الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 119 |  |  |
| | | from | 119 | | |
Abstract
The World Health Organization (WHO) ranks tobacco smoking among the
greatest risks to health.
A study done in 2004 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the
WHO concluded that nonsmokers are exposed to the same carcinogens as active
smokers.Side-stream smoke contains more than 4000 chemicals, including 69
known carcinogens such as formaldehyde, lead, arsenic, benzene, and radioactive
polonium-210.
Second hand smoking (SHS) also known as Passive smoking, occurs when a nonsmoker
inhales environmental tobacco smoke produced by smokers in the same
vicinity. The exposure affects every one in the area where the smoke is produced,
regardless of the fact that they did not actively smoke the cigarette, pipe, cigar or
sheesha.
Children’s exposure to environmental tobacco smoke continues to be an area of
public health concern, it is associated with a number of poor child health outcomes.
Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure or passive smoke exposure is one of
the most common preventable health hazardsin our community. In
children,Environmental tobacco smoke(ETS) exposure has also been shownto be
particularly associated with upper and lower respiratorytract infections such as the
common cold, middle-ear disease, bronchitis, pneumonia, andother serious
bacterial infections.
Cotinine, a nicotine metabolite detected in urine, has been recommended as a
quantitative measure of nicotine intake and thus as a marker for Environmental
tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure in humans. A significant correlation was found
between the nicotine levels in indoor air and the urinary cotinine of the passive
smokers.
Summary and conclusion
80
This study aimed to measure urinary cotinine level in non diabetic children of
diabetic families.
This study was conducted on 54 children at age between 2-17 years with a mean
age of 9.02±4.623 years. They were 30 females (55.6%) and 24 males (44.4%).
The studied children were classified into two groups according to the history of
exposure to passive smoking:
Group A: Included 34 children exposed to passive smoking they were 24 females
(70.5%) and 10 males (29.5%),their ages range between 2-17 years and mean age
of9.24±4.69±SD years.
Group A wasfurther classified into 2 subgroups according to number of cigarettes
/day.
Group A1: They were 9 childrenmildly exposed to passive smoking (1-10 cig.
/day) = ≤ 0.5 pack.
Group A2: They were 25 children heavily exposed to passive smoking (>10
cig/day) = > 0.5 pack.
Group B (Control): Included 20 children not exposed to passive smoking they
were 6 females (30%) and 14 males (70%),their ages range between 2-
15 years and mean age of8.30±4.57years.
All studied children were subjected to the following:
Ι-Detailed history.
II-Thorough clinical examination.
III-Investigations:
-Routine: Complete blood picture, Liver functions and Kidney functions.
Summary and conclusion
81
-Specific: Estimation of cotinine in urine.
IV- Family counseling:For the smoker’s family.
This study revealed that:
Demographic data
-A significant difference among studied groups regarding sex and the source of
smoking and no significant difference regarding residence, birth order,
consanguinity and age.
- The routine investigations done (liver functions, kidney functions and C.B.C) for
the studied groups were within normal ranges.
-No significant difference between group A and group B regarding height, body
weight, age, body mass index (BMI), upper segment, Lower segment, chest
circumference, head circumference and span.
-A significantly higher urinary cotinine concentration (152.06 + 106.92) among
group A (exposed to passive smoking) when compared to group B (control group)
(3095.0 +1160.09). Moreover, there is a significantly higher urinary cotinine
concentration among subgroups A2(heavily expose to passive smoking)(109.80
+76.53)when compared to group A1 (mildly exposed to passive smoking)
(269.44+ 92.21).
-Asignificant difference between group A (exposed to passive smoking) and group
B (control group) and among group A regarding frequency of infections.
-There is significant correlation in frequency of infections and cotinine levels
among subgroups A.
-A significant positive correlationof urinary cotinine absorbance among
subgroupsand number of packs.