参与者)主要选择液化石油气(LPG)。只有19.7%(95人)的参与者使用液化石油气,而4.58%(22人)的一小部分人完全依赖泥炉。受教育程度、家庭收入、烹饪年数和燃料偏好之间存在显著相关(P < 0.05)。生物质使用者的PM2.5水平高于液化石油气使用者。结论:研究强调了农村地区社会人口因素、烹饪习惯、PM2.5浓度和呼吸道症状之间复杂的相互作用,强调有必要加强宣传采用液化石油气,以减轻室内空气污染相关的健康风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Household Fuel Preference and Its Association with Breathing Difficulty among Rural Women in Jodhpur, Rajasthan: A Cross-sectional Study.

Background: Indoor air pollution is a critical global health concern and is associated with an increased incidence of respiratory infections. Despite the introduction of a subsidiary scheme, the adoption of clean fuel remains limited in rural India.

Objectives: The current study investigated the fuel preferences and its association with participants characteristics, particulate matter (PM2.5) levels and respiratory complaints.

Materials and methods: A cross sectional study was done among rural women in Jodhpur, Rajasthan. A total of 480 women aged 15 years and above were included, and 120 households were selected using systematic random sampling technique for PM2.5 level assessment. Statistical analysis was done using Chi-square test, Fischer's exact test, Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis test. Post hoc test with Bonferroni correction were used to identify differences between groups of fuel users.

Results: The study revealed that 43.1% (207 participants) primarily used biomass as their fuel of choice, while 32.5% (156) primarily preferred liquified petroleum gas (LPG). Only LPG was used by 19.7% (95) of participants, and a small proportion of 4.58% (22) relied solely on mud stoves. There was significant association between education status, family income, years of cooking and fuel preferences among the participants (P < 0.05). The PM2.5 levels were higher among biomass users than LPG users.

Conclusion: Study highlighted the intricate interplay between sociodemographic factors, cooking practices, PM2.5 concentration, and respiratory symptoms in rural settings, emphasizing the need for increased advocacy on LPG adoption to mitigate indoor air pollution-related health risks.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Indian journal of public health
Indian journal of public health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
92
审稿时长
21 weeks
期刊介绍: Indian Journal of Public Health is a peer-reviewed international journal published Quarterly by the Indian Public Health Association. It is indexed / abstracted by the major international indexing systems like Index Medicus/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, PUBMED, etc. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles. The Indian Journal of Public Health publishes articles of authors from India and abroad with special emphasis on original research findings that are relevant for developing country perspectives including India. The journal considers publication of articles as original article, review article, special article, brief research article, CME / Education forum, commentary, letters to editor, case series reports, etc. The journal covers population based studies, impact assessment, monitoring and evaluation, systematic review, meta-analysis, clinic-social studies etc., related to any domain and discipline of public health, specially relevant to national priorities, including ethical and social issues. Articles aligned with national health issues and policy implications are prefered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信