Children's Environmental Health Indicators in Context of the Sustainable Development Goals for Small Island Developing States.

The unique environmental vulnerability of small island developing states (SIDS) is likely to impact negatively on children's health. Children's environmental health indicators (CEHI) are standardized measures that can be used to assess the environmental exposures and their resulting health outcomes in children. This study sought to utilize the United Nations (UN) global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with their associated targets and indicators, as a framework for a CEHI proposal for SIDS. Exposure-side indicators were taken from key themes from the 2012 Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development, and health-side indicators were selected based on the most significant contributors to the burden of disease in children. The multiple-exposures⁻multiple-effect (MEME) framework was then used to show the relationships between environmental exposures and children's health outcomes. The framework was populated with available data from the World Bank's DataBank. Whilst there was some data available at a population level, major gaps in both exposure-side and health-side indicators were revealed. In order to progress children's environmental health in SIDS, a further piece of work is required to propose a fully prioritized set of exposure-side and health-side CEHIs; based on, but not exclusively linked to, the SDGs.

Health Impacts of Climate Change in Pacific Island Countries: A Regional Assessment of Vulnerabilities and Adaptation Priorities.

BACKGROUND: Between 2010 and 2012, the World Health Organization Division of Pacific Technical Support led a regional climate change and health vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning project, in collaboration with health sector partners, in 13 Pacific island countries-Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the vulnerabilities of Pacific island countries to the health impacts of climate change and planned adaptation strategies to minimize such threats to health. METHODS: This assessment involved a combination of quantitative and qualitative techniques. The former included descriptive epidemiology, time series analyses, Poisson regression, and spatial modeling of climate and climate-sensitive disease data, in the few instances where this was possible; the latter included wide stakeholder consultations, iterative consensus building, and expert opinion. Vulnerabilities were ranked using a "likelihood versus impact" matrix, and adaptation strategies were prioritized and planned accordingly. RESULTS: The highest-priority climate-sensitive health risks in Pacific island countries included trauma from extreme weather events, heat-related illnesses, compromised safety and security of water and food, vector-borne diseases, zoonoses, respiratory illnesses, psychosocial ill-health, non-communicable diseases, population pressures, and health system deficiencies. Adaptation strategies relating to these climate change and health risks could be clustered according to categories common to many countries in the Pacific region. CONCLUSION: Pacific island countries are among the most vulnerable in the world to the health impacts of climate change. This vulnerability is a function of their unique geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic characteristics combined with their exposure to changing weather patterns associated with climate change, the health risks entailed, and the limited capacity of the countries to manage and adapt in the face of such risks. Citation: McIver L, Kim R, Woodward A, Hales S, Spickett J, Katscherian D, Hashizume M, Honda Y, Kim H, Iddings S, Naicker J, Bambrick H, McMichael AJ, Ebi KL. 2016. Health impacts of climate change in Pacific island countries: a regional assessment of vulnerabilities and adaptation priorities. Environ Health Perspect 124:1707-1714; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1509756.

Environmental burden of disease in Europe: assessing nine risk factors in six countries.

BACKGROUND: Environmental health effects vary considerably with regard to their severity, type of disease, and duration. Integrated measures of population health, such as environmental burden of disease (EBD), are useful for setting priorities in environmental health policies and research. This review is a summary of the full Environmental Burden of Disease in European countries (EBoDE) project report. OBJECTIVES: The EBoDE project was set up to provide assessments for nine environmental risk factors relevant in selected European countries (Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands). METHODS: Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) were estimated for benzene, dioxins, secondhand smoke, formaldehyde, lead, traffic noise, ozone, particulate matter (PM2.5), and radon, using primarily World Health Organization data on burden of disease, (inter)national exposure data, and epidemiological or toxicological risk estimates. Results are presented here without discounting or age-weighting. RESULTS: About 3-7% of the annual burden of disease in the participating countries is associated with the included environmental risk factors. Airborne particulate matter (diameter ≤ 2.5 µm; PM2.5) is the leading risk factor associated with 6,000-10,000 DALYs/year and 1 million people. Secondhand smoke, traffic noise (including road, rail, and air traffic noise), and radon had overlapping estimate ranges (600-1,200 DALYs/million people). Some of the EBD estimates, especially for dioxins and formaldehyde, contain substantial uncertainties that could be only partly quantified. However, overall ranking of the estimates seems relatively robust. CONCLUSIONS: With current methods and data, environmental burden of disease estimates support meaningful policy evaluation and resource allocation, including identification of susceptible groups and targets for efficient exposure reduction. International exposure monitoring standards would enhance data quality and improve comparability.

Potential years of life lost (PYLL) caused by asbestos-related diseases in the world.

BACKGROUND: We applied the well-established, but rather under-utilized, indicator of Potential Years of Life Lost (PYLL) to estimate the global burden of mesothelioma and asbestosis. METHODS: We analyzed all deaths caused by mesothelioma and asbestosis that were reported by 82 and 55 countries, respectively, to the World Health Organization (WHO) from 1994 to 2010. RESULTS: The 128,015 and 13,885 persons who died of mesothelioma and asbestosis, potentially lost a total of 2.18 million and 180,000 years of life (PYLL), or, an annual average PYLL of 201,000 years and 17,000 years, respectively. The average PYLL per decedent were 17.0 and 13.0 years for mesothelioma and asbestosis, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The current burden of asbestos-related diseases (ARDs) in terms of PYLL is substantial. The future burden of ARDs can be eliminated by stopping the use of asbestos.

Assessment of noise measurements made with a continuous monitoring in time.

The World Health Organization has stated that hearing loss is one of the top 10 health problems worldwide and that noise-induced hearing loss is the leading occupational disease. This work evaluated the noise exposure levels of several job categories for 24-h periods over 7 days to determine the contribution of each microenvironment to total noise exposure. The noise exposure levels of 47 individuals were continuously measured using personal noise dosimeters in metropolitan Seoul, Korea. Participants ranged in age from 20 to 50 yr and represented eight occupational groups. Participants were asked to attach the noise dosimeters and complete a time-activity diary 24 h a day for 7 days. The average Leq 24 h,w among these individuals was 74 dBA, which ranged from 64 to 96 dBA. The average Leq 24 h,w was highest for Korean traditional music apprentices, followed by heavy equipment operators, firefighters, service workers, office workers, industrial hygienists, graduate and undergraduate students, and housewives (89, 77, 76, 76, 75, 71, 71, and 71 dBA, respectively, p < 0.001). 38 (80.9%) were exposed to noise levels greater than 70 dBA, which corresponds to the World Health Organization's exposure limit.

Methodological guidance for estimating the burden of disease from environmental noise

The World Health Organization, supported by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, is issuing this technical document as guidance for national and local authorities in risk assessment and environmental health planning related to environmental noise. The principles of quantitative assessment of the burden of disease from environmental noise, the status of implementation of the European Noise Directive, and lessons from the project on Environmental Burden of Disease in the European countries (EBoDE) are summarized, together with a review of evidence on exposure‒ response relationships between noise and cardiovascular diseases. Step-by-step guidance is presented on how to calculate the burden of cardiovascular diseases and sleep disturbance. The limitations and uncertainties of estimating disability-adjusted life years and the usefulness and limitations of noise map data are discussed.

Assessment of needs for capacity-building for health risk assessment of environmental noise: case studies

A group of international experts met in Bonn in October 2010 to define and agree on the assessment of the burden of disease from environmental noise, with a focus on cardiovascular disorders and sleep disturbance, and to promote knowledge transfer and capacity-building in European countries in the area of health risk assessment of environmental noise. The needs for awareness-raising and capacity-building in new EU member states, south-eastern European countries and newly independent states were studied on the basis of reports of experts from Albania, Belarus, the Czech Republic, Georgia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. The following common needs were identified: harmonization of the implementation of the Environmental Noise Directive 2002/49/EC, especially for strategic noise mapping and noise action plans, human resources development through education and training in health risk assessment, and provision of methodological guidelines for health risk assessment of environmental noise exposure. WHO, the European Commission and expert networks are important in promoting the transfer of knowledge and building human and institutional capacities for environmental noise risk assessment.

Methodological guidance for estimating the burden of disease from environmental noise

The World Health Organization, supported by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, is issuing this technical document as guidance for national and local authorities in risk assessment and environmental health planning related to environmental noise. The principles of quantitative assessment of the burden of disease from environmental noise, the status of implementation of the European Noise Directive, and lessons from the project on Environmental Burden of Disease in the European countries(EBoDE) are summarized, together with a review of evidence on exposure response relationships between noise and cardiovascular diseases. Step-by-step guidance is presented on how to calculate the burden of cardiovascular diseases and sleep disturbance. The limitations and uncertainties of estimating disability-adjusted life years and the usefulness and limitations of noise map data are discussed.

Workgroup report: developing environmental health indicators for European children: World Health Organization Working Group.

A working group coordinated by the World Health Organization developed a set of indicators to protect children's health from environmental risks and to support current and future European policy needs. On the basis of identified policy needs, the group developed a core set of 29 indicators for implementation plus an extended set of eight additional indicators for future development, focusing on exposure, health effects, and action. As far as possible, the indicators were designed to use existing information and are flexible enough to be developed further to meet the needs of policy makers and changing health priorities. These indicators cover most of the priority topic areas specified in the Children's Environment and Health Action Plan for Europe (CEHAPE) as adopted in the Fourth Ministerial Conference on Health and Environment in 2004, and will be used to monitor the implementation of CEHAPE. This effort can be viewed as an integral part of the Global Initiative on Children's Environmental Health Indicators, launched at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002.

Defining a common set of indicators to monitor road accidents in the European Union.

BACKGROUND: currently road accidents are mostly monitored through mortality and injury rates. This paper reports the methodology and the results of a project set forth by the European Union (EU) and coordinated by the WHO aimed at identifying and evaluating a core set of indicators to monitor the causal chain of road accident health effects. The project is part of the ECOEHIS (Development of Environment and Health Indicators for European Union Countries). METHODS: a group of experts (WG), identified 14 indicators after a review of the information collected at the EU level, each of them representing a specific aspect of the DPSEEA (Driving, Pressure, State, Exposure, Effect, Action) model applied and adapted to the road accidents. Each indicator was scored according to a list of 16 criteria chosen by the WG. Those found to have a high score were analysed to determine if they were compatible with EU legislation and then tested in the feasibility study. RESULTS: 11 of the 14 indicators found to be relevant and compatible with the criteria of selection were proposed for the feasibility study. Mortality, injury, road accident rate, age of vehicle fleet, and distance travelled are the indicators recommended for immediate implementation. CONCLUSION: after overcoming the limitations that emerged (absence of a common definition of death by road accident and injury severity, underestimation of injuries, differences in information quality) this core set of indicators will allow Member States to carry out effective internal/external comparisons over time.