BACKGROUND: The prevalence and morbidity of asthma vary greatly among different ethnic communities and geographical locations, but the roles of environmental and genetic factors are not fully understood. The differences in prevalence of adult asthma among Chinese, Malay, and Indian ethnic groups in Singapore were examined, and the extent to which these could be explained by personal and environmental factors were investigated.
METHODS: A stratified disproportionate random sample (n = 2868) of Chinese (n = 1018), Malays (n = 967), and Indians (n = 883) of both sexes was drawn from households in five public housing estates, and an interviewer administered questionnaire was used to determine cumulative and current prevalence of "physician diagnosed asthma" (symptoms with a physician diagnosis of asthma).
RESULTS: Lifetime cumulative prevalence (standardised to the general population) of "physician diagnosed asthma" was 4.7% in men and 4.3% in women; 12 month period prevalences were 2.4% and 2.0%, respectively. Cumulative prevalence of asthma was significantly higher in Indians (6.6%) and Malays (6.0%) than in Chinese (3.0%); period prevalences of asthma were 4.5% in Indians, 3.3% in Malays, and 0.9% in Chinese. Ownership of cats or dogs was more frequent in Malays (15.4%) and Indians (11.2%) than in Chinese (8.8%). Rugs and carpets were also more frequently used by Malays (52.2%) and Indians (40.7%) than by Chinese (8.9%). Current smoking prevalences were higher in Malays (27.3%) than in Indians (19.4%) and Chinese (23.0%). Malays and Indians did not have higher rates of atopy (11.1% and 15.2%, respectively) than Chinese (15.4%). Adjustment for these factors in multivariate analyses reduced the greater odds of asthma in Malays and Indians, but not to a significant extent.
CONCLUSIONS: There are ethnic differences in the prevalence of asthma in Singapore which are not entirely explained by differences in smoking, atopy, or other risk factors. Other unmeasured environmental factors or genetic influences are likely to account for residual differences in the prevalence of asthma.
Ethnic differences in lung function are well recognized, hence the use of normative data should therefore be based on reference equations that are derived specifically for different ethnic groups. We have collected data (n = 406) for population-based reference values of lung function from randomly selected samples of healthy non-smoking adults of both gender (aged 20-79 years) for each of the three major ethnic groups (Chinese, Malay and Indians) in Singapore. Lung function forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), FEV1/FVC, diffusion capacity (transfer factor) for carbon monoxide (DLCO), total lung capacity (TLC), residual volume (RV), RV/TLC and functional residual capacity (FRC) was measured using standardization procedures and acceptability criteria recommended by the American Thoracic Society. Lung function values were predicted from age, height, weight, body mass index (BMI) and transformed variables of these anthropometric measures, using multiple regression techniques. Ethnic differences were demonstrated, with Chinese having the largest lung volumes and flow rates, and Indians the smallest. These prediction equations provide improved and additional (TLC, RV, RV/TLC, FRC) population-based reference values for assessment of pulmonary health and disease in Singapore.
Noninvasive oximetry provides continuous monitoring of arterial oxygen saturation and hence, early detection of hypoxia. This has proved to be a useful adjunct to patients' safety, and is considered indispensable in certain settings. However, errors may be present in the pulse oximeter estimation (SpO2) of arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2), which may be due to various parameters. We have studied a multi-ethnic population where the skin pigmentation is different, and also under different conditions comparing SpO2 with SaO2. Our results showed that SpO2 estimation of SaO2 amongst the three racial groups (Chinese, Malays, and Indians) varied significantly (ANOVA, p < 0.05). The over-estimation was more pronounced by hypoxic conditions and jaundice. Haemoglobin and systolic blood pressure did not affect the difference between SpO2 and SaO2.