Mary Willis1, Perry Hystad1, Alina Denham2, Elaine Hill1,2. 1. School of Biological & Population Health, College of Public Health & Human Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA. 2. Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent advancements in drilling technology led to a rapid increase in natural gas development (NGD). Air pollution may be elevated in these areas and may vary by drilling type (conventional and unconventional), production volume and gas flaring. Impacts of NGD on paediatric asthma are largely unknown. This study quantifies associations between specific NGD activities and paediatric asthma hospitalizations in Texas. METHODS: We leveraged a database of Texas inpatient hospitalizations between 2000 and 2010 at the zip code level by quarter to examine associations between NGD and paediatric asthma hospitalizations, where our primary outcome is 0 vs ≥1 hospitalization. We used quarterly production reports to assess additional drilling-specific exposures at the zip code-level including drilling type, production and gas flaring. We developed logistic regression models to assess paediatric asthma hospitalizations by zip code-quarter-year observations, thus capturing spatiotemporal exposure patterns. RESULTS: We observed increased odds of ≥1 paediatric asthma hospitalization in a zip code per quarter associated with increasing tertiles of NGD exposure and show that spatiotemporal variation impacts results. Conventional drilling, compared with no drilling, is associated with odds ratios up to 1.23 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13, 1.34], whereas unconventional drilling is associated with odds ratios up to 1.59 (95% CI: 1.46, 1.73). Increasing production volumes are associated with increased paediatric asthma hospitalizations in an exposure-response relationship, whereas associations with flaring volumes are inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence of associations between paediatric asthma hospitalizations and NGD, regardless of drilling type. Practices related to production volume may be driving these positive associations.
BACKGROUND: Recent advancements in drilling technology led to a rapid increase in natural gas development (NGD). Air pollution may be elevated in these areas and may vary by drilling type (conventional and unconventional), production volume and gas flaring. Impacts of NGD on paediatric asthma are largely unknown. This study quantifies associations between specific NGD activities and paediatric asthma hospitalizations in Texas. METHODS: We leveraged a database of Texas inpatient hospitalizations between 2000 and 2010 at the zip code level by quarter to examine associations between NGD and paediatric asthma hospitalizations, where our primary outcome is 0 vs ≥1 hospitalization. We used quarterly production reports to assess additional drilling-specific exposures at the zip code-level including drilling type, production and gas flaring. We developed logistic regression models to assess paediatric asthma hospitalizations by zip code-quarter-year observations, thus capturing spatiotemporal exposure patterns. RESULTS: We observed increased odds of ≥1 paediatric asthma hospitalization in a zip code per quarter associated with increasing tertiles of NGD exposure and show that spatiotemporal variation impacts results. Conventional drilling, compared with no drilling, is associated with odds ratios up to 1.23 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13, 1.34], whereas unconventional drilling is associated with odds ratios up to 1.59 (95% CI: 1.46, 1.73). Increasing production volumes are associated with increased paediatric asthma hospitalizations in an exposure-response relationship, whereas associations with flaring volumes are inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence of associations between paediatric asthma hospitalizations and NGD, regardless of drilling type. Practices related to production volume may be driving these positive associations.
Authors: P E Tolbert; J A Mulholland; D L MacIntosh; F Xu; D Daniels; O J Devine; B P Carlin; M Klein; J Dorley; A J Butler; D F Nordenberg; H Frumkin; P B Ryan; M C White Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2000-04-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Matthew J Strickland; Lyndsey A Darrow; Mitchel Klein; W Dana Flanders; Jeremy A Sarnat; Lance A Waller; Stefanie E Sarnat; James A Mulholland; Paige E Tolbert Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2010-04-08 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Joan A Casey; David A Savitz; Sara G Rasmussen; Elizabeth L Ogburn; Jonathan Pollak; Dione G Mercer; Brian S Schwartz Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: William B Allshouse; Lisa M McKenzie; Kelsey Barton; Stephen Brindley; John L Adgate Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2019-06-05 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Cheryl L Weyant; Paul B Shepson; R Subramanian; Maria O L Cambaliza; Alexie Heimburger; David McCabe; Ellen Baum; Brian H Stirm; Tami C Bond Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2016-01-27 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Panagiotis T Nastos; Athanasios G Paliatsos; Michael B Anthracopoulos; Eleftheria S Roma; Kostas N Priftis Journal: Environ Health Date: 2010-07-28 Impact factor: 5.984
Authors: Irena Gorski-Steiner; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Heather E Volk; Sean O'Dell; Brian S Schwartz Journal: Environ Res Date: 2022-03-24 Impact factor: 8.431
Authors: Kristen Okorn; Amanda Jimenez; Ashley Collier-Oxandale; Jill Johnston; Michael Hannigan Journal: Sci Total Environ Date: 2021-03-03 Impact factor: 10.753
Authors: Nicole C Deziel; Cassandra J Clark; Joan A Casey; Michelle L Bell; Desiree L Plata; James E Saiers Journal: Curr Environ Health Rep Date: 2022-05-06