Interventions to reduce ambient particulate matter air pollution and their effect on health.

BACKGROUND: Ambient air pollution is associated with a large burden of disease in both high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To date, no systematic review has assessed the effectiveness of interventions aiming to reduce ambient air pollution. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of interventions to reduce ambient particulate matter air pollution in reducing pollutant concentrations and improving associated health outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched a range of electronic databases with diverse focuses, including health and biomedical research (CENTRAL, Cochrane Public Health Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO), multidisciplinary research (Scopus, Science Citation Index), social sciences (Social Science Citation Index), urban planning and environment (Greenfile), and LMICs (Global Health Library regional indexes, WHOLIS). Additionally, we searched grey literature databases, multiple online trial registries, references of included studies and the contents of relevant journals in an attempt to identify unpublished and ongoing studies, and studies not identified by our search strategy. The final search date for all databases was 31 August 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible for inclusion were randomized and cluster randomized controlled trials, as well as several non-randomized study designs, including controlled interrupted time-series studies (cITS-EPOC), interrupted time-series studies adhering to EPOC standards (ITS-EPOC), interrupted time-series studies not adhering to EPOC standards (ITS), controlled before-after studies adhering to EPOC standards (CBA-EPOC), and controlled before-after studies not adhering to EPOC standards (CBA); these were classified as main studies. Additionally, we included uncontrolled before-after studies (UBA) as supporting studies. We included studies that evaluated interventions to reduce ambient air pollution from industrial, residential, vehicular and multiple sources, with respect to their effect on mortality, morbidity and several air pollutant concentrations. We did not restrict studies based on the population, setting or comparison. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: After a calibration exercise among the author team, two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We conducted data extraction, risk of bias assessment and evidence synthesis only for main studies; we mapped supporting studies with regard to the types of intervention and setting. To assess risk of bias, we used the Graphic Appraisal Tool for Epidemiological studies (GATE) for correlation studies, as modified and employed by the Centre for Public Health Excellence at the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). For each intervention category, i.e. those targeting industrial, residential, vehicular and multiple sources, we synthesized evidence narratively, as well as graphically using harvest plots. MAIN RESULTS: We included 42 main studies assessing 38 unique interventions. These were heterogeneous with respect to setting; interventions were implemented in countries across the world, but most (79%) were implemented in HICs, with the remaining scattered across LMICs. Most interventions (76%) were implemented in urban or community settings.We identified a heterogeneous mix of interventions, including those aiming to address industrial (n = 5), residential (n = 7), vehicular (n = 22), and multiple sources (n = 4). Some specific interventions, such as low emission zones and stove exchanges, were assessed by several studies, whereas others, such as a wood burning ban, were only assessed by a single study.Most studies assessing health and air quality outcomes used routine monitoring data. Studies assessing health outcomes mostly investigated effects in the general population, while few studies assessed specific subgroups such as infants, children and the elderly. No identified studies assessed unintended or adverse effects.The judgements regarding the risk of bias of studies were mixed. Regarding health outcomes, we appraised eight studies (47%) as having no substantial risk of bias concerns, five studies (29%) as having some risk of bias concerns, and four studies (24%) as having serious risk of bias concerns. Regarding air quality outcomes, we judged 11 studies (31%) as having no substantial risk of bias concerns, 16 studies (46%) as having some risk of bias concerns, and eight studies (23%) as having serious risk of bias concerns.The evidence base, comprising non-randomized studies only, was of low or very low certainty for all intervention categories and primary outcomes. The narrative and graphical synthesis showed that evidence for effectiveness was mixed across the four intervention categories. For interventions targeting industrial, residential and multiple sources, a similar pattern emerged for both health and air quality outcomes, with essentially all studies observing either no clear association in either direction or a significant association favouring the intervention. The evidence base for interventions targeting vehicular sources was more heterogeneous, as a small number of studies did observe a significant association favouring the control. Overall, however, the evidence suggests that the assessed interventions do not worsen air quality or health. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Given the heterogeneity across interventions, outcomes, and methods, it was difficult to derive overall conclusions regarding the effectiveness of interventions in terms of improved air quality or health. Most included studies observed either no significant association in either direction or an association favouring the intervention, with little evidence that the assessed interventions might be harmful. The evidence base highlights the challenges related to establishing a causal relationship between specific air pollution interventions and outcomes. In light of these challenges, the results on effectiveness should be interpreted with caution; it is important to emphasize that lack of evidence of an association is not equivalent to evidence of no association.We identified limited evidence for several world regions, notably Africa, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Southeast Asia; decision-makers should prioritize the development and implementation of interventions in these settings. In the future, as new policies are introduced, decision-makers should consider a built-in evaluation component, which could facilitate more systematic and comprehensive evaluations. These could assess effectiveness, but also aspects of feasibility, fidelity and acceptability.The production of higher quality and more uniform evidence would be helpful in informing decisions. Researchers should strive to sufficiently account for confounding, assess the impact of methodological decisions through the conduct and communication of sensitivity analyses, and improve the reporting of methods, and other aspects of the study, most importantly the description of the intervention and the context in which it is implemented.

Accountability Studies on Air Pollution and Health: the HEI Experience.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Assessing health effects of air quality interventions is of ever-increasing interest. Given the prominent role Health Effects Institute (HEI) has played in accountability research, this review focuses on HEI's recent experiences, the challenges it has encountered, and provides possible directions for future research. RECENT FINDINGS: Most accountability studies to date have focused on effects of relatively short-term, local-scale, and sometimes temporary interventions. Only a few recent accountability studies have sought to investigate large-scale, multiyear regulatory programs. Common challenges encountered include lack of statistical power, how to account appropriately for background trends in air quality and health, and difficulties in direct attribution of changes in air pollution and health to a single intervention among many regulatory actions. New methods have been developed for accountability research that has shown promise addressing some of those challenges, including use of causal inference methods. These and other approaches that would enhance the attribution of changes in air quality and health directly to an intervention should continue to be further explored. In addition, integration of social and behavioral sciences in accountability research is warranted, and climate related co-benefits and dis-benefits may be considered.

Particulate matter components, sources, and health: Systematic approaches to testing effects.

UNLABELLED: Exposure to particulate matter (PM) is associated with adverse health outcomes. There has long been a question as to whether some components of the PM mixture are of greater public health concern than others so that the sources that emit the more toxic components could be controlled. In this paper, we describe the National Particle Component Toxicity (NPACT) initiative, a comprehensive research program that combined epidemiologic and toxicologic approaches to evaluate this critical question, partly relying on information from a national network of air quality monitors that provided data on speciated PM2.5 (PM with an aerodynamic diameter<2.5 µm) starting in 2000. We also consider the results of the NPACT program in the context of selected research on PM components and health in order to assess the current state of the field. Overall, the ambitious NPACT research program found associations of secondary sulfate and, to a somewhat lesser extent, traffic sources with health effects. Although this and other research has linked a variety of health effects to multiple groups of PM components and sources of PM, the collective evidence has not yet isolated factors or sources that would be closely and unequivocally more strongly related to specific health outcomes. If greater success is to be achieved in isolating the effects of pollutants from mobile and other major sources, either as individual components or as a mixture, more advanced approaches and additional measurements will be needed so that exposure at the individual or population level can be assessed more accurately. Enhanced understanding of exposure and health effects is needed before it can be concluded that regulations targeting specific sources or components of PM2.5 will protect public health more effectively than continuing to follow the current practices of targeting PM2.5 mass as a whole. IMPLICATIONS: This paper describes a comprehensive epidemiologic and toxicologic research program to evaluate whether some components and sources of PM may be more toxic than others. This question is important for regulatory agencies in setting air quality standards to protect people's health. The results show that PM from coal and oil combustion and from traffic sources was associated with adverse health outcomes, but other components and sources could not definitively be ruled out. Thus, given current knowledge, the current practice of setting air quality standards for PM mass as a whole likely remains an effective approach to protecting public health.

Evaluating the effectiveness of air quality interventions.

Evaluating the extent to which air quality regulations improve public health--sometimes referred to as accountability--is part of an emerging effort to assess the effectiveness of environmental regulatory policies. Air quality has improved substantially in the United States and Western Europe in recent decades, with far less visible pollution and decreasing concentrations of several major pollutants. In large part, these gains were achieved through increasingly stringent air quality regulations. The costs associated with compliance and, importantly, the need to ensure that the regulations are achieving the intended public health benefits underscore the importance of accountability research. To date, accountability research has emphasized measuring the effects of actions already taken to improve air quality. Such research may also contribute to estimating the burden of disease that might be avoided in the future if certain actions are taken. The Health Effects Institute (HEI) currently funds eight ongoing studies on accountability, which cover near-term interventions to improve air quality including (1) a ban on the sale of coal, (2) replacing old wood stoves with cleaner ones, (3) decreasing sulfur content in fuel, (4) measures to reduce traffic, and (5) longer term, wide-ranging actions or events (such as complex changes associated with the reunification of Germany). HEI is also funding the development of methods and research to assess regulations that are implemented incrementally over extended periods of time, such as Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, which reduces sulfur dioxide emissions from power plants in the eastern United States.

Increased accumbal dopamine during daily alcohol consumption and subsequent aggressive behavior in rats.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol drinking may lead to increased aggression in certain individuals, and both fighting and drinking increase levels of dopamine and serotonin in mesocorticolimbic structures. Assessing the dynamic changes in these neurotransmitters during the course of drinking and fighting has remained challenging. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to learn about ongoing monoaminergic activity in the nucleus accumbens of rats that engaged in aggressive behavior after having consumed low doses of alcohol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After male members of breeding pairs of Long-Evans rats displayed reliable aggression toward an intruder into their home cage, they were trained to consume a 10% alcohol solution, leading to blood alcohol levels of 20-80 mg/dl. Subsequently, the effect of daily alcohol self-administration on aggression was determined in biweekly confrontations with an intruder. Finally, rats were implanted with a microdialysis probe aimed at the n. accumbens for sample collection before, during, and after a 10-min alcohol drinking session followed by a 10-min aggressive confrontation. RESULTS: Accumbal dopamine, but not serotonin, levels tended to increase in anticipation of the daily alcohol session, reaching significance immediately after the alcohol session and remaining significantly elevated (by 40%) during and after the subsequent confrontation. No such changes were seen in residents that confronted an intruder without preceding alcohol consumption. Animals that had a history of becoming more aggressive after consumption of low levels of alcohol showed similar changes in dopamine levels as did animals that had no such history. CONCLUSIONS: The rise in accumbal dopamine confirms previous findings and seems to reflect the anticipation of alcohol consumption; it persisted during the aggressive confrontation regardless of the level of aggression. The daily alcohol drinking for several months may have facilitated dopamine release and masked any further changes associated with the aggressive encounter.

International Workshop on the Design and Analysis of Experimental Studies using PM Concentrator Technologies, Boston, May 5, 2004.

A workshop that brought together representatives of most of the laboratories that have conducted animal and/or human inhalation exposure studies with concentrated ambient air particles (CAPs) was convened by the Health Effects Institute in Boston on May 5, 2004. Participants agreed that CAPs researchers need to make serious efforts to harmonize their experimental and analytical protocols to permit the sharing of lessons learned, questions raised, and opportunities for more definitive studies. Standardized outcome measures based on spirometry and response markers in lung bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) cells and fluids exist, including the appropriate times after exposure to collect samples and measurements. However, for the emerging focus on cardiac system responses, there are many different electrocardiographic (ECG) endpoints being examined, and little standardization on markers that are most informative about adverse effects; on when the measurements need to be made; and on how to make comparable measurements. The workshop focused on two aspects of dealing with these complexities: sorting out influential particulate matter (PM) components responsible for observed effects, and searching for time-varying responses in continuous outcome data. The need for more complete analyses of PM samples from the CAPs studies was also emphasized, as was obtaining a consistent set of parameters characterizing exposure atmospheres and the ambient PM from which the CAPs are sampled. CAPs studies have already had a significant impact within the air pollution health effects community, especially in regard to cardiovascular system effects, and a follow-up meeting with a greater focus on means to harmonize data collection and analysis is needed.