There is poor agreement on definitions of different phenotypes of preschool wheezing disorders. The present Task Force proposes to use the terms episodic (viral) wheeze to describe children who wheeze intermittently and are well between episodes, and multiple-trigger wheeze for children who wheeze both during and outside discrete episodes. Investigations are only needed when in doubt about the diagnosis.Based on the limited evidence available, inhaled short-acting b 2 -agonists by metered-dose inhaler/spacer combination are recommended for symptomatic relief. Educating parents regarding causative factors and treatment is useful. Exposure to tobacco smoke should be avoided; allergen avoidance may be considered when sensitisation has been established. Maintenance treatment with inhaled corticosteroids is recommended for multiple-trigger wheeze; benefits are often small. Montelukast is recommended for the treatment of episodic (viral) wheeze and can be started when symptoms of a viral cold develop.Given the large overlap in phenotypes, and the fact that patients can move from one phenotype to another, inhaled corticosteroids and montelukast may be considered on a trial basis in almost any preschool child with recurrent wheeze, but should be discontinued if there is no clear clinical benefit.Large well-designed randomised controlled trials with clear descriptions of patients are needed to improve the present recommendations on the treatment of these common syndromes.

A third of the world’s population uses solid fuel derived from plant material (biomass) or coal for cooking, heating, or lighting. These fuels are smoky, often used in an open fire or simple stove with incomplete combustion, and result in a large amount of household air pollution when smoke is poorly vented. Air pollution is the biggest environmental cause of death worldwide, with household air pollution accounting for about 3·5–4 million deaths every year. Women and children living in severe poverty have the greatest exposures to household air pollution. In this Commission, we review evidence for the association between household air pollution and respiratory infections, respiratory tract cancers, and chronic lung diseases. Respiratory infections (comprising both upper and lower respiratory tract infections with viruses, bacteria, and mycobacteria) have all been associated with exposure to household air pollution. Respiratory tract cancers, including both nasopharyngeal cancer and lung cancer, are strongly associated with pollution from coal burning and further data are needed about other solid fuels. Chronic lung diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and bronchiectasis in women, are associated with solid fuel use for cooking, and the damaging effects of exposure to household air pollution in early life on lung development are yet to be fully described. We also review appropriate ways to measure exposure to household air pollution, as well as study design issues and potential effective interventions to prevent these disease burdens. Measurement of household air pollution needs individual, rather than fixed in place, monitoring because exposure varies by age, gender, location, and household role. Women and children are particularly susceptible to the toxic effects of pollution and are exposed to the highest concentrations. Interventions should target these high-risk groups and be of sufficient quality to make the air clean. To make clean energy available to all people is the long-term goal, with an intermediate solution being to make available energy that is clean enough to have a health impact.

SummaryBackgroundWHO estimates exposure to air pollution from cooking with solid fuels is associated with over 4 million premature deaths worldwide every year including half a million children under the age of 5 years from pneumonia. We hypothesised that replacing open fires with cleaner burning biomass-fuelled cookstoves would reduce pneumonia incidence in young children.MethodsWe did a community-level open cluster randomised controlled trial to compare the effects of a cleaner burning biomass-fuelled cookstove intervention to continuation of open fire cooking on pneumonia in children living in two rural districts, Chikhwawa and Karonga, of Malawi. Clusters were randomly allocated to intervention and control groups using a computer-generated randomisation schedule with stratification by site, distance from health centre, and size of cluster. Within clusters, households with a child under the age of 4·5 years were eligible. Intervention households received two biomass-fuelled cookstoves and a solar panel. The primary outcome was WHO Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI)-defined pneumonia episodes in children under 5 years of age. Efficacy and safety analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN59448623.FindingsWe enrolled 10 750 children from 8626 households across 150 clusters between Dec 9, 2013, and Feb 28, 2016. 10 543 children from 8470 households contributed 15 991 child-years of follow-up data to the intention-to-treat analysis. The IMCI pneumonia incidence rate in the intervention group was 15·76 (95% CI 14·89–16·63) per 100 child-years and in the control group 15·58 (95% CI 14·72–16·45) per 100 child-years, with an intervention versus control incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 1·01 (95% CI 0·91–1·13; p=0·80). Cooking-related serious adverse events (burns) were seen in 19 children; nine in the intervention and ten (one death) in the control group (IRR 0·91 [95% CI 0·37–2·23]; p=0·83).InterpretationWe found no evidence that an intervention comprising cleaner burning biomass-fuelled cookstoves reduced the risk of pneumonia in young children in rural Malawi. Effective strategies to reduce the adverse health effects of household air pollution are needed.FundingMedical Research Council, UK Department for International Development, and Wellcome Trust.

The American Thoracic Society has previously published statements on what constitutes an adverse effect on health of air pollution in 1985 and 2000. We set out to update and broaden these past statements that focused primarily on effects on the respiratory system. Since then, many studies have documented effects of air pollution on other organ systems, such as on the cardiovascular and central nervous systems. In addition, many new biomarkers of effects have been developed and applied in air pollution studies. This current report seeks to integrate the latest science into a general framework for interpreting the adversity of the human health effects of air pollution. Rather than trying to provide a catalogue of what is and what is not an adverse effect of air pollution, we propose a set of considerations that can be applied in forming judgments of the adversity of not only currently documented, but also emerging and future effects of air pollution on human health. These considerations are illustrated by the inclusion of examples for different types of health effects of air pollution.