Facing the Realities of Pragmatic Design Choices in Environmental Health Studies: Experiences from the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network Trial

Objective: Household Air Pollution Intervention Network (HAPIN) investigators tested a complex, non-pharmacological intervention in four low- and middle-income countries as a strategy to mitigate household air pollution and improve health outcomes across the lifespan. Intervention households received a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) stove, continuous fuel delivery and regular behavioral reinforcements for 18 months, whereas controls were asked to continue with usual cooking practices. While HAPIN was designed as an explanatory trial to test the efficacy of the intervention on four primary outcomes, it introduced several pragmatic aspects in its design and conduct that resemble real-life conditions. We surveyed HAPIN investigators and asked them to rank what aspects of the design and conduct they considered were more pragmatic than explanatory. Methods: We used the revised Pragmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary (PRECIS-2) to survey investigators on the degree of pragmatism in nine domains of trial design and conduct using a five-point Likert rank scale from very explanatory (1) to very pragmatic (5). We invited 103 investigators. Participants were given educational material on PRECIS-2, including presentations, papers and examples that described the use and implementation of PRECIS-2. Results: Thirty-five investigators (mean age 42 years, 51% female) participated in the survey. Overall, only 17% ranked all domains as very explanatory, with an average (±SD) rank of 3.2 ± 1.4 across domains. Fewer than 20% of investigators ranked eligibility, recruitment or setting as very explanatory. In contrast, ≥50% of investigators ranked the trial organization, delivery and adherence of the intervention and follow-up as very/rather explanatory whereas ≤17% ranked them as rather/very pragmatic. Finally, &lt;25% of investigators ranked the relevance of outcomes to participants and analysis as very/rather explanatory whereas ≥50% ranked then as rather/very pragmatic. In-country partners were more likely to rank domains as pragmatic when compared to investigators working in central coordination (average rank 3.2 vs. 2.8, respectively; Wilcoxon rank-sum p &lt; 0.001). Conclusion: HAPIN investigators did not consider their efficacy trial to be rather/very explanatory and reported that some aspects of the design and conduct were executed under real-world conditions; however, they also did not consider the trial to be overly pragmatic. Our analysis underscores the importance of using standardized tools such as PRECIS-2 to guide early discussions among investigators in the design of environmental health trials attempting to measure efficacy.</jats:p

Developing Visual Messages to Support Liquefied Petroleum Gas Use in Intervention Homes in the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network (HAPIN) Trial in Rural Guatemala.

BackgroundHousehold air pollution adversely affects human health and the environment, yet more than 40% of the world still depends on solid cooking fuels. The House Air Pollution Intervention Network (HAPIN) randomized controlled trial is assessing the health effects of a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) stove and 18-month supply of free fuel in 3,200 households in rural Guatemala, India, Peru, and Rwanda.AimsWe conducted formative research in Guatemala to create visual messages that support the sustained, exclusive use of LPG in HAPIN intervention households.MethodWe conducted ethnographic research, including direct observation (n = 36), in-depth (n = 18), and semistructured (n = 6) interviews, and 24 focus group discussions (n = 96) to understand participants' experience with LPG. Sixty participants were selected from a pilot study of LPG stove and 2-months of free fuel to assess the acceptability and use of LPG. Emergent themes were used to create visual messages based on observations and interviews in 40 households; messages were tested and revised in focus group discussions with 20 households.ResultsWe identified 50 codes related to household air pollution and stoves; these were reduced into 24 themes relevant to LPG stoves, prioritizing 12 for calendars. Messages addressed fear and reluctance to use LPG; preference of wood stoves for cooking traditional foods; sustainability and accessibility of fuel; association between health outcomes and household air pollution; and the need for inspirational and aspirational messages.DiscussionWe created a flip chart and calendar illustrating themes to promote exclusive LPG use in HAPIN intervention households

Biomass smoke exposure and somatic growth among children: The RESPIRE and CRECER prospective cohort studies in rural Guatemala

Background: Cooking-related biomass smoke is a major source of household air pollution (HAP) and an important health hazard. Prior studies identified associations between HAP exposure and childhood stunting; less is known for underweight and wasting. Few studies had personal HAP measurements. Methods: 557 households in rural Guatemala were enrolled in the CRECER study, the follow-up study of the RESPIRE randomized intervention trial. They were assigned to three groups that received chimney stoves at different ages of the study children. Multiple personal carbon monoxide (CO) exposure measurements were used as proxies for HAP exposures. Children’s heights and weights were measured from 24 to 60 months of age. Height-for-age z-score (HAZ), weight-for-age z-score (WAZ), and weight-for-height z-score (WHZ) were calculated based on the World Health Organization’s Multicentre Growth Reference Study. HAZ, WAZ, and WHZ below −2 were classified as stunting, underweight, and wasting, respectively. Generalized linear models and mixed effects models were applied. Results: 541 children had valid anthropometric data, among whom 488 (90.2 %) were stunted, 192 (35.5 %) were underweight, and 2 (0.3 %) were wasted. A 1 ppm higher average CO exposure was associated with a 0.21 lower HAZ (95 % CI: 0.17–0.25), a 0.13 lower WAZ (95 % CI: 0.10–0.17) and a 0.06 lower WHZ (95 % CI: 0.02–0.10).The associations for HAZ were stronger among boys (coefficient = −0.29, 95 % CI: −0.35 – −0.22) than among girls (coefficient = −0.15, 95 % CI: −0.20 – −0.10). A 1 ppm-year higher cumulative CO exposure was associated with a higher risk of moderate stunting among boys (OR = 1.27, 95 % CI: 1.05-1.59), but not among girls. Discussion: In this rural Guatemalan population, higher HAP exposure was associated with lower HAZ and WAZ. The associations between HAP and HAZ/stunting were stronger among boys. Reducing HAP might benefit childhood somatic growth in rural populations of low-income countries

A risk assessment tool for resumption of research activities during the COVID-19 pandemic for field trials in low resource settings.

RationaleThe spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 has suspended many non-COVID-19 related research activities. Where restarting research activities is permitted, investigators need to evaluate the risks and benefits of resuming data collection and adapt procedures to minimize risk.ObjectivesIn the context of the multicountry Household Air Pollution Intervention (HAPIN) trial conducted in rural, low-resource settings, we developed a framework to assess the risk of each trial activity and to guide protective measures. Our goal is to maximize the integrity of reseach aims while minimizing infection risk based on the latest scientific understanding of the virus.MethodsWe drew on a combination of expert consultations, risk assessment frameworks, institutional guidance and literature to develop our framework. We then systematically graded clinical, behavioral, laboratory and field environmental health research activities in four countries for both adult and child subjects using this framework. National and local government recommendations provided the minimum safety guidelines for our work.ResultsOur framework assesses risk based on staff proximity to the participant, exposure time between staff and participants, and potential viral aerosolization while performing the activity. For each activity, one of four risk levels, from minimal to unacceptable, is assigned and guidance on protective measures is provided. Those activities that can potentially aerosolize the virus are deemed the highest risk.ConclusionsBy applying a systematic, procedure-specific approach to risk assessment for each trial activity, we were able to protect our participants and research team and to uphold our ability to deliver on the research commitments we have made to our staff, participants, local communities, and funders. This framework can be tailored to other research studies conducted in similar settings during the current pandemic, as well as potential future outbreaks with similar transmission dynamics. The trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov NCT02944682 on October 26. 2016