Ultrasound feedback and motivational interviewing targeting smoking cessation in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy.

INTRODUCTION: Cigarette smoking during pregnancy is associated with poor maternal and child health outcomes. Effective interventions to increase smoking cessation rates are needed particularly for pregnant women unable to quit in their first trimester. Real-time ultrasound feedback focused on potential effects of smoking on the fetus may be an effective treatment adjunct, improving smoking outcomes. METHODS: A prospective randomized trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of a smoking cessation intervention consisting of personalized feedback during ultrasound plus motivational interviewing-based counseling sessions. Pregnant smokers (N = 360) between 16 and 26 weeks of gestation were randomly assigned to one of three groups: Best Practice (BP) only, Best Practice plus ultrasound feedback (BP+US), or Motivational Interviewing-based counseling plus ultrasound feedback (MI+US). Assessments were conducted at baseline and end of pregnancy (EOP). RESULTS: Analyses of cotinine-verified self-reported smoking status at EOP indicated that 10.8% of the BP group was not smoking at EOP; 14.2% in the BP+US condition and 18.3% who received MI+US were abstinent, but differences were not statistically significant. Intervention effects were found conditional upon level of baseline smoking, however. Nearly 34% of light smokers (< or =10 cigarettes/day) in the MI+US condition were abstinent at EOP, followed by 25.8% and 15.6% in the BP+US and BP conditions, respectively. Heavy smokers (>10 cigarettes/day) were notably unaffected by the intervention. DISCUSSION: Future research should confirm benefit of motivational interviewing plus ultrasound feedback for pregnant light smokers and explore mechanisms of action. Innovative interventions for pregnant women smoking at high levels are sorely needed.

The heart challenge: The effect of regular aerobic exercise on body fat distribution in third and fourth grade school children: A randomized clinical trial

The pattern of body fat distribution known as "centralized", and characterized by a predominance of subcutaneous fat on the trunk and a "pot belly", has been associated with an increased risk of chronic disease. These patterns of fat distribution, as well as the lifestyle habit variables associated with adult fatness and chronic morbidity clearly begin to develop during childhood, indicating the need for intervention and primary prevention of obesity, particularly the centralized form, during childhood or adolescence. The purpose of this study was to determine whether regular aerobic exercise could beneficially alter the distribution of body fat in 8 and 9 year old children. One hundred and eighty-eight participants were randomized into either a regular aerobic exercise treatment group or a standard physical education program control group. A variety of aerobic activities was used for intervention 5 days per week during physical education class for a period of 12 weeks. Fat distribution was measured by a number of the most commonly used indices, including ratios of body circumferences and skinfolds and indices derived from a principal components analysis. Change over time in average pulse rate was used to determine if intervention actually occurred. Approximately 10% of the students were remeasured, allowing the calculation of intra- and interexaminer measurement reliability estimates for all indices.^ This study group was comparable to the U.S. population, though the study children were slightly larger for certain measures. No effect of the exercise intervention was found. The most likely explanation for this was inadequacy of the intervention, as indicated by the lack of any change in average pulse rate with treatment. The results of the measurement reliability analysis are reported and indicate that body circumference ratios are more precise than skinfold ratios, particularly when multiple observers are used. Reliability estimates for the principal component indices were also high.^ It remains unclear whether the distribution of body fat can be altered with exercise. It is likely that this issue will remain undecided until one highly reliable, valid, and sensitive measure of fat distribution can be found. ^

Prevalence and risk factors of asthma and work -related asthma among U.S. adults: Data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988--1994

This cross-sectional analysis of the data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was conducted to determine the prevalence and determinants of asthma and wheezing among US adults, and to identify the occupations and industries at high risk of developing work-related asthma and work-related wheezing. Separate logistic models were developed for physician-diagnosed asthma (MD asthma), wheezing in the previous 12 months (wheezing), work-related asthma and work-related wheezing. Major risk factors including demographic, socioeconomic, indoor air quality, allergy, and other characteristics were analyzed. The prevalence of lifetime MD asthma was 7.7% and the prevalence of wheezing was 17.2%. Mexican-Americans exhibited the lowest prevalence of MD asthma (4.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.2, 5.4) when compared to other race-ethnic groups. The prevalence of MD asthma or wheezing did not vary by gender. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that Mexican-Americans were less likely to develop MD asthma (adjusted odds ratio (ORa) = 0.64, 95%CI: 0.45, 0.90) and wheezing (ORa = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.44, 0.69) when compared to non-Hispanic whites. Low education level, current and past smoking status, pet ownership, lifetime diagnosis of physician-diagnosed hay fever and obesity were all significantly associated with MD asthma and wheezing. No significant effect of indoor air pollutants on asthma and wheezing was observed in this study. The prevalence of work-related asthma was 3.70% (95%CI: 2.88, 4.52) and the prevalence of work-related wheezing was 11.46% (95%CI: 9.87, 13.05). The major occupations identified at risk of developing work-related asthma and wheezing were cleaners; farm and agriculture related occupations; entertainment related occupations; protective service occupations; construction; mechanics and repairers; textile; fabricators and assemblers; other transportation and material moving occupations; freight, stock and material movers; motor vehicle operators; and equipment cleaners. The population attributable risk for work-related asthma and wheeze were 26% and 27% respectively. The major industries identified at risk of work-related asthma and wheeze include entertainment related industry; agriculture, forestry and fishing; construction; electrical machinery; repair services; and lodging places. The population attributable risk for work-related asthma was 36.5% and work-related wheezing was 28.5% for industries. Asthma remains an important public health issue in the US and in the other regions of the world. ^