Streja 2014.
| Methods | Country: USA Setting: community (home) Type: RCT |
|
| Participants | 242 parents or guardians of children aged 2 to 14 years with asthma from low‐income, predominantly ethnic minority families, living in households with at least 1 current smoker where smoking had occurred at home | |
| Interventions |
Intervention: tailored Spanish/English video addressing implications of SHS exposure for children with asthma, possible efficacy of household SHS exposure reductions on the child's health and frequency of asthma attacks, and strategies to reduce household SHS exposure. A companion Spanish/English workbook was also provided to reinforce messages in the DVD and to encourage discussion among participating and non‐participating household members. Brief counselling consisted of asking participants to use the DVD and workbook only. Booster elements included a refrigerator magnet, a mug, and "no smoking" signs to serve as reminders. Control: received standard brochures describing the importance of SHS exposure as an asthma trigger |
|
| Outcomes | Child exposure: self‐reported SHS exposure with two separate surveys of parents/guardians and children; urinary cotinine in children; passive air nicotine monitors in major activity rooms Child illness: child's asthma severity, asthma‐related quality of life Target behavioural change: reduced smoking in household (including smoking ban) |
|
| Type of intervention | Community‐based | |
| Notes | Conflict of interest: unclear Source of funding: National Institutes of Health grants HL53957 from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, Division of Lung Diseases, and CA16042 from the National Cancer Institute |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not specified |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Sealed envelopes with allocations opened after baseline data collection |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | 76% follow‐up in intervention group and 70% in control group |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Unclear whether blinded, but objective air nicotine measure used |