Ulrich Franck1, Arne Marian Leitte2, Peter Suppan3. 1. Core Facility Studies, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, Leipzig, Germany. Electronic address: ulrich.franck@ufz.de. 2. Core Facility Studies, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, Leipzig, Germany. Electronic address: arne.leitte@googlemail.com. 3. Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research (IMK-IFU), Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany. Electronic address: peter.suppan@kit.edu.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Our results provide evidence for respiratory effects of combined exposure to airborne pollutants in Santiago de Chile. Different pollutants account for varying adverse effects. Ozone was not found to be significantly associated with respiratory morbidity. BACKGROUND: High concentrations of various air pollutants have been associated with hospitalization due to development and exacerbation of respiratory diseases. The findings of different studies vary in effect strength and are sometimes inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess associations between airborne exposures by particulate matter as well as gaseous air pollutants and hospital admissions due to respiratory disease groups under the special orographic and meteorological conditions of Santiago de Chile. METHODS: The study was performed in the metropolitan area of Santiago de Chile during 2004-2007. We applied a time-stratified case-crossover analysis taking temporal variation, meteorological conditions and autocorrelation into account. We computed associations between daily ambient concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5 - particulate matter with aerodynamic diameters less than 10 or 2.5 μm, respectively) or ozone (O3) and hospital admissions for respiratory illnesses. RESULTS: We found for CO, NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 adverse relationships to respiratory admissions while effect strength and lag depended on the pollutant and on the disease group. By trend, in 1-pollutant models most adverse pollutants were CO and PM10 followed by PM2.5, while in 2-pollutant models effects of NO2 persisted in most cases whereas other effects weakened and significant effects remain for PM2.5, only. In addition the strongest effects seemed to be immediate or with a delay of up to one day, but effects were found until day 7, too. Adverse effects of ozone could not be detected. CONCLUSIONS: Taking case numbers and effect strength of all cardiovascular diseases into account, mitigation measures should address all pollutants especially CO, NO2, and PM10.
UNLABELLED: Our results provide evidence for respiratory effects of combined exposure to airborne pollutants in Santiago de Chile. Different pollutants account for varying adverse effects. Ozone was not found to be significantly associated with respiratory morbidity. BACKGROUND: High concentrations of various air pollutants have been associated with hospitalization due to development and exacerbation of respiratory diseases. The findings of different studies vary in effect strength and are sometimes inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess associations between airborne exposures by particulate matter as well as gaseous air pollutants and hospital admissions due to respiratory disease groups under the special orographic and meteorological conditions of Santiago de Chile. METHODS: The study was performed in the metropolitan area of Santiago de Chile during 2004-2007. We applied a time-stratified case-crossover analysis taking temporal variation, meteorological conditions and autocorrelation into account. We computed associations between daily ambient concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5 - particulate matter with aerodynamic diameters less than 10 or 2.5 μm, respectively) or ozone (O3) and hospital admissions for respiratory illnesses. RESULTS: We found for CO, NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 adverse relationships to respiratory admissions while effect strength and lag depended on the pollutant and on the disease group. By trend, in 1-pollutant models most adverse pollutants were CO and PM10 followed by PM2.5, while in 2-pollutant models effects of NO2 persisted in most cases whereas other effects weakened and significant effects remain for PM2.5, only. In addition the strongest effects seemed to be immediate or with a delay of up to one day, but effects were found until day 7, too. Adverse effects of ozone could not be detected. CONCLUSIONS: Taking case numbers and effect strength of all cardiovascular diseases into account, mitigation measures should address all pollutants especially CO, NO2, and PM10.