Table 2.
Effect of indoor renovation exposure on groups of CHDs
|
Indoor renovation |
COR (95%CI) | AORa (95%CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | |||
| Controls |
77 |
331 |
Reference |
Reference |
| Cases |
101 |
245 |
1.82 (1.30, 2.56) |
1.89 ** (1.29, 2.77) |
| CHD Groups |
|
|
|
|
| Complex malformation |
23 |
42 |
2.35 (1.34, 4.15) |
2.65 ** (1.38, 5.07) |
| Isolated Cardiac defect |
80 |
201 |
1.71 (1.20, 2.45) |
1.76** (1.18, 2.64) |
| Subtype for isolated cardiac defect |
|
|
|
|
| Septal defect |
38 |
113 |
1.45 (0.93, 2.25) |
1.56 (0.93, 2.62) |
| Conotruncal defect |
34 |
102 |
1.43 (0.90, 2.27) |
1.84 * (1.08, 3.13) |
| Right-sided obstructive |
18 |
41 |
1.89 (1.03, 3.46) |
1.41 (0.69, 2.88) |
| Left-sided obstructive |
17 |
39 |
1.87 (1.01, 3.49) |
1.51 (0.72, 3.17) |
| Anomalous venous return |
12 |
23 |
2.24 (1.07, 4.70) |
2.51 * (1.12, 5.66) |
| Others | 15 | 30 | 2.15 (1.10, 4.19) | 2.63 * (1.19, 5.80) |
a Variables entered were maternal age, maternal education level, place of residence (category), folate intake, ETS, factory or landfill nearby, air ventilation and hospital distribution (category).
Significant differences between the mothers of case and control groups were indicated as follows: * (p < 0.05), ** (p < 0.01), (tested two-tailed).