Bedeutung der Gesetzgebung zur Luftreinhaltung in der Prävention umweltbedingter Erkrankungen

Air pollution, for example from particulate matter, nitrogen oxides or ozone, is harmful to health. Short-term increases in air pollution can lead to exacerbation of existing lung diseases. Long-term air pollution contributes to the development of cardiorespiratory diseases. According to the European Environment Agency, 53,000 people prematurely died in Germany in 2019 due to particulate matter pollution. Air pollution control is a political task with great public health potential. In recent years, it has significantly contributed to improving air quality and thus health. In view of the new more stringent World Health Organization (WHO) air quality guidelines, the authorities and policy makers worldwide are now confronted with the question of adjusting air quality targets and setting standards. In Europe, the EU Directive on air quality standards is passed by the EU Parliament and the Council of the EU and is binding for air quality targets of member states. Member states can be brought to court for failure to achieve the targets. Therefore, there is a risk that achievable and less ambitious air pollution targets will be set. Even now, the EU guideline values are significantly higher than those in the USA or Switzerland. While "only" 11% of the EU population were exposed to levels above the current EU limit for PM10 in 2020, 71% of the population were exposed to hazardous levels of PM10 following the new recommendation by the WHO. Among the most important and successful air pollution control measures is the reduction of air pollutants at the source: emission control. Despite the energy crisis goals regarding air pollution control and climate protection must not be ignored. Importantly, health protection cannot be left to individuals. Health professionals have an important clinical role in advising sensitive patients on how to deal with short-term elevated levels of air pollutants but beyond that their advisory role in policy is very significant

Evaluation of a physical activity promotion program in primary care

Background. Physical inactivity increases the risk of many chronic disorders. It is not clear which strategies are the most appropriate to enable people to adopt a more active lifestyle. Randomized controlled trials have found that brief advice from GPs supported by written material had a significant positive effect on patient's physical activity. The pilot project ‘Move for Health and the Environment' translated this evidence into a program suitable for the real-life situation of busy practices. The aim of this study was to evaluate the change in physical activity level of the participating patients 1 year after the intervention. Methods. Patients aged 16-65 years completed a screening questionnaire before consultation with their physician. Insufficiently active patients were offered an information leaflet and a voucher for a physical activity counselling session. One year later, all inactive patients and a random selection of the active were re-contacted and invited to answer identical questions. Results. A total of 1239 (73.9%) returned the follow-up questionnaire. In all, 37.3% of the formerly inactive patients met the threshold of sufficient activity at follow-up, whereas 20.3% of the previously active no longer did. Formerly inactive patients reported an increase of 58.8 minutes/week of moderate and 34.6 minutes/week of vigorous activity and spending more time walking and cycling. Formerly active patients reported less time spent in moderate activities. Conclusions. Systematic counselling in primary care encouraged insufficiently active patients to adopt a more active lifestyle. Yet it became evident that active patients also need counselling to maintain their activity level

Mortality attributable to ambient fine particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide in Switzerland in 2019: use of two-pollutant effect estimates

INTRODUCTION: Air pollution health risk assessments have traditionally used single-pollutant effect estimates for one proxy ambient air pollutant such as PM(2.5). Two-pollutant effect estimates, i.e. adjusted for another correlated pollutant, theoretically enable the aggregation of pollutant-specific health effects minimizing double-counting. Our study aimed at estimating the adult mortality in Switzerland in 2019 attributable to PM(2.5) from a single-pollutant effect estimate and to the sum of PM(2.5) and NO(2) from two-pollutant estimates; comparing the results with those from alternative global, European and Swiss effect estimates. METHODS: For the single-pollutant approach, we used a PM(2.5) summary estimate of European cohorts from the project ELAPSE, recommended by the European Respiratory Society and International Society for Environmental Epidemiology (ERS-ISEE). To derive the two-pollutant effect estimates, we applied ELAPSE-based conversion factors to ERS-ISEE PM(2.5) and NO(2) single-pollutant effect estimates. Additionally, we used World Health Organization 2021 Air Quality Guidelines as counterfactual scenario, exposure model data from 2019 and Swiss lifetables. RESULTS: The single-pollutant effect estimate for PM(2.5) (1.118 [1.060; 1.179] per 10 mug/m(3)) resulted in 2240 deaths (21,593 years of life lost). Using our derived two-pollutant effect estimates (1.023 [1.012; 1.035] per 10 mug/m(3) PM(2.5) adjusted for NO(2) and 1.040 [1.023; 1.058] per 10 mug/m(3) NO(2) adjusted for PM(2.5)), we found 1977 deaths (19,071 years of life lost) attributable to PM(2.5) and NO(2) together (23% from PM(2.5)). Deaths using alternative effect estimates ranged from 1042 to 5059. DISCUSSION: Estimated premature mortality attributable to PM(2.5) alone was higher than to both PM(2.5) and NO(2) combined. Furthermore, the proportion of deaths from PM(2.5) was lower than from NO(2) in the two-pollutant approach. These seemingly paradoxical results, also found in some alternative estimates, are due to statistical imprecisions of underlying correction methods. Therefore, using two-pollutant effect estimates can lead to interpretation challenges in terms of causality

Methods matter: a comparative review of health risk assessments for ambient air pollution in Switzerland

Objectives: Air pollution health risk assessments (AP-HRAs) provide a method to quantify health effects for entire populations. In Switzerland, AP-HRAs are included in Swiss assessments for Transport Externalities (STEs), ordered by public authorities since the 1990s. This study aimed to describe the differences among national and international AP-HRAs for Switzerland. Methods: We compared input data, approaches and results across AP-HRAs over time. Results and input data for each AP-HRA were expressed as a ratio compared to the most recent STE (in most cases STE-2010). Results: Substantial variation across AP-HRAs was found. For all-cause adult mortality attributed to particulate matter (the most frequent outcome-pollutant pair), the ratio in HRAs oscillated from 0.40 to 2.09 (times the STE-2010 value). Regarding input data, the ratio ranged from 0.69 to 1.26 for population exposure, from 0 to 1.81 for counterfactual scenario, from 0.96 to 1.13 for concentration-response function and from 1.03 to 1.13 for baseline health data. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that methods matter for AP-HRAs. Transparent and possibly standardized reporting of key input data and assumptions should be promoted to facilitate comparison of AP-HRAs

Long-term exposure to traffic-related air pollution and stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Stroke remains the second cause of death worldwide. The mechanisms underlying the adverse association of exposure to traffic-related air pollution (TRAP) with overall cardiovascular disease may also apply to stroke. Our objective was to systematically evaluate the epidemiological evidence regarding the associations of long-term exposure to TRAP with stroke. Methods PubMed and LUDOK electronic databases were searched systematically for observational epidemiological studies from 1980 through 2019 on long-term exposure to TRAP and stroke with an update in January 2022. TRAP was defined according to a comprehensive protocol based on pollutant and exposure assessment methods or proximity metrics. Study selection, data extraction, risk of bias (RoB) and confidence assessments were conducted according to standardized protocols. We performed meta-analyses using random effects models; sensitivity analyses were assessed by geographic area, RoB, fatality, traffic specificity and new studies. Results Nineteen studies were included. The meta-analytic relative risks (and 95% confidence intervals) were: 1.03 (0.98-1.09) per 1 μg/m3 EC, 1.09 (0.96-1.23) per 10 μg/m3 PM10, 1.08 (0.89-1.32) per 5 μg/m3 PM2.5, 0.98 (0.92; 1.05) per 10 μg/m3 NO2 and 0.99 (0.94; 1.04) per 20 μg/m3 NOx with little to moderate heterogeneity based on 6, 5, 4, 7 and 8 studies, respectively. The confidence assessments regarding the quality of the body of evidence and separately regarding the presence of an association of TRAP with stroke considering all available evidence were rated low and moderate, respectively. Conclusion The available literature provides low to moderate evidence for an association of TRAP with stroke

Long-term exposure to traffic-related air pollution and stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Stroke remains the second cause of death worldwide. The mechanisms underlying the adverse association of exposure to traffic-related air pollution (TRAP) with overall cardiovascular disease may also apply to stroke. Our objective was to systematically evaluate the epidemiological evidence regarding the associations of long-term exposure to TRAP with stroke. METHODS: PubMed and LUDOK electronic databases were searched systematically for observational epidemiological studies from 1980 through 2019 on long-term exposure to TRAP and stroke with an update in January 2022. TRAP was defined according to a comprehensive protocol based on pollutant and exposure assessment methods or proximity metrics. Study selection, data extraction, risk of bias (RoB) and confidence assessments were conducted according to standardized protocols. We performed meta-analyses using random effects models; sensitivity analyses were assessed by geographic area, RoB, fatality, traffic specificity and new studies. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included. The meta-analytic relative risks (and 95% confidence intervals) were: 1.03 (0.98-1.09) per 1 μg/m3 EC, 1.09 (0.96-1.23) per 10 μg/m3 PM10, 1.08 (0.89-1.32) per 5 μg/m3 PM2.5, 0.98 (0.92; 1.05) per 10 μg/m3 NO2 and 0.99 (0.94; 1.04) per 20 μg/m3 NOx with little to moderate heterogeneity based on 6, 5, 4, 7 and 8 studies, respectively. The confidence assessments regarding the quality of the body of evidence and separately regarding the presence of an association of TRAP with stroke considering all available evidence were rated low and moderate, respectively. CONCLUSION: The available literature provides low to moderate evidence for an association of TRAP with stroke

Long-term exposure to traffic-related air pollution and selected health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The health effects of traffic-related air pollution (TRAP) continue to be of important public health interest. Following its well-cited 2010 critical review, the Health Effects Institute (HEI) appointed a new expert Panel to systematically evaluate the epidemiological evidence regarding the associations between long-term exposure to TRAP and selected adverse health outcomes. Health outcomes were selected based on evidence of causality for general air pollution (broader than TRAP) cited in authoritative reviews, relevance for public health and policy, and resources available. The Panel used a systematic approach to search the literature, select studies for inclusion in the review, assess study quality, summarize results, and reach conclusions about the confidence in the evidence. An extensive search was conducted of literature published between January 1980 and July 2019 on selected health outcomes. A new exposure framework was developed to determine whether a study was sufficiently specific to TRAP. In total, 353 studies were included in the review. Respiratory effects in children (118 studies) and birth outcomes (86 studies) were the most commonly studied outcomes. Fewer studies investigated cardiometabolic effects (57 studies), respiratory effects in adults (50 studies), and mortality (48 studies). The findings from the systematic review, meta-analyses, and evaluation of the quality of the studies and potential biases provided an overall high or moderate-to-high level of confidence in an association between long-term exposure to TRAP and the adverse health outcomes all-cause, circulatory, ischemic heart disease and lung cancer mortality, asthma onsetin chilldren and adults, and acute lower respiratory infections in children. The evidence was considered moderate, low or very low for the other selected outcomes. In light of the large number of people exposed to TRAP - both in and beyond the near-road environment - the Panel concluded that the overall high or moderate-to-high confidence in the evidence for an association between long-term exposure to TRAP and several adverse health outcomes indicates that exposures to TRAP remain an important public health concern and deserve greater attention from the public and from policymakers