W L Zijlema1, D W Morley2, R P Stolk3, J G M Rosmalen4. 1. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Epidemiology, Groningen, The Netherlands. Electronic address: w.l.zijlema@umcg.nl. 2. MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom. 3. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Epidemiology, Groningen, The Netherlands. 4. University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Psychiatry, Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion regulation (ICPE), Groningen, The Netherlands; University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Internal Medicine, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We investigated the role of a stress-sensitive personality on relations between noise, noise annoyance and somatic symptom reporting. First, we investigated the cross-sectional association of road traffic noise exposure and somatic symptoms, and its modification by hostility and vulnerability to stress. Second, we investigated the cross-sectional association of noise annoyance from eight sources (e.g. road traffic, aircraft, neighbours) and somatic symptoms, and it's confounding by hostility and vulnerability to stress. METHODS: Data were obtained from LifeLines, a general population cohort from the Netherlands. Road traffic noise was estimated using the Common Noise Assessment Methods in Europe (CNOSSOS-EU) noise model. Noise annoyance, hostility, vulnerability to stress, and somatic symptoms were assessed with validated questionnaires. RESULTS: Poisson regression models adjusted for demographic and socioeconomic variables indicated no association of noise exposure and somatic symptoms (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.001; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.000-1.001; n=56,937). Interactions of noise exposure and hostility and vulnerability to stress were not statistically significant. Small positive associations were found for noise annoyance from each of the eight sources and somatic symptoms, when adjusted for demographic and socioeconomic variables (e.g. for road traffic noise annoyance IRR 1.014, 95% CI 1.011-1.018; n=6177). Additional adjustment for hostility and vulnerability to stress resulted in small decreases of the IRRs for noise annoyance from each of the eight sources, but the associations remained statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Personality facets hostility and vulnerability to stress did not modify the relation between road traffic noise exposure and somatic symptom reporting, or confound relations between noise annoyance and symptoms.
OBJECTIVES: We investigated the role of a stress-sensitive personality on relations between noise, noise annoyance and somatic symptom reporting. First, we investigated the cross-sectional association of road traffic noise exposure and somatic symptoms, and its modification by hostility and vulnerability to stress. Second, we investigated the cross-sectional association of noise annoyance from eight sources (e.g. road traffic, aircraft, neighbours) and somatic symptoms, and it's confounding by hostility and vulnerability to stress. METHODS: Data were obtained from LifeLines, a general population cohort from the Netherlands. Road traffic noise was estimated using the Common Noise Assessment Methods in Europe (CNOSSOS-EU) noise model. Noise annoyance, hostility, vulnerability to stress, and somatic symptoms were assessed with validated questionnaires. RESULTS: Poisson regression models adjusted for demographic and socioeconomic variables indicated no association of noise exposure and somatic symptoms (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.001; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.000-1.001; n=56,937). Interactions of noise exposure and hostility and vulnerability to stress were not statistically significant. Small positive associations were found for noise annoyance from each of the eight sources and somatic symptoms, when adjusted for demographic and socioeconomic variables (e.g. for road traffic noise annoyance IRR 1.014, 95% CI 1.011-1.018; n=6177). Additional adjustment for hostility and vulnerability to stress resulted in small decreases of the IRRs for noise annoyance from each of the eight sources, but the associations remained statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Personality facets hostility and vulnerability to stress did not modify the relation between road traffic noise exposure and somatic symptom reporting, or confound relations between noise annoyance and symptoms.
Authors: Wilma L Zijlema; Nynke Smidt; Bart Klijs; David W Morley; John Gulliver; Kees de Hoogh; Salome Scholtens; Judith G M Rosmalen; Ronald P Stolk Journal: Arch Public Health Date: 2016-08-01