Dataset Information

Systematic Review of Ozone Effects on Human Lung Function, 2013 Through 2020.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Ozone effects on lung function are particularly important to understand in the context of the air pollution-health outcomes epidemiologic literature, given the complex relationships between ozone and other air pollutants with known lung function effects.

Research question

What has been learned about the association between ozone exposures and lung function from epidemiology studies published from 2013 through 2020?

Study design and methods

On March 18, 2018, and September 8, 2020, PubMed was searched using the terms health AND ozone, filtering to articles in English and about humans, from 2013 or later. An additional focused review searching for ozone AND (lung function OR FEV₁OR FVC) was performed June 26, 2021. Articles were selected for this review if they reported a specific relationship between a lung function outcome and ozone exposure.

Results

Of 3,271 articles screened, 53 ultimately met criteria for inclusion. A systematic review with assessment of potential for bias was conducted, but a meta-analysis was not carried out because of differences in exposure duration and outcome quantification. Consistent evidence exists of small decreases in children's lung function, even associated with very low levels of short-term ozone exposure. The effects on adult lung function from exposure to low-level, short-term ozone are less clear, although ozone-associated decrements may occur in the elderly. Finally, long-term ozone exposure decreases both lung function and lung function growth in children, although few new studies have examined long-term ozone and lung function in adults.

Interpretation

Much of this literature involves concentrations below the current US Environmental Protection Agency's National Ambient Air Quality Standard of 70 parts per billion over an 8-h averaging time, suggesting that this current standard may not protect children adequately from ozone-related decrements in lung function.

SUBMITTER: Holm SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8783034 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The potential effects of combinations of dilute whole diesel exhaust (DE) and ozone (O?), each a common component of ambient airborne pollutant mixtures, on lung function were examined. Healthy young human volunteers were exposed for 2 hr to pollutants while exercising (~50 L/min) intermittently on two consecutive days. Day 1 exposures were either to filtered air, DE (300 ?g/m³), O? (0.300 ppm), or the combination of both pollutants. On Day 2 all exposures were to O? (0.300 ppm), and Day 3 served as a followup observation day. Lung function was assessed by spirometry just prior to, immediately after, and up to 4 hr post-exposure on each exposure day. Functional pulmonary responses to the pollutants were also characterized based on stratification by glutathione S-transferase mu 1 (GSTM1) genotype. On Day 1, exposure to air or DE did not change FEV1 or FVC in the subject population (n?=?15). The co-exposure to O? and DE decreased FEV1 (17.6%) to a greater extent than O? alone (9.9%). To test for synergistic exposure effects, i.e., in a greater than additive fashion, FEV1 changes post individual O? and DE exposures were summed together and compared to the combined DE and O? exposure; the p value was 0.057. On Day 2, subjects who received DE exposure on Day 1 had a larger FEV1 decrement (14.7%) immediately after the O? exposure than the individuals' matched response following a Day 1 air exposure (10.9%). GSTM1 genotype did not affect the magnitude of lung function changes in a significant fashion. These data suggest that altered respiratory responses to the combination of O? and DE exposure can be observed showing a greater than additive manner. In addition, O?-induced lung function decrements are greater with a prior exposure to DE compared to a prior exposure to filtered air. Based on the joint occurrence of these pollutants in the ambient environment, the potential exists for interactions in more than an additive fashion affecting lung physiological processes.

Project description:IntroductionAmbient ozone exposure may be adverse to health. Since the reported associations between ozone and health effects are heterogeneous and the underlying pathways are indistinct, the overall relationship remains unclear. Only a few overall syntheses of the evidence regarding ozone and health effects are available to date.Methods and analysisWe plan to summarise the current evidence on ozone-related health effects systematically. First, to identify the possible associations between ambient ozone exposure and health outcomes, we will conduct an umbrella review. PubMed, Web of Science and grey literature will be searched for systematic reviews on exposure to ambient ozone and any possible health endpoints published before 31 May 2019. Data selection and extraction will be carried out by one reviewer, and a second reviewer will check the agreement of a sample of the studies. The methodological quality of the eligible systematic reviews and level of evidence regarding ozone and every specific health effect will be evaluated. Second, for each of the identified effects with a high level of evidence, comprehensive information retrievals will be conducted, considering both epidemiological and experimental studies. The study selection and data mapping will be carried out by one reviewer and checked by the second reviewer. We will summarise the information of the filtered epidemiological and experimental studies to conduct several systematic maps presenting the currently available evidence for the specific health effect. Because the association between ozone exposure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is relatively well investigated, we will at least conduct one systematic map of ozone and COPD.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required for this study. The completed umbrella review and systematic maps will be considered for publication and presentation. We will additionally upload the relevant data to publicly accessible online databases.Prospero registration numberCRD42019123064.

Project description:BackgroundPostoperative recovery in lung cancer patients is a complex process, where breathing exercises may play a crucial role in enhancing pulmonary function and quality of life (QoL). This study systematically reviews and meta-analyzes the impact of breathing exercises on post-surgical lung function and QoL in lung cancer patients.MethodsAn extensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Embase databases using terms like "Lung Neoplasms", "breathing exercises", and "randomized controlled trial", supplemented by Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and free words. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for quality assessment. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of breathing exercises post-lung cancer surgery followed by data extraction and quality evaluation.ResultsFrom 384 retrieved studies, 10 met the inclusion criteria and were selected for detailed analysis. The main outcomes assessed were postoperative pulmonary function indices and QoL measures. The majority of studies were deemed 'low risk' for random sequence generation and allocation concealment. However, due to the nature of the interventions, blinding was a 'high risk' in most cases. The meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in key pulmonary function indices: forced vital capacity (FVC%) increased by an average of 1.73%, maximal voluntary ventilation (MVV) improved by 7.58 L/min, and maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) enhanced by 0.95 cmH2O. Additionally, there was a notable alleviation of postoperative dyspnea and an enhancement in QoL, with anxiety scores decreasing by an average of 3.42 points and complication rates reducing correspondingly. However, the interventions did not significantly affect physical activity levels or performance on the 6-minute walk test (6WMT), with effect sizes for these outcomes being non-significant.ConclusionsThis study indicates that breathing exercises significantly improve postoperative pulmonary function and QoL in lung cancer patients. Future research should delve into the mechanisms behind these exercises and evaluate their long-term rehabilitation effects. Customized programs could further optimize recovery and enhance patient QoL.