• Lancet · Oct 2017

    Randomized Controlled Trial

    Effectiveness of household lockable pesticide storage to reduce pesticide self-poisoning in rural Asia: a community-based, cluster-randomised controlled trial.

    • Melissa Pearson, Chris Metcalfe, Shaluka Jayamanne, David Gunnell, Manjula Weerasinghe, Ravi Pieris, Chamil Priyadarshana, Duleeka W Knipe, Keith Hawton, Andrew H Dawson, Palitha Bandara, Dhammika deSilva, Indika Gawarammana, Michael Eddleston, and Flemming Konradsen.
    • Pharmacology, Toxicology and Therapeutics, University/BHF Centre for Cardiovascular Science, and Centre for Pesticide Suicide Prevention, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK; South Asian Clinical Toxicology Research Collaboration (SACTRC), Faculty of Medicine, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka.
    • Lancet. 2017 Oct 21; 390 (10105): 186318721863-1872.

    BackgroundAgricultural pesticide self-poisoning is a major public health problem in rural Asia. The use of safer household pesticide storage has been promoted to prevent deaths, but there is no evidence of effectiveness. We aimed to test the effectiveness of lockable household containers for prevention of pesticide self-poisoning.MethodsWe did a community-based, cluster-randomised controlled trial in a rural area of North Central Province, Sri Lanka. Clusters of households were randomly assigned (1:1), with a sequence computer-generated by a minimisation process, to intervention or usual practice (control) groups. Intervention households that had farmed or had used or stored pesticide in the preceding agricultural season were given a lockable storage container. Further promotion of use of the containers was restricted to community posters and 6-monthly reminders during routine community meetings. The primary outcome was incidence of pesticide self-poisoning in people aged 14 years or older during 3 years of follow-up. Identification of outcome events was done by staff who were unaware of group allocation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT1146496.FindingsBetween Dec 31, 2010, and Feb 2, 2013, we randomly assigned 90 rural villages to the intervention group and 90 to the control group. 27 091 households (114 168 individuals) in the intervention group and 26 291 households (109 693 individuals) in the control group consented to participate. 20 457 household pesticide storage containers were distributed. In individuals aged 14 years or older, 611 cases of pesticide self-poisoning had occurred by 3 years in the intervention group compared with 641 cases in the control group; incidence of pesticide self-poisoning did not differ between groups (293·3 per 100 000 person-years of follow-up in the intervention group vs 318·0 per 100 000 in the control group; rate ratio [RR] 0·93, 95% CI 0·80-1·08; p=0·33). We found no evidence of switching from pesticide self-poisoning to other forms of self-harm, with no significant difference in the number of fatal (82 in the intervention group vs 67 in the control group; RR 1·22, 0·88-1·68]) or non-fatal (1135 vs 1153; RR 0·97, 0·86-1·08) self-harm events involving all methods.InterpretationWe found no evidence that means reduction through improved household pesticide storage reduces pesticide self-poisoning. Other approaches, particularly removal of highly hazardous pesticides from agricultural practice, are likely to be more effective for suicide prevention in rural Asia.FundingWellcome Trust, with additional support from the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, Lister Institute of Preventive Medicine, Chief Scientist Office of Scotland, University of Copenhagen, and NHMRC Australia.Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.