Road traffic noise, noise sensitivity, noise annoyance, psychological and physical health and mortality

Abstract

Background Both 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. Methods A 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. Results Road 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). Conclusions Noise 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.

Associations between Personal Attitudes towards COVID-19 and Public Space Soundscape Assessment: An Example from Antwerp, Belgium

“…Previous studies had argued against this interpretation and concluded that noise sensitivity in general scarcely correlates with perception of the overall quality of the environments and would therefore only be related to the acoustic setting (see, e.g., [29]). However, Stansfeld and colleagues [30] recently showed that noise sensitivity is a specific predictor of psychological ill-health and could be part of a broader construct that they call "environmental susceptibility". The current research seems to point in this same direction.…”

Association between Noise Annoyance and Mental Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Jensen, 2018 [41] Neighbour and traffic noise annoyance: a nationwide study of associated mental health and perceived stress Denmark Jensen, 2019 [47] Neighbour noise annoyance is associated with various mental and physical health symptoms: results from a nationwide study among individuals living in multi-storey housing Denmark Maschke, 2007 [46] Health effects of annoyance induced by neighbour noise France, Germany, Slovakia, Hungary, Portugal, Italy, Switzerland, Latvia Okokon, 2018 [42] Traffic noise, noise annoyance and psychotropic medication use FInland Schreckenberg, 2010 [31] Aircraft noise and quality of life around Frankfurt airport Germany Stansfeld, 2021 [39] Road traffic noise, noise sensitivity, noise annoyance, psychological and physical health, and mortality UK Table A5. Quality of evidence [22].…”

Remote Working in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results From a Questionnaire on the Perceived Noise Annoyance

“…The other items from Q9 to Q12, in fact, were related to features of reaction to noise and were not accounted for an average. In general, this approach in the data analysis is based on past studies that have highlighted the need of including the sensitivity to noise as a factor (Stansfeld et al, 2021). Furthermore, it allowed exploring the answers given to the perceived noise annoyance (Q1) considering the sample's general characteristics of gender, age range, professional sector, and city of remote working (see Tables 7, 8), and the number of people that the respondents shared the working or living environment with (see Tables 10 and 11).…”