| 1. |
- Roswall, N., et al.
(author)
-
Long-Term Exposure to Transportation Noise and Risk of Incident Stroke: A Pooled Study of Nine Scandinavian Cohorts
- 2021
-
In: Environmental Health Perspectives. - : Environmental Health Perspectives. - 0091-6765 .- 1552-9924. ; 129:10
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Transportation noise is increasingly acknowledged as a cardiovascular risk factor, but the evidence base for an association with stroke is sparse. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the association between transportation noise and stroke incidence in a large Scandinavian population. METHODS: We harmonized and pooled data from nine Scandinavian cohorts (seven Swedish, two Danish), totaling 135,951 participants. We identified residential address history and estimated road, railway, and aircraft noise for all addresses. Information on stroke incidence was acquired through linkage to national patient and mortality registries. We analyzed data using Cox proportional hazards models, including socioeconomic and lifestyle confounders, and air pollution. RESULTS: During follow-up (median = 19.5 y), 11,056 stroke cases were identified. Road traffic noise (Lden) was associated with risk of stroke, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.06 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03, 1.08] per 10-dB higher 5-y mean time-weighted exposure in analyses adjusted for individual- and area-level socioeconomic covariates. The association was approximately linear and persisted after adjustment for air pollution [particulate matter (PM) with an aerodynamic diameter of <= 2.5 mu m (PM2.5) and NO2]. Stroke was associated with moderate levels of 5-y aircraft noise exposure (40-50 vs. <= 40 dB) (HR = 1.12; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.27), but not with higher exposure (>= 50 dB, HR = 0.94; 95% CI: 0.79, 1.11). Railway noise was not associated with stroke. DISCUSSION: In this pooled study, road traffic noise was associated with a higher risk of stroke. This finding supports road traffic noise as an important cardiovascular risk factor that should be included when estimating the burden of disease due to traffic noise.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Thacher, Jesse D., et al.
(author)
-
Occupational noise exposure and risk of incident stroke: a pooled study of five Scandinavian cohorts
- 2022
-
In: OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE. - : BMJ. - 1351-0711 .- 1470-7926. ; 79:9, s. 594 - 601
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives To investigate the association between occupational noise exposure and stroke incidence in a pooled study of five Scandinavian cohorts (NordSOUND). Methods We pooled and harmonised data from five Scandinavian cohorts resulting in 78 389 participants. We obtained job data from national registries or questionnaires and recoded these to match a job-exposure matrix developed in Sweden, which specified the annual average daily noise exposure in five exposure classes (L-Aeq8h): <70, 70-74, 75-79, 80-84, >= 85 dB(A). We identified residential address history and estimated 1-year average road traffic noise at baseline. Using national patient and mortality registers, we identified 7777 stroke cases with a median follow-up of 20.2 years. Analyses were conducted using Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for individual and area-level potential confounders. Results Exposure to occupational noise at baseline was not associated with overall stroke in the fully adjusted models. For ischaemic stroke, occupational noise was associated with HRs (95% CI) of 1.08 (0.98 to 1.20), 1.09 (0.97 to 1.24) and 1.06 (0.92 to 1.21) in the 75-79, 80-84 and >= 85 dB(A) exposure groups, compared with <70 dB(A), respectively. In subanalyses using time-varying occupational noise exposure, we observed an indication of higher stroke risk among the most exposed (>= 85 dB(A)), particularly when restricting analyses to people exposed to occupational noise within the last year (HR: 1.27; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.63). Conclusions We found no association between occupational noise and risk of overall stroke after adjustment for confounders. However, the non-significantly increased risk of ischaemic stroke warrants further investigation.
|
|
