Sauni Riitta, Uitti Jukka, Jauhiainen Merja, Kreiss Kathleen, Sigsgaard Torben, Verbeek Jos H
Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Tampere, Finland.
Evid Based Child Health. 2013 May;8(3):944-1000. doi: 10.1002/ebch.1914.
Dampness and mould in buildings have been associated with adverse respiratory symptoms, asthma and respiratory infections of inhabitants. Moisture damage is a very common problem in private houses, workplaces and public buildings such as schools.
To determine the effectiveness of remediating buildings damaged by dampness and mould in order to reduce or prevent respiratory tract symptoms, infections and symptoms of asthma.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2), which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1951 to June week 1, 2011), EMBASE (1974 to June 2011), CINAHL (1982 to June 2011), Science Citation Index (1973 to June 2011), Biosis Previews (1989 to June 2011), NIOSHTIC (1930 to November 2010) and CISDOC (1974 to November 2010).
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs (cRCTs), interrupted time series studies and controlled before-after (CBA) studies of the effects of remediating dampness and mould in a building on respiratory symptoms, infections and asthma.
Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.
We included eight studies (6538 participants); two RCTs (294 participants), one cRCT (4407 participants) and five CBA studies (1837 participants). The interventions varied from thorough renovation to cleaning only. We found moderate-quality evidence in adults that repairing houses decreased asthma-related symptoms (among others, wheezing (odds ratio (OR) 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 0.75) and respiratory infections (among others, rhinitis (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.66)). For children, we found moderate-quality evidence that the number of acute care visits (among others mean difference (MD) -0.45; 95% CI -0.76 to -0.14)) decreased in the group receiving thorough remediation. One CBA study showed very low-quality evidence that after repairing a mould-damaged office building, asthma-related and other respiratory symptoms decreased. For children and staff in schools, there was very low-quality evidence that asthma-related and other respiratory symptoms in mould-damaged schools were similar to those of children and staff in non-damaged schools, both before and after intervention. For children, respiratory infections might have decreased after the intervention.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found moderate to very low-quality evidence that repairing mould-damaged houses and offices decreases asthma-related symptoms and respiratory infections compared to no intervention in adults. There is very low-quality evidence that although repairing schools did not significantly change respiratory symptoms in staff or children, pupils' visits to physicians due to a common cold were less frequent after remediation of the school. Better research, preferably with a cRCT design and with more validated outcome measures, is needed.
建筑物中的潮湿和霉菌与居住者的不良呼吸道症状、哮喘及呼吸道感染有关。潮湿损害是私人住宅、工作场所及学校等公共建筑中非常常见的问题。
确定修复因潮湿和霉菌受损的建筑物以减少或预防呼吸道症状、感染及哮喘症状的有效性。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(《Cochrane图书馆》2011年第2期),其中包含Cochrane急性呼吸道感染组的专业注册库、MEDLINE(1951年至2011年6月第1周)、EMBASE(1974年至2011年6月)、CINAHL(1982年至2011年6月)、科学引文索引(1973年至2011年6月)、生物学文摘数据库(1989年至2011年6月)、美国国家职业安全与健康研究所数据库(NIOSHTIC)(1930年至2010年11月)和CISDOC(1974年至2010年11月)。
关于修复建筑物中的潮湿和霉菌对呼吸道症状、感染及哮喘影响的随机对照试验(RCT)、整群随机对照试验(cRCT)、中断时间序列研究和前后对照(CBA)研究。
两位作者独立提取数据并评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。
我们纳入了8项研究(6538名参与者);2项RCT(294名参与者)、1项cRCT(4407名参与者)和5项CBA研究(1837名参与者)。干预措施从彻底翻新到仅清洁不等。我们发现中等质量的证据表明,在成年人中,修复房屋可减少与哮喘相关的症状(如喘息(比值比(OR)0.64;95%置信区间(CI)0.55至0.75))及呼吸道感染(如鼻炎(OR 0.57;95%CI 0.49至0.66))。对于儿童,我们发现中等质量的证据表明,接受彻底修复的组急性护理就诊次数(如平均差(MD)-0.45;95%CI -0.76至-0.14))减少。1项CBA研究显示质量极低的证据表明,修复霉菌受损的办公楼后,与哮喘相关及其他呼吸道症状减少。对于学校中的儿童和工作人员,质量极低的证据表明,在干预前后,霉菌受损学校中与哮喘相关及其他呼吸道症状与未受损学校中的儿童和工作人员相似。对于儿童,干预后呼吸道感染可能减少。
我们发现中等至极低质量的证据表明,与不干预相比,修复霉菌受损的房屋和办公室可减少成年人中与哮喘相关的症状及呼吸道感染。质量极低的证据表明,尽管修复学校并未显著改变工作人员或儿童的呼吸道症状,但学校修复后学生因普通感冒就医的频率降低。需要开展更好的研究,最好采用cRCT设计并使用更多经过验证的结局指标。