Achieving Dust Lead Clearance Standards After Lead Hazard Control Projects: An Evaluation of the HUD-Recommended Cleaning Procedure and an Abbreviated Alternative

Dixon, Sherry; Tohn, Ellen; Rupp, Ron; Clark, Scott

doi:10.1080/104732299302927

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies have found that uncarpeted smooth and cleanable surfaces have significantly lower PbD after cleaning compared with rough uncarpeted surfaces (Dixon et al 1999; Ettinger et al 2002). Although our results indicated that floor PbD on uncarpeted non-smooth or noncleanable surfaces was not significantly higher than floor PbD on smooth and cleanable surfaces, the trend was in the expected direction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Exposure of U.S. Children to Residential Dust Lead, 1999–2004: I. Housing and Demographic Factors

Gaitens

Dixon

Jacobs

et al. 2009

Environ Health Perspect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLead-contaminated house dust is a major source of lead exposure for children in the United States. In 1999–2004, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) collected dust lead (PbD) loading samples from the homes of children 12–60 months of age.ObjectivesIn this study we aimed to compare national PbD levels with existing health-based standards and to identify housing and demographic factors associated with floor and windowsill PbD.MethodsWe used NHANES PbD data (n = 2,065 from floors and n = 1,618 from windowsills) and covariates to construct linear and logistic regression models.ResultsThe population-weighted geometric mean floor and windowsill PbD were 0.5 μg/ft2 [geometric standard error (GSE) = 1.0] and 7.6 μg/ft2 (GSE = 1.0), respectively. Only 0.16% of the floors and 4.0% of the sills had PbD at or above current federal standards of 40 and 250 μg/ft2, respectively. Income, race/ethnicity, floor surface/condition, windowsill PbD, year of construction, recent renovation, smoking, and survey year were significant predictors of floor PbD [the proportion of variability in the dependent variable accounted for by the model (R2) = 35%]. A similar set of predictors plus the presence of large areas of exterior deteriorated paint in pre-1950 homes and the presence of interior deteriorated paint explained 20% of the variability in sill PbD. A companion article [Dixon et al. Environ Health Perspect 117:468–474 (2009)] describes the relationship between children’s blood lead and PbD.ConclusionMost houses with children have PbD levels that comply with federal standards but may put children at risk. Factors associated with PbD in our population-based models are primarily the same as factors identified in smaller at-risk cohorts. PbD on floors and windowsills should be kept as low as possible to protect children.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Exposure of U.S. Children to Residential Dust Lead, 1999–2004: I. Housing and Demographic Factors

Gaitens

Dixon

Jacobs

et al. 2009

Environ Health Perspect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using a damp cloth to wipe down surfaces can reduce dust loading and therefore reduce exposures to contaminants residing in dust. 24 Frequent cleaning of floors with damp mops or vacuums with high-efficiency particulate filters can also reduce dust levels. 25 26 Also, carefully choosing household products and building materials has been shown to be effective.…”

Section: Chemical Exposure Reduction Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing chemical exposures at home: opportunities for action

Zota

Singla

Adamkiewicz

et al. 2017

J Epidemiol Community Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Indoor environments can influence human environmental chemical exposures and, ultimately, public health. Furniture, electronics, personal care and cleaning products, floor coverings and other consumer products contain chemicals that can end up in the indoor air and settled dust. Consumer product chemicals such as phthalates, phenols, flame retardants and per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances are widely detected in the US general population, including vulnerable populations, and are associated with adverse health effects such as reproductive and endocrine toxicity. We discuss the implications of our recent meta-analysis describing the patterns of chemical exposures and the ubiquity of multiple chemicals in indoor environments. To reduce the likelihood of exposures to these toxic chemicals, we then discuss approaches for exposure mitigation: targeting individual behaviour change, household maintenance and purchasing decisions, consumer advocacy and corporate responsibility in consumer markets, and regulatory action via state/federal policies. There is a need to further develop evidence-based strategies for chemical exposure reduction in each of these areas, given the multi-factorial nature of the problem. Further identifying those at greatest risk; understanding the individual, household and community factors that influence indoor chemical exposures; and developing options for mitigation may substantially improve individuals’ exposures and health.

show abstract

“…These interim control measurements are no substitute for abatement and other long-term strategies to remove sources of lead exposure. In Baltimore, houses that received new replacement windows, floor treatments to make them smooth and more easily cleanable, and other repairs besides professional cleaning were more likely to meet current recommended clearance standards (10). Other long-term strategies include encapsulation or removal of lead-based paint according to published protocols (25,28).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Low-technology household cleanup strategies can be effective in lowering lead dust levels (10), at least in the short term (11). These strategies also have been effective in reducing children's blood lead levels (12)(13)(14), but these benefits may be shortlived (15).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of cleaning to control lead dust in homes of children with moderate lead poisoning: treatment of lead-exposed children trial.

Ettinger¹,

Bornschein²,

Farfel³

et al. 2002

Environ Health Perspect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we describe the assessment and control of lead dust exposure in the Treatment of Lead-exposed Children (TLC) Trial, a clinical trial of the effects of oral chelation on developmental end points in urban children with moderately elevated blood lead levels. To reduce potential lead exposure from settled dust or deteriorated paint during the drug treatment phase of the trial, the homes of 765 (98%) of the randomized children (both active and placebo drug treatment groups) were professionally cleaned. Lead dust measurements were made in a sample of 213 homes before and after cleaning. Geometric mean dust lead loadings before cleaning were 43, 29, 308, and 707 micro g/ft2 in the kitchen floor, playroom floor, playroom windowsill, and playroom window well samples respectively. Following cleaning, floor dust lead loadings were reduced on average 32% for paired floor samples (p < 0.0001), 66% for windowsills (p < 0.0001), and 93% for window wells (p < 0.0001). Cleaning was most effective for 146 homes with precleaning dust lead levels above the recommended clearance levels, with average reductions of 44%, 74%, and 93% for floors (p < 0.0001), windowsills (p < 0.0001), and window wells (p < 0.0001), respectively. Despite these substantial reductions in dust lead loadings, a single professional cleaning did not reduce the lead loadings of all dust samples to levels below current federal standards for lead in residential dust. Attainment of dust levels below current standards will require more intensive cleaning and lead hazard reduction strategies.

show abstract

Achieving Dust Lead Clearance Standards After Lead Hazard Control Projects: An Evaluation of the HUD-Recommended Cleaning Procedure and an Abbreviated Alternative

Cited by 8 publications

References 5 publications

Exposure of U.S. Children to Residential Dust Lead, 1999–2004: I. Housing and Demographic Factors

Exposure of U.S. Children to Residential Dust Lead, 1999–2004: I. Housing and Demographic Factors

Reducing chemical exposures at home: opportunities for action

Assessment of cleaning to control lead dust in homes of children with moderate lead poisoning: treatment of lead-exposed children trial.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About