首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health >WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region: A Systematic Review on Environmental Noise and Effects on Sleep
【2h】

WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region: A Systematic Review on Environmental Noise and Effects on Sleep

机译:世卫组织欧洲地区环境噪声准则:环境噪声及其对睡眠的影响的系统评价

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

To evaluate the quality of available evidence on the effects of environmental noise exposure on sleep a systematic review was conducted. The databases PSYCINFO, PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science and the TNO Repository were searched for non-laboratory studies on the effects of environmental noise on sleep with measured or predicted noise levels and published in or after the year 2000. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria. Seventy four studies predominately conducted between 2000 and 2015 were included in the review. A meta-analysis of surveys linking road, rail, and aircraft noise exposure to self-reports of sleep disturbance was conducted. The odds ratio for the percent highly sleep disturbed for a 10 dB increase in Lnight was significant for aircraft (1.94; 95% CI 1.61–2.3), road (2.13; 95% CI 1.82–2.48), and rail (3.06; 95% CI 2.38–3.93) noise when the question referred to noise, but non-significant for aircraft (1.17; 95% CI 0.54–2.53), road (1.09; 95% CI 0.94–1.27), and rail (1.27; 95% CI 0.89–1.81) noise when the question did not refer to noise. A pooled analysis of polysomnographic studies on the acute effects of transportation noise on sleep was also conducted and the unadjusted odds ratio for the probability of awakening for a 10 dBA increase in the indoor Lmax was significant for aircraft (1.35; 95% CI 1.22–1.50), road (1.36; 95% CI 1.19–1.55), and rail (1.35; 95% CI 1.21–1.52) noise. Due to a limited number of studies and the use of different outcome measures, a narrative review only was conducted for motility, cardiac and blood pressure outcomes, and for children’s sleep. The effect of wind turbine and hospital noise on sleep was also assessed. Based on the available evidence, transportation noise affects objectively measured sleep physiology and subjectively assessed sleep disturbance in adults. For other outcome measures and noise sources the examined evidence was conflicting or only emerging. According to GRADE criteria, the quality of the evidence was moderate for cortical awakenings and self-reported sleep disturbance (for questions that referred to noise) induced by traffic noise, low for motility measures of traffic noise induced sleep disturbance, and very low for all other noise sources and investigated sleep outcomes.
机译:为了评估关于环境噪声暴露对睡眠影响的现有证据的质量,进行了系统评价。搜索数据库PSYCINFO,PubMed,Science Direct,Scopus,Web of Science和TNO储存库,以获取关于非环境噪声对睡眠的影响的非实验室研究,并以可测量或可预测的噪声水平进行研究,并于2000年或之后发布。使用GRADE标准评估证据。该评价包括2000年至2015年之间主要进行的74项研究。对将道路,铁路和飞机噪声暴露与睡眠障碍自我报告联系起来的调查进行了荟萃分析。对于飞机(1.94; 95%CI 1.61–2.3),道路(2.13; 95%CI 1.82–2.48)和铁路(3.06; 95%),高度睡眠干扰百分比使Lnight增加10 dB的几率很显着当问题涉及噪声时,CI为2.38–3.93),但对于飞机(1.17; 95%CI 0.54–2.53),道路(1.09; 95%CI 0.94–1.27)和铁路(1.27; 95%CI)则不重要0.89–1.81)当问题不涉及噪声时。还对交通噪声对睡眠的急性影响进行了多导睡眠图研究的汇总分析,并且飞机的Lmax升高10 dBA的觉醒概率未经调整的比值比对飞机很重要(1.35; 95%CI 1.22-1.50 ),道路(1.36; 95%CI 1.19-1.55)和铁路(1.35; 95%CI 1.21-1.52)噪声。由于研究数量有限,并且使用了不同的结局指标,因此仅对运动,心脏和血压结局以及儿童睡眠进行了叙述性回顾。还评估了风力涡轮机和医院噪音对睡眠的影响。根据现有证据,运输噪声会影响客观测量的成年人睡眠生理和主观评估的睡眠障碍。对于其他结果测量和噪声源,已检查的证据相互矛盾或仅出现。根据GRADE标准,交通噪音引起的皮质觉醒和自我报告的睡眠障碍(对于涉及噪音的问题)的证据质量中等,交通噪音引起的睡眠障碍的运动指标证据质量低,所有其他噪声源并研究睡眠结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号