ASSESSING THE IMPACT ON PEFR AMONG SMOKERS AND PASS IVE SMOKERS–A COMPARATIVE STUDY
Publication details: M P Innovare Academic Sciences Pvt Ltd 2019Edition: Vol.11(11)Description: 17-19pSubject(s): Online resources: In: International journal of pharmacy and pharmaceutical scienceSummary: Objective: The purpose of this study was to monitor the intens ity and difference in Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PE FR) between smokers and passive smokers. Methods: A total of 1000 participants were enrolled in two groups as smokers and passive smokers who are livin g closely with smokers. Their PEFR values were measured with Wright’s mini peak f low meter. The influence of smoking on the lung fun ction among smokers and passive smokers were assessed with a suitable statistical t est. Results: Among the study participants, most of the smokers were in the age group of 31 to 60 and 31 to 50 in p assive smokers. Based on the lung function smokers (31%) and passive smokers (19.2%) were in the red zone, PEFR was decreased in both sm okers as well as passive smokers, and the magnitude of decline was higher in passive smok ing elderly individuals. The impact of passive smok ing was significantly observed in all the categories of smoking history they are living with. Conclusion: Smokers and passive smokers have equally deleterio us effects on PEFR. Where passive smoking emerged a s the main variable to influence airway obstruction in smokers that caused a greater reduction in PEFR.| Item type | Current library | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|  Articles Abstract Database | School of Pharmacy Archieval Section | Not for loan | 2020851 | 
                                                    
                                                        Objective: 
The purpose of this study was to monitor the intens
ity and difference in Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PE
FR) between smokers and 
passive smokers. 
Methods:
 A total of 1000 participants were enrolled in two 
groups as smokers and passive smokers who are livin
g closely with smokers. Their 
PEFR values were measured with Wright’s mini peak f
low meter. The influence of smoking on the lung fun
ction among smokers and passive 
smokers were assessed with a suitable statistical t
est. 
Results:
 Among the study participants, most of the smokers 
were in the age group of 31 to 60 and 31 to 50 in p
assive smokers. Based on the lung 
function smokers (31%) and passive smokers (19.2%) 
were in the red zone, PEFR was decreased in both sm
okers as well as passive smokers, and 
the magnitude of decline was higher in passive smok
ing elderly individuals. The impact of passive smok
ing was significantly observed in all the 
categories of smoking history they are living with.
Conclusion:
 Smokers and passive smokers have equally deleterio
us effects on PEFR. Where passive smoking emerged a
s the main variable to 
influence airway obstruction in smokers that caused
 a greater reduction in PEFR. 
                                                    
                                                
There are no comments on this title.
