Dataset Information

Combined Effects of Aircraft, Rail, and Road Traffic Noise on Total Noise Annoyance-A Cross-Sectional Study in Innsbruck.

ABSTRACT: Noise legislation in Austria does not provide an assessment of the cumulative effect of noise from different sources. The desire of citizens for a total noise assessment is getting stronger. Within the pilot project "Gesamtlärmbetrachtung" (Total Noise Investigation) Innsbruck, data from 1031 face-to-face interviews were correlated with exposure data from road, rail and air traffic noise. The interviews were selected in clusters according to the exposure combinations of these three sources. In addition to exposure-response relationships, it has also been found that the annoyance response to air and rail traffic noise is independent of the background noise from road traffic. The total noise annoyance response shows a cumulative effect in each source considered. From the source specific exposure-response relationships, a total noise assessment model based on the annoyance equivalents model was developed. This model is more suitable than the dominant source model and thus also considerable for legal application.

SUBMITTER: Lechner C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6766025 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Combined Effects of Aircraft, Rail, and Road Traffic Noise on Total Noise Annoyance-A Cross-Sectional Study in Innsbruck.

Lechner Christoph C Schnaiter David D Bose-O'Reilly Stephan S

International journal of environmental research and public health 20190919 18

Noise legislation in Austria does not provide an assessment of the cumulative effect of noise from different sources. The desire of citizens for a total noise assessment is getting stronger. Within the pilot project "Gesamtlärmbetrachtung" (Total Noise Investigation) Innsbruck, data from 1031 face-to-face interviews were correlated with exposure data from road, rail and air traffic noise. The interviews were selected in clusters according to the exposure combinations of these three sources. In a ...[more]

PMID: 31546974

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBoth physical and psychological health outcomes have been associated with exposure to environmental noise. Noise sensitivity could have the same moderating effect on physical and psychological health outcomes related to environmental noise exposure as on annoyance but this has been little tested.MethodsA cohort of 2398 men between 45 and 59 years, the longitudinal Caerphilly Collaborative Heart Disease study, was established in 1984/88 and followed into the mid-1990s. Road traffic noise maps were assessed at baseline. Psychological ill-health was measured in phase 2 in 1984/88, phase 3 (1989/93) and phase 4 (1993/7). Ischaemic heart disease was measured in clinic at baseline and through hospital records and records of deaths during follow up. We examined the longitudinal associations between road traffic noise and ischaemic heart disease morbidity and mortality using Cox Proportional Hazard Models and psychological ill-health using Logistic Regression; we also examined whether noise sensitivity and noise annoyance might moderate these associations. We also tested if noise sensitivity and noise annoyance were longitudinal predictors of ischaemic heart disease morbidity and mortality and psychological ill-health.ResultsRoad traffic noise was not associated with ischaemic heart disease morbidity or mortality. Neither noise sensitivity nor noise annoyance moderated the effects of road traffic noise on ischaemic heart disease morbidity or mortality. High noise sensitivity was associated with lower ischaemic heart disease mortality risk (HR = 0.74, 95%CI 0.57, 0.97). Road traffic noise was associated with Phase 4 psychological ill-health but only among those exposed to 56-60dBA (fully adjusted OR = 1.82 95%CI 1.07, 3.07). Noise sensitivity moderated the association of road traffic noise exposure with psychological ill-health. High noise sensitivity was associated longitudinally with psychological ill-health at phase 3 (OR = 1.85 95%CI 1.23, 2.78) and phase 4 (OR = 1.65 95%CI 1.09, 2.50). Noise annoyance predicted psychological ill-health at phase 4 (OR = 2.47 95%CI 1.00, 6.13).ConclusionsNoise sensitivity is a specific predictor of psychological ill-health and may be part of a wider construct of environmental susceptibility. Noise sensitivity may increase the risk of psychological ill-health when exposed to road traffic noise. Noise annoyance may be a mediator of the effects of road traffic noise on psychological ill-health.

Project description:Road traffic and related noise is a major source of annoyance and impairment to health in urban areas. Many areas exposed to road traffic noise are also exposed to rail and air traffic noise. The resulting annoyance may depend on individual/neighborhood socio-demographic factors. Nevertheless, few studies have taken into account the confounding or modifying factors in the relationship between transportation noise and annoyance due to road traffic. In this study, we address these issues by combining Geographic Information Systems and epidemiologic methods. Street network buffers with a radius of 500 m were defined around the place of residence of the 7290 participants of the RECORD Cohort in Ile-de-France. Estimated outdoor traffic noise levels (road, rail, and air separately) were assessed at each place of residence and in each of these buffers. Higher levels of exposure to noise were documented in low educated neighborhoods. Multilevel logistic regression models documented positive associations between road traffic noise and annoyance due to road traffic, after adjusting for individual/neighborhood socioeconomic conditions. There was no evidence that the association was of different magnitude when noise was measured at the place of residence or in the residential neighborhood. However, the strength of the association between neighborhood noise exposure and annoyance increased when considering a higher percentile in the distribution of noise in each neighborhood. Road traffic noise estimated at the place of residence and road traffic noise in the residential neighborhood (75th percentile) were independently associated with annoyance, when adjusted for each other. Interactions of effects indicated that the relationship between road traffic noise exposure in the residential neighborhood and annoyance was stronger in affluent and high educated neighborhoods. Overall, our findings suggest that it is useful to take into account (i) the exposure to transportation noise in the residential neighborhood rather than only at the residence, (ii) different percentiles of noise exposure in the residential neighborhood, and (iii) the socioeconomic characteristics of the residential neighborhood to explain variations in annoyance due to road traffic in the neighborhood.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Surveys are a common way to measure annoyance due to road traffic noise, but the method has some draw-backs. Survey context, question wording and answer alternatives could affect participation and answers and could have implications when comparing studies and/or performing pooled analyses. The aim of this study was to investigate the difference in annoyance reporting due to road traffic noise in two types of surveys of which one was introduced broadly and the other with the clearly stated aim of investigating noise and health. METHODS: Data was collected from two surveys carried out in the municipality of Malmö, southern Sweden in 2007 and 2008 (n = 2612 and n = 3810). The first survey stated an aim of investigating residential environmental exposure, especially noise and health. The second survey was a broad public health survey stating a broader aim. The two surveys had comparable questions regarding noise annoyance, although one used a 5-point scale and the other a 4-point scale. We used geographic information systems (GIS) to assess the average road and railway noise (LAeq,24h) at the participants' residential address. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios for annoyance in relation to noise exposure. RESULTS: Annoyance at least once a week due to road traffic noise was significantly more prevalent in the survey investigating environment and health compared to the public health survey at levels > 45 dB(A), but not at lower exposure levels. However no differences in annoyance were found when comparing the extreme alternatives "never" and "every day". In the study investigating environment and health, "Noise sensitive" persons were more likely to readily respond to the survey and were more annoyed by road traffic noise compared to the other participants in that survey. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in annoyance reporting between the two surveys were mainly due to different scales, suggesting that extreme alternatives are to prefer before dichotomization when comparing results between the two. Although some findings suggested that noise-sensitive individuals were more likely to respond to the survey investigating noise and health, we could not find convincing evidence that contextual differences affected either answers or participation.

Dataset Information

Combined Effects of Aircraft, Rail, and Road Traffic Noise on Total Noise Annoyance-A Cross-Sectional Study in Innsbruck.

Publications

Combined Effects of Aircraft, Rail, and Road Traffic Noise on Total Noise Annoyance-A Cross-Sectional Study in Innsbruck.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets