 | The 131st Annual Meeting (November 15-19, 2003) of APHA |
|
| The 131st Annual Meeting (November 15-19, 2003) of APHA |
Stan Kaplowitz, PhD1, Harry Perlstadt, PhD, MPH2, Sean Frost1, Lori Ann Post, PhD3, Yasmina Bouraoui4, Marguerite Barratt, PhD3, and Warren Brown, PhD5. (1) Dept of Sociology, Michigan State University, 316 Berkey Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824-1111, 517 355-6640, Stan.Kaplowitz@ssc.msu.edu, (2) Department of Sociology, Michigan State University, 316 Berkey Hall, E. Lansing, MI 48824, (3) Institute for Children, Youth, and Families, Michigan State University, Suite 27 Kellogg Center, East Lansing, MI 48824, (4) Community Living, Children and Families Administration, Michigan Department of Community Health, 3423 N. Martin L. King Jr. Blvd, PO Box 30195, Lansing, MI 48909, (5) Institute for Social and Economic Research, Cornell University, 201 Caldwell Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-2602
Background: Lead poisoning is a significant public health issue, which leads to physical and psychological damage, including death. Clinical research suggests early detection and treatment can reverse the health problems associated with elevated blood lead levels (EBLL). In absence of universal screening, the CDC has developed practitioner guidelines to identify persons at higher risk for EBLL. These include zip code, age of housing, presence of paint chips and Medicaid participation. Research objective: to test the ability of current guidelines to predict EBLL and to develop better predictors. Methods: Two samples of BLL results were used: 4000 cases from participating pediatric clinics, who had parents complete a screening survey; and the data base (over 300,000 BLL tests in four years), collected by the Michigan Department of Community Health. Residence address of child was combined with a) census block group data regarding of age of housing stock, and socio-demographic characteristics of the neighborhood and b) location of nearby sources of lead emission and high traffic roads. Findings: 1) The modified questionnaire including questions on income, race, and lead pipes, has better sensitivity and specificity than the original CDC questionnaire 2) Adding residence address combined with census data and distances from major sources of lead emission further improves sensitivity and specificity.
Learning Objectives:
Keywords: Lead, Screening
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
Organization/institution whose products or services will be discussed: Michigan State University
Michigan Department of Community Health
Centers for Disease Control
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.