Adult asthma and traffic exposure at residential address, workplace address, and self-reported daily time outdoor in traffic: A two-stage case-control study.
Adult asthma and traffic exposure at residential address, workplace address, and self-reported daily time outdoor in traffic: A two-stage case-control study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/1471-2458-10-716
复制
发表时间：
2010-11-22
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Jakobsson K
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lindgren A;Björk J;Stroh E;Jakobsson K
在调查交通对呼吸健康的影响时，大多数流行病学研究使用居住地址的交通作为总交通暴露的替代。本研究使用GIS（地理信息系统）来估计交通暴露，不仅对住宅，而且对工作场所地址，除了在通勤或其他日常活动中花费在交通上的时间的调查问题。目的是调查1)交通暴露与成人哮喘患病率和哮喘症状之间是否存在关联，2)如果存在关联，使用更完整的交通暴露信息是否会使这种关联变得更强。本研究分两个阶段进行：2004年在瑞典南部进行了第一次横断面调查（n = 24819, 18-80岁，反应率59%），随后在2005年进行了病例对照研究，以获得更详细的暴露和混杂因素信息（n = 2856，哮喘患者和对照组（1:3），反应率86%）。在第一次调查中，只知道居住地址。在第二次调查中，关于工作地点和每天花在交通上的时间的问题也被包括在内。对居住和工作地点进行地理编码，并将GIS与道路数据和分散模拟的室外氮氧化物浓度（年平均值，250 × 250米分辨率）联系起来。居住在距离道路50米范围内（由GIS测量），交通强度为10辆/分钟（与此距离内没有道路的人相比）与哮喘患病率增加相关（OR = 1.8, 95% CI =(1.1-2.8)），并且哮喘症状持续12个月。在调整混杂因素后，在工作地点的交通暴露、每天在交通中花费的时间或上班通勤时间没有统计学上显著的影响。综合总暴露估计并没有给出与哮喘患病率或哮喘症状更强的关联。过去12个月，在瑞典南部的成年人中，靠近住宅地址的交通暴露与哮喘患病率和哮喘症状有关。当考虑到总交通暴露时，这种关联并不强。这可能反映了工作地点和其他日常交通时间的暴露分类错误，但也反映了居住地址仍然是成年人交通暴露的主要决定因素。
Most epidemiologic studies use traffic at residential address as a surrogate for total traffic exposure when investigating effects of traffic on respiratory health. This study used GIS (Geographical Information Systems) to estimate traffic exposure, not only on residential, but also on workplace address, in addition to survey questions on time spent in traffic during commuting or other daily activities. The aim was to investigate 1) if there is an association between traffic exposure and prevalence of adult asthma and asthma symptoms, and 2) if so, does this association become stronger using more complete traffic exposure information. This study was conducted in two stages: A first cross-sectional survey in Southern Sweden 2004 (n = 24819, 18-80 years, response rate 59%) was followed by a case-control study in 2005 to obtain more detailed exposure and confounder information (n = 2856, asthmatics and controls (1:3), 86% response rate). In the first survey, only residential address was known. In the second survey, questions about workplace addresses and daily time spent in traffic were also included. Residential and workplace addresses were geocoded and linked with GIS to road data and dispersion modelled outdoor concentrations of NOx (annual mean, 250 × 250 m resolution). Living within 50 m of a road (measured by GIS) with traffic intensity of >10 cars/minute (compared with no road within this distance) was associated with an increased prevalence of asthma, (OR = 1.8, 95% CI = (1.1-2.8), and with asthma symptoms last 12 months. No statistically significant effects were seen for traffic exposure at workplace address, daily time spent in traffic, or commuting time to work, after adjustment for confounders. A combined total exposure estimate did not give a stronger association with asthma prevalence or asthma symptoms. Traffic exposure at close proximity to residential address showed association with asthma prevalence and asthma symptoms last 12 months, among adults in southern Sweden. The associations were not stronger when accounting for total traffic exposure. This could reflect exposure misclassfication at workplace address and for other daily time in traffic, but also that residential address remains the main determinant for traffic exposure among adults.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
10.4
作者：
Jaakkola MS;Nordman H;Piipari R;Uitti J;Laitinen J;Karjalainen A;Hahtola P;Jaakkola JJ
通讯作者：
Jaakkola JJ
影响因子：
4.9
作者：
Pujades-Rodriguez, M.;Lewis, S.;Venn, A.
通讯作者：
Venn, A.
影响因子：
24.3
作者：
Bråbäck, L;Hjern, A;Rasmussen, F
通讯作者：
Rasmussen, F
影响因子：
4.9
作者：
Setton EM;Keller CP;Cloutier-Fisher D;Hystad PW
通讯作者：
Hystad PW
影响因子：
10.4
作者：
McConnell R;Islam T;Shankardass K;Jerrett M;Lurmann F;Gilliland F;Gauderman J;Avol E;Künzli N;Yao L;Peters J;Berhane K
通讯作者：
Berhane K