This table is designed to provide you with information about the results of several blood-lead level hazard information studies. This information will give you an idea about the success of different types of intervention.
Blood-Lead Level Results from Various Lead Hazard Intervention Studies(1,2) |
Study (Page No.[3]) |
Group |
Intervention Type(4) |
Initial Mean Lead Level |
1-6 Month Post-Intervention Follow-Up |
> 6 Month Post-Intervention Follow-Up |
Months Post-Intervention |
Mean Percent Change |
Months Post-Intervention |
Mean Percent Change |
| Baltimore Dust Control (C-3) |
Abated and Dust Control |
DA |
PA |
|
|
|
|
39 |
6 |
-14% |
12 |
-18% |
| Abated |
|
PA |
|
|
|
|
39 |
6 |
+1% |
12 |
-2% |
| 1982 St. Louis Retrospective (C-5) |
Abated |
|
PA |
|
|
|
|
48 |
-- |
nc(5) |
6-12 |
-23% |
| Unabated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
43 |
-- |
nc(5) |
6-12 |
-3% |
| Baltimore "Traditional"/"Modified"(C-6)(6) |
"Traditional" |
|
PA |
|
|
|
|
37 |
1 |
+18% |
-- |
nc(5) |
| "Modified" |
DA |
PA |
PS |
|
|
|
34 |
1 |
+3% |
-- |
nc(5) |
| Combined |
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
-- |
nc (5) |
6 |
-6% |
| Boston Retrospective (C-8) |
Study |
|
PA |
PS |
|
|
|
36 |
1 |
-8% |
-- |
nc(5) |
| No Chelation(7) |
|
PA |
PS |
|
|
|
36 |
During |
-13% |
8 |
-28% |
| New York Paint Abatement (19) |
"Low" HES Score(8) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
6 |
-16% |
-- |
nc(5) |
| "High" HES Score(8) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
6 |
-26% |
-- |
nc(5) |
| Central Massachusetts Retrospective (C-13) |
Abated |
DA |
PA |
PS |
E |
|
|
26 |
3-52 weeks |
-18% |
-- |
nc(5) |
| Baltimore 3-City Soil Abatement (23) |
Treatment |
|
|
PS |
|
SA |
|
9.44 |
3 |
-11% |
8-15 |
-1% |
| Control |
|
|
PS |
|
|
|
9.28 |
3 |
-18% |
9-15 |
-10% |
| Cincinnati 3-City Soil Abatement (26) (9) |
Area A |
DA |
|
|
|
SA |
|
10.42 |
3 |
-18% |
23-24 |
+7% |
| Area B |
DA |
|
|
|
SA |
|
13.05 |
3 |
-14% |
23-24 |
-16% |
| Area C |
DA |
|
|
|
SA |
|
9.47 |
3 |
-27% |
23-24 |
-17% |
| Toronto Soil and Dust (68) |
South Riverdale Study |
DA |
|
|
|
SA |
|
10.9 |
-- |
nc(5) |
60 |
-64% |
| 1990 St. Louis Retrospective (C-17) |
Abated |
|
PA |
|
|
|
RE |
na(10) |
-- |
nc(5) |
10-14 |
-23% |
| Unabated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
na(10) |
-- |
nc(5) |
10-14 |
-12% |
| Boston 3-city Phase I |
Study |
DA |
|
PS |
|
SA |
|
13 |
6 |
-22% |
10 |
-19% |
| Comparison A |
DA |
|
PS |
|
|
|
12 |
6 |
-s8% |
10 |
-7% |
| Comparison B |
|
|
PS |
|
|
|
12 |
6 |
-18% |
10 |
-6% |
| Boston 3-City Phase II |
Comparison A |
|
PA |
|
|
SA |
|
13 |
-- |
nc(5) |
9 |
-41% |
| Comparison B |
|
PA |
|
|
SA |
|
11 |
-- |
nc(5) |
9 |
-13% |
| Milwaukee Retrospective LBP (C-27) |
Study |
|
PA |
|
|
|
|
34 |
-- |
-- |
3-12 |
-24% |
| New York Chelation |
No Chelation(7) |
|
PA |
|
|
|
|
29 |
1.5 |
-9% |
-- |
-- |
| No Chelation (Subset)(7) |
|
PA |
|
|
|
|
29 |
1.5 |
-21% |
6 |
-28% |
| Rouyn-Noranda Soil (67) |
Study |
|
|
|
|
SA |
|
10 |
-- |
nc(5) |
24 |
-27% |
| St. Jean-Sur-Richelieu Soil and Dust |
Study |
DA |
|
|
|
SA |
|
9.7 |
-- |
nc(5) |
24 |
-48% |
| Milwaukee Retrospective Education (C-29) |
Educational Outreach |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
22 |
2-15 |
-18% |
-- |
nc(5) |
| Control |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
22 |
2-15 |
-5% |
-- |
nc(5) |
| Granite City Educational (C-30) |
Study |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
15 |
4 |
-45% |
12 |
-32% |
| Children with Complete Data |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
15 |
4 |
-47% |
12 |
-40% |
| Leadville/Lake County Educational Intervention (42) |
Community |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
5.02 |
-- |
-- |
12 |
-10% |
| Intervention |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
11.4 |
-- |
-- |
12 |
-10% |
| Trail Dust Intervention (44) |
Treatment |
DA |
|
|
E |
|
|
11.9 |
-- |
-- |
12 |
-8% |
| Control |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
11.3 |
-- |
-- |
12 |
-6% |
| New Jersey Children's Lead Exposure and Reduction Dust Intervention (48) |
Lead |
DA |
|
|
E |
|
|
12.4 |
-- |
-- |
12 |
-17% |
| Accident |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
11.6 |
-- |
-- |
12 |
+1% |
| Boston Interim Dust Intervention (49) |
Automatic Intervention |
DA |
|
PS |
E |
|
|
17.5 |
6 |
-48% |
-- |
-- |
| Randomized Intervention |
DA |
|
PS |
E |
|
|
17.6 |
6 |
-35% |
-- |
-- |
| Randomized Comparison |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
16.3 |
6 |
-36% |
-- |
-- |
| Rochester Educational Intervention (53) |
Intervention |
DA |
|
|
E |
|
|
6.85 |
-- |
-- |
7 |
-1% |
| Control |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.1 |
-- |
-- |
7 |
-14% |
| Baltimore Repair and Maintenance (R&M) Paint Abatement: Initial Blood-Lead Levels < 20 ug/dL (55) |
R&M Level I |
DA |
|
PS |
|
|
|
8.8 |
6 |
+1% |
24 |
-20% |
| R&M Level II |
DA |
PA |
PS |
|
|
|
10.5 |
6 |
+10% |
24 |
-10% |
| R&M Level III |
DA |
PA |
PS |
|
|
RE |
11.4 |
6 |
+6% |
24 |
-16% |
| Previously Paint-Abated (control) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.8 |
6 |
+19% |
24 |
-14% |
| Modern Urban (control) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.4 |
6 |
+15% |
24 |
-6% |
| Baltimore R&M Paint Abatement: Initial Blood-Lead LEvels >= 20 ug/dL (55) |
R&M Level I |
DA |
|
PS |
|
|
|
20 |
6 |
-17% |
24 |
-- |
| R&M Level II |
DA |
PA |
PS |
|
|
|
28.3 |
6 |
-33% |
24 |
-49% |
| R&M Level III |
DA |
PA |
PS |
|
|
RE |
29.5 |
6 |
-29% |
24 |
-47% |
| Milwaukee Prospective Education (C-33) |
Educational Outreach |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
22 |
2 |
-18% |
-- |
nc(5) |
| Control |
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
2 |
-5% |
-- |
nc(5) |
| Pre-Abatement Educational Outreach |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
29 |
2-6 |
-19% |
-- |
nc(5) |
(1) U.S. EPA, Review of Studies Addressing Lead Abatement Effectiveness: Updated Edition, EPA 757-B-98-001, December 1998 (PDF, 359 pp., 3.3 MB, about PDF)
(2) Information in this table was condensed from Table B-2, Summary of Blood-Lead Concentration Results for Identified Lead Hazard Intervention Studies.
(3) Page number where a more detailed description of the study may be found in Review of Studies Addressing Lead Abatement Effectiveness: Updated Edition.
(4) DA = Dust abatement, PA = Paint abatement, PS = Paint Stabilization, E = Education, SA = Soil Abatement, RE = Repair and Encapsulation.
(5) nc = Measurements were not collected during these time intervals.
(6)
Traditional abatement is addressing deteriorated paint on surfaces up to four feet from the floor and all hazardous paint on accessible surfaces which may be chewed on. Modified abatement means using heat guns for paint removal and repainting abated surfaces.
(7) Chelation is a medical treatment used to reduced blood-lead levels within the body.
(8) HES = Home Environment Score. Researchers used this method to determine the amount of lead within the home. Please see study for more details.
(9) This study divided its subjects into the geographic areas in which they lived.
(10) Insufficient information is available in the literature to allow determination of these values.
|
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.