Literature DB >> 26372694

Health impact metrics for air pollution management strategies.

Sheena E Martenies1, Donele Wilkins2, Stuart A Batterman3.   

Abstract

Health impact assessments (HIAs) inform policy and decision making by providing information regarding future health concerns, and quantitative HIAs now are being used for local and urban-scale projects. HIA results can be expressed using a variety of metrics that differ in meaningful ways, and guidance is lacking with respect to best practices for the development and use of HIA metrics. This study reviews HIA metrics pertaining to air quality management and presents evaluative criteria for their selection and use. These are illustrated in a case study where PM2.5 concentrations are lowered from 10 to 8μg/m(3) in an urban area of 1.8 million people. Health impact functions are used to estimate the number of premature deaths, unscheduled hospitalizations and other morbidity outcomes. The most common metric in recent quantitative HIAs has been the number of cases of adverse outcomes avoided. Other metrics include time-based measures, e.g., disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), monetized impacts, functional-unit based measures, e.g., benefits per ton of emissions reduced, and other economic indicators, e.g., cost-benefit ratios. These metrics are evaluated by considering their comprehensiveness, the spatial and temporal resolution of the analysis, how equity considerations are facilitated, and the analysis and presentation of uncertainty. In the case study, the greatest number of avoided cases occurs for low severity morbidity outcomes, e.g., asthma exacerbations (n=28,000) and minor-restricted activity days (n=37,000); while DALYs and monetized impacts are driven by the severity, duration and value assigned to a relatively low number of premature deaths (n=190 to 230 per year). The selection of appropriate metrics depends on the problem context and boundaries, the severity of impacts, and community values regarding health. The number of avoided cases provides an estimate of the number of people affected, and monetized impacts facilitate additional economic analyses useful to policy analysis. DALYs are commonly used as an aggregate measure of health impacts and can be used to compare impacts across studies. Benefits per ton metrics may be appropriate when changes in emissions rates can be estimated. To address community concerns and HIA objectives, a combination of metrics is suggested.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Air quality management; Disability-adjusted life years; Health impact assessment; Health metrics; Monetized impacts

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26372694      PMCID: PMC4648637          DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2015.08.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Int        ISSN: 0160-4120            Impact factor:   9.621


  74 in total

Review 1.  From data to policy: good practices and cautionary tales.

Authors:  Carla AbouZahr; Sam Adjei; Churnrurtai Kanchanachitra
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-03-24       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Use of health impact assessment in incorporating health considerations in decision making.

Authors:  Clare Davenport; Jonathan Mathers; Jayne Parry
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  A review of the strengths and weaknesses of quantitative methods used in health impact assessment.

Authors:  E O'Connell; F Hurley
Journal:  Public Health       Date:  2009-03-26       Impact factor: 2.427

4.  Health impact assessment of traffic-related air pollution at the urban project scale: influence of variability and uncertainty.

Authors:  Chidsanuphong Chart-Asa; Jacqueline MacDonald Gibson
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2014-11-26       Impact factor: 7.963

5.  Reducing fine particulate to improve health: a health impact assessment for Taiwan.

Authors:  Chia-Ming Yang; Kai Kao
Journal:  Arch Environ Occup Health       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.663

Review 6.  Interpreting health statistics for policymaking: the story behind the headlines.

Authors:  Neff Walker; Jennifer Bryce; Robert E Black
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-03-17       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 7.  Practical advancement of multipollutant scientific and risk assessment approaches for ambient air pollution.

Authors:  Douglas O Johns; Lindsay Wichers Stanek; Katherine Walker; Souad Benromdhane; Bryan Hubbell; Mary Ross; Robert B Devlin; Daniel L Costa; Daniel S Greenbaum
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 9.031

8.  Towards good practice for health statistics: lessons from the Millennium Development Goal health indicators.

Authors:  Christopher Jl Murray
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-03-10       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 9.  Integrating human health into environmental impact assessment: an unrealized opportunity for environmental health and justice.

Authors:  Rajiv Bhatia; Aaron Wernham
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  Comparative quantification of health risks conceptual framework and methodological issues.

Authors:  Christopher JL Murray; Majid Ezzati; Alan D Lopez; Anthony Rodgers; Stephen Vander Hoorn
Journal:  Popul Health Metr       Date:  2003-04-14
View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Towards environmental health equity in health impact assessment: innovations and opportunities.

Authors:  Chris G Buse; Valerie Lai; Katie Cornish; Margot W Parkes
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 3.380

2.  Nonlinear relationships between air pollutant emissions and PM2.5-related health impacts in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region.

Authors:  Bin Zhao; Shuxiao Wang; Dian Ding; Wenjing Wu; Xing Chang; Jiandong Wang; Jia Xing; Carey Jang; Joshua S Fu; Yun Zhu; Mei Zheng; Yu Gu
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 7.963

3.  Estimating environmental co-benefits of U.S. low-carbon pathways using an integrated assessment model with state-level resolution.

Authors:  Yang Ou; Wenjing Shi; Steven J Smith; Catherine M Ledna; J Jason West; Christopher G Nolte; Daniel H Loughlin
Journal:  Appl Energy       Date:  2018-04-15       Impact factor: 9.746

4.  Environmental impacts of commuting modes in Lisbon: a life-cycle assessment addressing particulate matter impacts on health.

Authors:  Joana Bastos; Pedro Marques; Stuart A Batterman; Fausto Freire
Journal:  Int J Sustain Transp       Date:  2018-09-23

5.  A pharmacoeconomic approach to assessing the costs and benefits of air quality interventions that improve health: a case study.

Authors:  James Lomas; Laetitia Schmitt; Sally Jones; Maureen McGeorge; Elizabeth Bates; Mike Holland; Duncan Cooper; Richard Crowther; Mike Ashmore; David Rojas-Rueda; Helen Weatherly; Gerry Richardson; Laura Bojke
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Disease and Health Inequalities Attributable to Air Pollutant Exposure in Detroit, Michigan.

Authors:  Sheena E Martenies; Chad W Milando; Guy O Williams; Stuart A Batterman
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2017-10-19       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Air pollution control strategies directly limiting national health damages in the US.

Authors:  Yang Ou; J Jason West; Steven J Smith; Christopher G Nolte; Daniel H Loughlin
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 14.919

8.  State-level drivers of future fine particulate matter mortality in the United States.

Authors:  Yang Ou; Steven J Smith; J Jason West; Christopher G Nolte; Daniel H Loughlin
Journal:  Environ Res Lett       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 6.793

9.  Health and Economic Impacts Assessment of O3 Exposure in Mexico.

Authors:  José Luis Texcalac-Sangrador; Magali Hurtado-Díaz; Eunice Elizabeth Félix-Arellano; Carlos Manuel Guerrero-López; Horacio Riojas-Rodríguez
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-11-05       Impact factor: 3.390

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.