Effects of particulate air pollution on blood pressure in a highly exposed population in Beijing, China: a repeated-measure study.

Effects of particulate air pollution on blood pressure in a highly exposed population in Beijing, China: a repeated-measure study.
复制标题

DOI:
10.1186/1476-069x-10-108
复制
发表时间:
2011-12-21
期刊:
Environmental health : a global access science source
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
Hou L
Hou L
中科院分区:
其他
文献类型:
--
作者:
Baccarelli A;Barretta F;Dou C;Zhang X;McCracken JP;Díaz A;Bertazzi PA;Schwartz J;Wang S;Hou L

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

北京市人口密度大,交通流量迅速增加,大气颗粒物(PM)暴露是影响北京市大气污染的重要因素。PM对血压(BP)的影响已被研究为介导心血管风险的机制,但结果仍然不一致。本研究的目的是确定环境和个人PM暴露对BP的影响。在2008年奥运会前(6月15日至7月27日),我们对60名卡车司机和60名办公室工作人员进行了为期两天的检查,间隔1-2周(n = 240)。我们获得了工作后血压的标准化措施。暴露评估包括在工作时间使用便携式监测器测量的个人PM2.5和元素碳(EC,交通颗粒物的示踪剂);以及检查前1-8天的平均环境PM10。我们研究了暴露(暴露组,个人PM2.5/EC,环境PM10)与BP控制多个协变量的关联。办公室工作人员的平均个人PM2.5为94.6 μg/m3(SD = 64.9),卡车司机为126.8(SD = 68.8)(p值< 0.001)。在所有参与者中,8天环境PM10增加10 μg/m3与血压增加0.98相关收缩压、舒张压和平均血压分别为0.71(95%CI 0.34; 1.61; p值= 0.003)、0.71(95%CI 0.18; 1.24; p值= 0.01)和0.81(95%CI 0.31; 1.30; p值= 0.002)mmHg。两组之间的血压无显著差异(p值> 0.14)。工作时间的个人PM2.5和EC与血压升高无关。我们的研究结果表明,环境PM 10对BP的延迟效应。与暴露组和个人PM2.5/EC缺乏关联表明,PM效应与北京的背景污染水平有关,而不是特别与工作相关的暴露。
Particulate Matter (PM) exposure is critical in Beijing due to high population density and rapid increase in vehicular traffic. PM effects on blood pressure (BP) have been investigated as a mechanism mediating cardiovascular risks, but results are still inconsistent. The purpose of our study is to determine the effects of ambient and personal PM exposure on BP. Before the 2008 Olympic Games (June 15-July 27), we examined 60 truck drivers and 60 office workers on two days, 1-2 weeks apart (n = 240). We obtained standardized measures of post-work BP. Exposure assessment included personal PM2.5 and Elemental Carbon (EC, a tracer of traffic particles) measured using portable monitors during work hours; and ambient PM10 averaged over 1-8 days pre-examination. We examined associations of exposures (exposure group, personal PM2.5/EC, ambient PM10) with BP controlling for multiple covariates. Mean personal PM2.5 was 94.6 μg/m3 (SD = 64.9) in office workers and 126.8 (SD = 68.8) in truck drivers (p-value < 0.001). In all participants combined, a 10 μg/m3 increase in 8-day ambient PM10 was associated with BP increments of 0.98 (95%CI 0.34; 1.61; p-value = 0.003), 0.71 (95%CI 0.18; 1.24; p-value = 0.01), and 0.81 (95%CI 0.31; 1.30; p-value = 0.002) mmHg for systolic, diastolic, and mean BP, respectively. BP was not significantly different between the two groups (p-value > 0.14). Personal PM2.5 and EC during work hours were not associated with increased BP. Our results indicate delayed effects of ambient PM10 on BP. Lack of associations with exposure groups and personal PM2.5/EC indicates that PM effects are related to background levels of pollution in Beijing, and not specifically to work-related exposure.