Comparison of wildfire smoke estimation methods and associations with cardiopulmonary-related hospital admissions
Comparison of wildfire smoke estimation methods and associations with cardiopulmonary-related hospital admissions
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/2017gh000073
复制
发表时间：
2017-05-01
期刊：
影响因子：
4.8
通讯作者：
Magzamen, Sheryl
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gan, Ryan W.;Ford, Bonne;Magzamen, Sheryl
气候预报预测，野火发生的频率和强度都会增加。使用地面监测仪、化学天气模型和一种混合三种暴露信息源的新方法，比较了健康结果与人群暴露于2012年华盛顿野火烟雾之间的关系。采用时间分层病例交叉设计评估2012年7月1日至10月31日华盛顿州发生的直径2.5m的烟雾颗粒物（PM2.5）与心肺住院之间的关系。按邮政编码汇总的住院人数与人口加权的烟雾PM2.5日平均浓度有关，使用三种不同的方法进行估算：使用化学天气研究与预报（WRF-Chem）模型进行模拟，使用地面监测仪测量PM2.5的克里格插值，以及使用地理加权脊回归（GWR）混合WRF-Chem的输入、气溶胶光学深度的卫星观测和克里格PM2.5。GWR烟雾PM2.5浓度每增加10g/m(3)，哮喘相关住院风险增加8%（优势比（OR）： 1.076, 95%可信区间（CI）： 1.019-1.136）；其他烟雾估计方法也得出了类似的结果。然而，慢性阻塞性肺疾病（COPD）的点估计值因烟雾PM2.5暴露法而异：使用GWR增加10g/m(3)与COPD风险增加显著相关（OR: 1.084, 95%CI: 1.026-1.145），而使用WRF-Chem不显著（OR: 0.986, 95%CI: 0.931-1.045）。烟雾PM2.5与住院率之间关联的大小（OR）和不确定性（95%CI）取决于所使用的估计方法和评估的结果。所使用的烟雾暴露估计方法的选择会影响研究的总体结论。
Climate forecasts predict an increase in frequency and intensity of wildfires. Associations between health outcomes and population exposure to smoke from Washington 2012 wildfires were compared using surface monitors, chemical-weather models, and a novel method blending three exposure information sources. The association between smoke particulate matter 2.5m in diameter (PM2.5) and cardiopulmonary hospital admissions occurring in Washington from 1 July to 31 October 2012 was evaluated using a time-stratified case-crossover design. Hospital admissions aggregated by ZIP code were linked with population-weighted daily average concentrations of smoke PM2.5 estimated using three distinct methods: a simulation with the Weather Research and Forecasting with Chemistry (WRF-Chem) model, a kriged interpolation of PM2.5 measurements from surface monitors, and a geographically weighted ridge regression (GWR) that blended inputs from WRF-Chem, satellite observations of aerosol optical depth, and kriged PM2.5. A 10g/m(3) increase in GWR smoke PM2.5 was associated with an 8% increased risk in asthma-related hospital admissions (odds ratio (OR): 1.076, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.019-1.136); other smoke estimation methods yielded similar results. However, point estimates for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) differed by smoke PM2.5 exposure method: a 10g/m(3) increase using GWR was significantly associated with increased risk of COPD (OR: 1.084, 95%CI: 1.026-1.145) and not significant using WRF-Chem (OR: 0.986, 95%CI: 0.931-1.045). The magnitude (OR) and uncertainty (95%CI) of associations between smoke PM2.5 and hospital admissions were dependent on estimation method used and outcome evaluated. Choice of smoke exposure estimation method used can impact the overall conclusion of the study.