Cargando…
Industrial odour pollution and human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review to evaluate the association between residential or occupational short- and long–term exposure to odour pollution from industrial sources and the health status of the exposed population. METHODS: The searches were conducted in Medline, EMBASE and Scopus in Ap...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8459501/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34551760 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12940-021-00774-3 |
_version_ | 1784571536139616256 |
---|---|
author | Guadalupe-Fernandez, Victor De Sario, Manuela Vecchi, Simona Bauleo, Lisa Michelozzi, Paola Davoli, Marina Ancona, Carla |
author_facet | Guadalupe-Fernandez, Victor De Sario, Manuela Vecchi, Simona Bauleo, Lisa Michelozzi, Paola Davoli, Marina Ancona, Carla |
author_sort | Guadalupe-Fernandez, Victor |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review to evaluate the association between residential or occupational short- and long–term exposure to odour pollution from industrial sources and the health status of the exposed population. METHODS: The searches were conducted in Medline, EMBASE and Scopus in April 2021. Exposure to an environmental odour from industrial sources in population resident near the source or in workers was considered. We considered outcomes for which there was a biological plausibility, such as wheezing and asthma, cough, headache, nausea and vomiting (primary outcomes). We also included stress-related symptoms and novel outcomes (e.g. mood states). Risk of bias was evaluated using the OHAT tool. For primary outcomes, when at least 3 studies provided effect estimates by comparing exposed subjects versus not exposed, we pooled the study-specific estimates of odour-related effect using random effects models. Heterogeneity was evaluated with Higgins I(2). RESULTS: Thirty studies were eligible for this review, mainly cross-sectional (n = 23). Only one study involved school-age children and two studies involved workers. Only five studies reported odour effects on objective laboratory or clinical outcomes. Animal Feeding Operations and waste were the most common industrial sources. The overall odds ratios in exposed versus not exposed population were 1.15 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.29) for headache (7 studies), 1.09 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.30) for nausea/vomiting (7 studies), and 1.27 (95% CI 1.10 to 1.44) for cough/phlegm (5 studies). Heterogeneity was a moderate concern. Overall, the body of evidence was affected by a definitely high risk of bias in exposure and outcome assessment since most studies used self-reported information. CONCLUSIONS: Findings underline the public health importance of odour pollution for population living nearby industrial odour sources. The limited evidence for most outcomes supports the need for high quality epidemiological studies on the association between odour pollution and its effects on human health. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12940-021-00774-3. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8459501 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84595012021-09-23 Industrial odour pollution and human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis Guadalupe-Fernandez, Victor De Sario, Manuela Vecchi, Simona Bauleo, Lisa Michelozzi, Paola Davoli, Marina Ancona, Carla Environ Health Review OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review to evaluate the association between residential or occupational short- and long–term exposure to odour pollution from industrial sources and the health status of the exposed population. METHODS: The searches were conducted in Medline, EMBASE and Scopus in April 2021. Exposure to an environmental odour from industrial sources in population resident near the source or in workers was considered. We considered outcomes for which there was a biological plausibility, such as wheezing and asthma, cough, headache, nausea and vomiting (primary outcomes). We also included stress-related symptoms and novel outcomes (e.g. mood states). Risk of bias was evaluated using the OHAT tool. For primary outcomes, when at least 3 studies provided effect estimates by comparing exposed subjects versus not exposed, we pooled the study-specific estimates of odour-related effect using random effects models. Heterogeneity was evaluated with Higgins I(2). RESULTS: Thirty studies were eligible for this review, mainly cross-sectional (n = 23). Only one study involved school-age children and two studies involved workers. Only five studies reported odour effects on objective laboratory or clinical outcomes. Animal Feeding Operations and waste were the most common industrial sources. The overall odds ratios in exposed versus not exposed population were 1.15 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.29) for headache (7 studies), 1.09 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.30) for nausea/vomiting (7 studies), and 1.27 (95% CI 1.10 to 1.44) for cough/phlegm (5 studies). Heterogeneity was a moderate concern. Overall, the body of evidence was affected by a definitely high risk of bias in exposure and outcome assessment since most studies used self-reported information. CONCLUSIONS: Findings underline the public health importance of odour pollution for population living nearby industrial odour sources. The limited evidence for most outcomes supports the need for high quality epidemiological studies on the association between odour pollution and its effects on human health. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12940-021-00774-3. BioMed Central 2021-09-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8459501/ /pubmed/34551760 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12940-021-00774-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Review Guadalupe-Fernandez, Victor De Sario, Manuela Vecchi, Simona Bauleo, Lisa Michelozzi, Paola Davoli, Marina Ancona, Carla Industrial odour pollution and human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Industrial odour pollution and human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Industrial odour pollution and human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Industrial odour pollution and human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Industrial odour pollution and human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Industrial odour pollution and human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | industrial odour pollution and human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8459501/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34551760 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12940-021-00774-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guadalupefernandezvictor industrialodourpollutionandhumanhealthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT desariomanuela industrialodourpollutionandhumanhealthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT vecchisimona industrialodourpollutionandhumanhealthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT bauleolisa industrialodourpollutionandhumanhealthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT michelozzipaola industrialodourpollutionandhumanhealthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT davolimarina industrialodourpollutionandhumanhealthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT anconacarla industrialodourpollutionandhumanhealthasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |