Influence of Indoor Air Filtration Strategies on Occupant Health Indicators

May 31, 2016 updated by: Feng Li
The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether two different central air purification technologies reduce air pollutant exposure and beneficially influence health as evaluated with a suite of biological markers related to cardiovascular and respiratory disease risk.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

This study will test two common types of central air handling unit filtration technologies, high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters and electrostatic precipitators (ESPs), to evaluate the impacts of these technologies on personal exposure to air pollutants and the associated cardiovascular and respiratory health outcomes. HEPA filters remove a high percentage of the particulate matter in the air, as do ESPs, but ESPs also generate ozone, which may have its own detrimental health effects. These air purification technologies will be placed in different combinations with a coarse pre-filter to protect the air exchange machinery (combinations: pre-filter only, pre-filter + HEPA, and pre-filter + HEPA + ESP) in both the residences and offices of study participants living on a factory campus in Changsha, Hunan Province, China. Large dormitories and office buildings with central air handling units are common in China and around the world, and so adding air purification into the central ducts represents a practical strategy to reducing personal exposure to air pollution and related health outcomes. The Changsha area commonly suffers from high air pollution, and the dormitories and offices on this workspace are already outfitted with both HEPA filters and ESPs. Therefore, testing these technologies in this environment presents a natural experimental condition to test the benefits of air purification. The study investigators hypothesize that both the pre-filter + HEPA and pre-filter + HEPA + ESP conditions will reduce particulate matter exposure and reduce biological markers of cardiovascular and respiratory disease compared to the pre-filter alone, but that the ESP will generate enough ozone to lead to lower health benefits than HEPA+pre-filter condition.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

89

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Shanghai
      • Shanghai, Shanghai, China, 201620
        • Shanghai First People's Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Healthy adults;
  • Live and work at the Broad Town work campus in eastern Changsha, Hunan Province, China

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Has any of the following diseases: chronic respiratory, cardiovascular, liver, renal, hematological disease; diabetes mellitus;
  • Has any other diseases that may confound or complicate the effects of the intervention
  • Pregnant females

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Non-Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Group A: Pre-Filter Only Intervention
Subjects in Group A start with baseline conditions of pre-filter + HEPA + ESP in their offices and dorms. After a baseline biological measurement, they then receive a 5-week intervention in which both the HEPA and ESP are removed, leaving only a pre-filter. This intervention period includes a biological measurement 2 weeks into the intervention and other 4-5 weeks into the intervention. The baseline air purification conditions are then restored, and another biological measurement is taken 2 weeks after that.
As described in the arm descriptions, the interventions involve changing the baseline pre-filter + HEPA + ESP conditions by removing either just the ESP or both the ESP and the HEPA for a five week period.
Other Names:
  • Pre-filter
  • HEPA filter
  • Electrostatic precipitator (ESP)
Active Comparator: Group B: Pre-filter + HEPA Intervention
Subjects in Group B start with baseline conditions of pre-filter + HEPA + ESP in their offices and dorms. After a baseline biological measurement, they then receive a 5-week intervention in which the ESP is removed, leaving a pre-filter + HEPA combination. This intervention period includes a biological measurement 2 weeks into the intervention and other 4-5 weeks into the intervention. The baseline air purification conditions are then restored, and another biological measurement is taken 2 weeks after that.
As described in the arm descriptions, the interventions involve changing the baseline pre-filter + HEPA + ESP conditions by removing either just the ESP or both the ESP and the HEPA for a five week period.
Other Names:
  • Pre-filter
  • HEPA filter
  • Electrostatic precipitator (ESP)

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change from baseline FEV1
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in the first second of exhalation, unit: liter) was measured by spirometry in all subjects at four separate time points to compare FEV1 changes at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of lung function.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline soluble P-selectin
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Soluble P-selectin (a protein shed by activated platelets in the blood, unit: ng/ml) was measured by ELISA in plasma in all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of platelet activation.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline von Willebrand factor (VWF)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
VWF (a glycoprotein released by damaged vascular cells into the blood, unit: ug/ml) was measured by ELISA in plasma in all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of endothelial cell damage.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline augmentation index (AI)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
AI (a measure of how much the reflecting pulse wave augments the outgoing systole pulse wave, unit: N/A (index)) was measured by pulse wave analysis in all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of arterial stiffness.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline systolic blood pressure (SBP)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Brachial SBP (unit: mm Hg) was measured by an oscillometric method in all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of vasoconstriction.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
FeNO (produced from inflammatory nitric oxide signalling in the lung, unit: ppb) was measured with an ambient NO-scrubbing collection method and chemiluminescence in all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of airway inflammation.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change from baseline C-reactive protein (CRP)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
CRP (an inflammatory protein in the blood, unit: ng/ml) was measured with an ELISA in blood samples for all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of systemic inflammation.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
8-OHdG (a product of DNA oxidation found in the urine, unit: ng/ml) was measured with LC-MS in urine samples for all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of systemic oxidative stress.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline exhaled breath condensate malondialdehyde (EBC MDA)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
EBC MDA (a product of lipid oxidation found in the exhaled breath, unit: nM) was measured with HPLC in exhaled breath condensate samples for all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of airway oxidative stress.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline exhaled breath condensate nitrite + nitrate (EBCNN)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
EBCNN (a product of airway inflammatory NO signaling found in the exhaled breath, unit: uM) was measured with HPLC in exhaled breath condensate samples for all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of airway inflammation.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline exhaled breath condensate pH (EBC pH)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
EBC pH (a characteristic of exhaled breath associated with inflammation, unit: pH) was measured with a pH meter in exhaled breath condensate samples for all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of airway inflammation.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline diastolic blood pressure (DBP)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
DBP (unit: mm Hg) was measured with an oscillometric method for all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of vasoconstriction.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
Change from baseline forced vital capacity (FVC)
Time Frame: At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention
FVC (unit: liter) was measured with spirometry for all subjects at four separate time points to compare levels at different times before, during, and after the filtration intervention as a marker of airway function.
At baseline, 2 weeks and 4 weeks into the intervention period, and then 2 weeks post-intervention

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

November 1, 2014

Primary Completion (Actual)

January 1, 2015

Study Completion (Actual)

January 1, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 10, 2016

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 10, 2016

First Posted (Estimate)

May 11, 2016

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

June 1, 2016

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 31, 2016

Last Verified

May 1, 2016

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Risk Factors for Respiratory and Cardiovascular Disease

Clinical Trials on Central air handling unit air purification technologies

3
Subscribe