Subjective work noise: A major risk factor in myocardial infarction

Ising, H; Babisch, Wolfgang; Kruppa, Barbara; Lindthammer, Alfred; Wiens, Daniel

doi:10.1007/bf02298042

Cited by 41 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If annoyance and stress-related health effects are associated, and taking into account that the observation threshold for annoyance in offices is much lower than that for industrial situations, we hypothesize that the observation threshold for noise-induced risk for hypertension in office workers is about 30 dB(A) lower than that for hypertension in blue-collar workers. The data in more recent publications on cardiovascular effects from exposure to noise are not in disagreement with the previous findings (51)(52)(53). However, one must be careful interpreting the results of these studies, as either noise measurements or proper control groups are lacking or the size of populations studied is small.…”

Section: Noise-induced Hearing Impairmentsupporting

confidence: 66%

Noise exposure and public health.

Passchier-Vermeer

Passchier

2000

Environ Health Perspect

499

223

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exposure to noise constitutes a health risk. There is sufficient scientific evidence that noise exposure can induce hearing impairment, hypertension and ischemic heart disease, annoyance, sleep disturbance, and decreased school performance. For other effects such as changes in the immune system and birth defects, the evidence is limited. Most public health impacts of noise were already identified in the 1 960s and noise abatement is less of a scientific but primarily a policy problem. A subject for further research is the elucidation of the mechanisms underlying noiseinduced cardiovascular disorders and the relationship of noise with annoyance and nonacoustical factors modifying health outcomes. A high priority study subject is the effects of noise on children, including cognitive effects and their reversibility. Noise exposure is on the increase, especially in the general living environment, both in industrialized nations and in developing world regions. This implies that in the twenty-first century noise exposure will still be a major public health problem. Figure 1. The substance occurs in environmental media at certain concentrations, depending on, among other factors, lifestyle, residence time, and dietary habits, that people may be exposed to this xenobiotic. Any subsequent harm depends on the level of exposure. The modifying impact of exogenous determinants and personal characteristics on the level of exposure and sensitivity with respect to the toxic action usually are not taken into account or are only considered in a standardized way, at least for risk assessment and standard-setting purposes. The data available, often derived from animal experiments and surveys of population behavior, do not allow a more refined analysis.In the case of the assessment of the health effects of noise exposure, the scheme in Figure 1 is too simple. With the exception of damage to the hearing organ, the exposed organism's reaction to the perception of sound is strongly dependent on the context of the exposure. The effects of noise exposure cannot be understood only by taking mechanisms of toxic action into account. For example, the sounds in a discotheque are music to the dancers but noise to the neighbors. In the first case, the exposure would not be annoying but is expected to contribute to hearing loss; for the neighbors, hearing loss would be improbable, but annoyance would certainly occur. A conceptual model to address the health effects of noise exposure is presented in Figure 2.The model considers effects on health and quality of life as the outcome of a processing of exogenous determinants or environmental factors-in this case, noise exposure. Exposure, processing, and effect take place within economic and social environments and all are modified by societal factors. Furthermore, lifestyle and concurrent exposure to other factors play a role. An example of the former was given above. An example of the latter is the finding that the perceived presence of the risk of an aircraft crash has been found to augment annoy...

show abstract

Section: Noise-induced Hearing Impairmentsupporting

confidence: 66%

Noise exposure and public health.

Passchier-Vermeer

Passchier

2000

Environ Health Perspect

499

223

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If the exposure is of sufficient intensity and unpredictability, cardiovascular and hormonal responses can appear, including increases in heart rate and peripheral vascular resistance and changes in blood pressure, blood viscosity, and blood lipids. These effects are of interest because of noise-related IHD (181). Many studies in occupational settings have indicated that workers exposed to high levels of industrial noise for 5-30 years have increased blood pressure and statistically significant increases in risk for hypertension, in comparison with workers in reference areas (182).…”

Section: Circulatory Diseasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemiologic estimate of the proportion of fatalities related to occupational factors in Finland

Nurminen¹,

Karjalainen²

2001

Scand J Work Environ Health

260

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives This study attempts to estimate the proportion of annual deaths related to occupational factors in Finland and considers related methodological issues and associated uncertainties.Methods Statistics on causes of death, numbers of subjects exposed, and risk ratios obtained from the epidemiologic literature were used to estimate the population attributable fraction and disease burden for causes of death from work-related diseases. Gender-, age-and disease-specific numbers of deaths were provided by Statistics Finland for 1996. Information on the size of the population, broken down by gender, age, occupation, and industry, was acquired from population censuses. A Finnish job-exposure matrix supplied data on the prevalence of exposure for specific agents and the level of exposure among exposed workers. ResultsThe attributable fraction of work-related mortality in the relevant disease and age categories was estimated to be 7% (10% for men and 2% for women), and for all diseases and ages the fraction was 4%. For the main cause-of-death categories, the attributable fraction became 12% for circulatory system diseases, 8% for malignant neoplasms, 4% for respiratory system diseases, 4% for mental disorders, 3% for nervous system diseases, and 3% for accidents and violence. The following estimates were obtained for specific important diseases: 24% for lung cancer, 17% for ischemic heart disease, 12% for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 11% for stroke. Based on these fractions, the total number of work-related deaths that occurred in Finland in 1996 was calculated to be on the order of 1800 (employed work force of 2.1 million); 86% involved men.Conclusions High-quality epidemiologic studies and national survey data are essential for obtaining reliable estimates of the proportion of deaths attributable to occupational factors. The magnitude of work-related mortality is an insufficiently recognized contributor to total mortality in Finland, especially from circulatory diseases and other diseases caused by exposure to agents other than asbestos.Key terms attributable fraction, burden of disease, epidemiologic methods, health statistics, occupational exposure. Global estimates of the burden of disease due to occupational factors have been calculated through the application of Finnish rates of registered work-related diseases (1). The approach is subject to the following two fundamental uncertainties: (i) the validity of the data on disease incidence from the national reporting scheme and (ii) the validity of worldwide extrapolations to different regions with different exposure circumstances. With the exception of studies using workers' compensation records, only a few research projects have estimated the magnitude of morbidity or mortality induced by exposure to hazardous agents or stress factors in the work environment at a state or national level. The investigations conducted in this area have covered New York State (2), the whole of the United States (3), Canada (4), and Australia (5). Given the lack of ...

show abstract

“…Workplace noise Ising et al (1997) reported a signi®cantly elevated risk of myocardial infarction with increasing workplace noise category (electric lawnmower: RR 1.4; electric drill: RR 2.0; road drill: RR 3.8). A possible pathway of this increased risk could be via increased sympathetic stimulation, due to the exposure to high levels of the noise.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Workplace noise: Workplace noise was assessed using a question developed by Ising (1997):``Please indicate the level of noise which matches best with the noise level at your workplace: (1) refrigerator; (2) typewriter; (3) electric lawnmower; (4) electric drill; (5) road drill''. Because of small numbers, especially in the higher categories, we combined the two lowest noise classi®cations [both estimated as 55 dB(A)], into a low-level category, and the highest three noise levels [estimated as 75, 90 and 100 dB(A)] into a high noise category.…”

Section: Personal and Work Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational determinants of heart rate variability

Amelsvoort¹,

Schouten²,

Maan

et al. 2000

International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health

101

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The finding of a decreased SDNNi level during sleep in shift workers compared with day workers indicated a less favourable cardiovascular autonomic regulation, which may explain in part the excess cardiovascular disease risk in shift workers. The elevated %LF during work in employees exposed to high job strain or high noise levels indicated a direct shift in the autonomic cardiac balance towards sympathetic dominance. We concluded that the analysis of HRV may provide a useful tool in the study of the physiological effects of work-related stresses.

show abstract

Subjective work noise: A major risk factor in myocardial infarction

Cited by 41 publications

References 8 publications

Noise exposure and public health.

Noise exposure and public health.

Epidemiologic estimate of the proportion of fatalities related to occupational factors in Finland

Occupational determinants of heart rate variability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About