OBJECTIVES: To compare the self reported health of a group of individuals living in an area contaminated by chromium (chromium group) with a group living in an uncontaminated area (control group), and to assess the effects of perception of risk from exposure to chromium on health. DESIGN: Cross sectional study using the SF-36 validated quality of life questionnaire. Further questions were added to examine the relations between perceptions about living on or near land contaminated with chromium and the effects on self reported health. SETTING: An area contaminated with chromium (Cambuslang, Carmyle, and Rutherglen) and a control area (Barrmulloch and Pollok). PARTICIPANTS: Residents of an area containing chromium landfill and residents of an uncontaminated control area. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores on SF-36. RESULTS: Little difference was found in health scores between the two groups, and only for general health was there a significantly higher score in the chromium group. Health scores for the chromium group were significantly worse across all dimensions for those who believed that chromium adversely affected health. Most of the chromium group (68%) would prefer money to be spent on improving amenities rather than on chromium remediation. CONCLUSIONS: Similar self reported health among residents of the chromium and control groups indicates that there is no evidence of harm to health from exposure to chromium in this setting. Noticeably lower scores in participants who believed chromium to be harmful to health point to the potential importance of perception and possible anxiety. Given the overall greater desire for better amenities rather than remedial action, policy makers and planners should discuss with residents how best to spend resources before instigating expensive cleaning up programmes.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the self reported health of a group of individuals living in an area contaminated by chromium (chromium group) with a group living in an uncontaminated area (control group), and to assess the effects of perception of risk from exposure to chromium on health. DESIGN: Cross sectional study using the SF-36 validated quality of life questionnaire. Further questions were added to examine the relations between perceptions about living on or near land contaminated with chromium and the effects on self reported health. SETTING: An area contaminated with chromium (Cambuslang, Carmyle, and Rutherglen) and a control area (Barrmulloch and Pollok). PARTICIPANTS: Residents of an area containing chromium landfill and residents of an uncontaminated control area. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores on SF-36. RESULTS: Little difference was found in health scores between the two groups, and only for general health was there a significantly higher score in the chromium group. Health scores for the chromium group were significantly worse across all dimensions for those who believed that chromium adversely affected health. Most of the chromium group (68%) would prefer money to be spent on improving amenities rather than on chromium remediation. CONCLUSIONS: Similar self reported health among residents of the chromium and control groups indicates that there is no evidence of harm to health from exposure to chromium in this setting. Noticeably lower scores in participants who believed chromium to be harmful to health point to the potential importance of perception and possible anxiety. Given the overall greater desire for better amenities rather than remedial action, policy makers and planners should discuss with residents how best to spend resources before instigating expensive cleaning up programmes.
Authors: H Dolk; M Vrijheid; B Armstrong; L Abramsky; F Bianchi; E Garne; V Nelen; E Robert; J E Scott; D Stone; R Tenconi Journal: Lancet Date: 1998-08-08 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Harrison J Schmitt; Eric E Calloway; Daniel Sullivan; Whitney Clausen; Pamela G Tucker; Jamie Rayman; Ben Gerhardstein Journal: Sci Total Environ Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 7.963
Authors: Pauline Slottje; Pau Line Slottje; Jos W R Twisk; Nynke Smidt; Anja C Huizink; Anke B Witteveen; Willem van Mechelen; Tjabe Smid Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2006-11-08 Impact factor: 3.440
Authors: Pauline Slottje; Nynke Smidt; Jos W R Twisk; Anja C Huizink; Anke B Witteveen; Willem van Mechelen; Tjabe Smid Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2006-05-30 Impact factor: 3.295