Health impacts of ambient biomass smoke in Tasmania, Australia

The island state of Tasmania has marked seasonal variations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations related to wood heating during winter, planned forest fires during autumn and spring, and bushfires during summer. Biomass smoke causes considerable health harms and associated costs. We estimated the historical health burden from PM2.5 attributable to wood heater smoke (WHS) and landscape fire smoke (LFS) in Tasmania between 2010 and 2019. We calculated the daily population level exposure to WHS- and LFS-related PM2.5 and estimated the number of cases and health costs due to premature mortality, cardiorespiratory hospital admissions, and asthma emergency department (ED) visits. We estimated 69 deaths, 86 hospital admissions, and 15 asthma ED visits, each year, with over 74% of impacts attributed to WHS. Average yearly costs associated with WHS were of AUD$293 million and AUD$ 16 million for LFS. The latter increased up to more than AUD$ 34 million during extreme bushfire seasons. This is the first study to quantify the health impacts attributable to biomass smoke for Tasmania. We estimated substantial impacts, which could be reduced through replacing heating technologies, improving fire management, and possibly implementing integrated strategies. This would most likely produce important and cost-effective health benefits

Public health messaging during extreme smoke events: are we hitting the mark?

Background: Emergency services working to protect communities from harm duringwildfires aim to provide regular public advisories on the hazards from fire and smoke.However, there are few studies evaluating the success of public health communicationsregarding the management of smoke exposure. We explored the responses tosmoke-related health advisories of people living in a severely smoke-affected regionduring extensive wildfires in Tasmania, Australia early in 2019. We also evaluatedthe acceptability of portable high efficiency particle air (HEPA) cleaners used in studyparticipant’s homes during the smoky period.Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 households in the HuonValley region of Tasmania following a severe smoke episode. These households wereinitially recruited into a HEPA cleaner study. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, andanalyzed for common themes using an inductive framework approach.Results: Public health messaging during the 2019 wildfire event in Tasmania waswidely shared and understood, with social media playing a central role. However,some participants expressed concerns about the timeliness and effectiveness ofthe recommended interventions, and some would have appreciated more detailedinformation about the health risks from smoke. Public messages and actions to protecthouseholds from wildfire threat were, at times, contradictory or dominated in coverageover the smoke messaging, and many participants were conflicted with the multiplepublic messages and action relating to the more serious perceived threat from the fire.Conclusions: Public messaging about smoke and health should continue to usemultiple avenues of communication, with a focus on simple messages provided throughsocial media. Messaging about the smoke hazard should be available from a trustedcentral source regarding all aspects of the wildfire emergency, with links to more detailedinformation including local air quality data alongside interpretation of the associatedhealth risks

Impact of the 2019/2020 Australian Megafires on Air Quality and Health

The Australian 2019/2020 bushfires were unprecedented in their extent and intensity, causing a catastrophic loss of habitat, human and animal life across eastern-Australia. We use a regional air quality model to assess the impact of the bushfires on particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 μm (PM2.5) concentrations and the associated health impact from short-term population exposure to bushfire PM2.5. The mean population Air Quality Index (AQI) exposure between September and February in the fires and no fires simulations indicates an additional ∼437,000 people were exposed to “Poor” or worse AQI levels due to the fires. The AQ impact was concentrated in the cities of Sydney, Newcastle-Maitland, Canberra-Queanbeyan and Melbourne. Between October and February 171 (95% CI: 66–291) deaths were brought forward due to short-term exposure to bushfire PM2.5. The health burden was largest in New South Wales (NSW) (109 (95% CI: 41–176) deaths brought forward), Queensland (15 (95% CI: 5–24)), and Victoria (35 (95% CI: 13–56)). This represents 38%, 13% and 30% of the total deaths brought forward by short-term exposure to all PM2.5. At a city-level 65 (95% CI: 24–105), 23 (95% CI: 9–38) and 9 (95% CI: 4–14) deaths were brought forward from short-term exposure to bushfire PM2.5, accounting for 36%, 20%, and 64% of the total deaths brought forward from all PM2.5. Thus, the bushfires caused substantial AQ and health impacts across eastern-Australia. Climate change is projected to increase bushfire risk, therefore future fire management policies should consider this

Exceedances of national air quality standards for particulate matter in Western Australia: sources and health-related impacts

No abstract available

Unprecedented smoke-related health burden associated with the 2019-20 bushfires in eastern Australia.

No abstract available

Association between fire smoke fine particulate matter and asthma-related outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Asthma-related outcomes are regularly used by studies to investigate the association between human exposure to landscape fire smoke and health. Robust summary effect estimates are required to inform health protection policy for fire smoke exposure.Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the association between short-term exposure to landscape fire smoke (LFS) fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and asthma-related outcomes.Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines. Four databases (PubMed, Medline, EMBASE and Scopus) and reference lists of recent fire smoke and health reviews were searched. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of case-crossover studies, and a previously validated quality assessment framework was used for observational studies lacking control groups. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger's Test. The trim and fill method was used when there was evidence of publication bias. Sensitivity and influence analyses were conducted on all endpoints to test the robustness of estimates. Summary estimates were obtained for hospitalisations and emergency department (ED) visits. A descriptive analysis was conducted for physician visits, medication use, and salbutamol dispensations.Results: From an initial 181 articles (after duplicate removal), 20 studies were included for quantitative assessment and descriptive synthesis. LFS PM2.5 levels were positively associated with asthma hospitalisations (RR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02-1.09) and emergency department visits (RR = 1.07, 95% CI: 1.04-1.09). Subgroup analyses found that females were more susceptible than males for ED visits, and that there was an increasing association by age groups for hospital admissions and ED visits. High heterogeneity between studies was observed, but results were robust to sensitivity analysis.Conclusions: Females and all adults aged over 65 years appear to be the population groups most sensitive to asthma-related outcomes when exposed to LFS PM2.5. Overall, results were higher than those obtained for a typical PM2.5 mixture