Bio: Hartmut Maaß is an academic researcher from German Aerospace Center. The author has contributed to research in topic(s): Traffic noise & Aircraft noise. The author has an hindex of 4, co-authored 7 publication(s) receiving 121 citation(s).
Topics: Traffic noise, Aircraft noise, Noise, Annoyance, Aircrew
TL;DR: Nocturnal freight train noise exposure in Germany was associated with increased awakening probabilities exceeding those for aircraft noise and contrasting the findings of many annoyance surveys and annoyance ratings of the study.
Abstract: Background Traffic noise is interfering during day- and nighttime causing distress and adverse physiological reactions in large parts of the population. Railway noise proved less annoying than aircraft noise in surveys which were the bases for a so called 5 dB railway bonus regarding noise protection in many European countries. Objectives The present field study investigated railway noise-induced awakenings during sleep, nighttime annoyance and the impact on performance the following day. Comparing these results with those from a field study on aircraft noise allowed for a ranking of traffic modes concerning physiological and psychological reactions. Methods 33 participants (mean age 36.2 years ± 10.3 (SD); 22 females) living alongside railway tracks around Cologne/Bonn (Germany) were polysomnographically investigated. These data were pooled with data from a field study on aircraft noise (61 subjects) directly comparing the effects of railway and aircraft noise in one random subject effects logistic regression model. Annoyance was rated in the morning evaluating the previous night. Results Probability of sleep stage changes to wake/S1 from railway noise increased significantly from 6.5% at 35 dB(A) to 20.5% at 80 dB(A) LAFmax. Rise time of noise events had a significant impact on awakening probability. Nocturnal railway noise led to significantly higher awakening probabilities than aircraft noise, partly explained by the different rise times, whereas the order was inversed for annoyance. Freight train noise compared to passenger train noise proved to have the most impact on awakening probability. Nocturnal railway noise had no effect on psychomotor vigilance. Conclusions Nocturnal freight train noise exposure in Germany was associated with increased awakening probabilities exceeding those for aircraft noise and contrasting the findings of many annoyance surveys and annoyance ratings of our study. During nighttime a bonus for railway noise seems not appropriate.
01 Dec 2006
TL;DR: Annoyance due to aircraft noise was stronger compared to both rail and road traffic noise, however, according to multvariable random subject effect logistic regression models, awakening probability increased in the order AI, RO, RA (AI
Abstract: INTRODUCTION: It is a well known fact that noise annoyance depends on the traffic mode. Much less is known about differences in physiological effects, especially on combined effects. Therefore, we investigated the effects of air (AI), road (RO) and rail (RA) traffic noise on sleep in the AIRORA study. METHODS: 72 subjects (40 ± 13 years, 32 male) were polysomnographically investigated during 11 consecutive nights in the laboratory. Electrophysiological signals included EEG, EOG, EMG, EKG, respiratory movements and finger pulse amplitude. Cortisol and noradrenalin were measured in nocturnal urine samples. Each traffic mode consisted of five noise categories (maximum SPL 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65 dBA) with 8 different noise events, i.e. 40 noise events in total. Therefore, between 40 and 120 noise events were realistically played back during single (AI, RO, RA, RORO), double (AIRO, AIRA, RORA) and triple (AIRORA) exposure nights. The design was complemented with a noise-free control night and carefully balanced. RESULTS: Annoyance due to aircraft noise was stronger compared to both rail and road traffic noise. However, according to multvariable random subject effect logistic regression models, awakening probability increased in the order AI, RO, RA (AI
01 Jun 2006
01 Jan 2004
22 Dec 2005
TL;DR: In this article, a new Anflugverfahren hinsichtlich der Flugsicherheit and der Akzeptanz durch die Piloten durchfuhrbar ist.
Abstract: Im Rahmen des Forschungsverbundes „Leiser Verkehr“ wurde untersucht, inwieweit ein neues Anflugverfahren hinsichtlich der Flugsicherheit und der Akzeptanz durch die Piloten durchfuhrbar ist. Zu diesem Zweck wurden zwei Verfahren – ein Standardverfahren (LDLP) und ein unter Larmaspekten weiter verbessertes Verfahren (SCDA) – in zwei Full-Flight-Simulatoren (A320 und A330) verglichen. Die Fliegbarkeit wurde mit 40 Piloten bzgl. technischer, psychologischer und physiologischer Parameter untersucht. Jeweils zwei Piloten fuhrten in einer Nacht acht Landeanfluge von jeweils 13 min. Dauer auf den Flughafen Munchen durch. Jede Simulation begann bei 9000 Fus Hohe und endete mit der Landung. Abwechselnd (als „pilot flying“ bzw. als „pilot non-flying“) wurden zwei LDLP und 6 SCDA absolviert. Neben technischen Grosen (z.B. Flughohe, Sinkrate, Geschwindigkeit, Schub, Fahren der Landeklappen und des Fahrwerks) wurden psychologische (z.B. Ermudung, Arbeitsbelastung, Akzeptanz, Aufgabenerfullung) und physiologische Parameter (z.B. EKG, EEG, EOG, Blutdruck, Cortisol) kontinuierlich oder diskret erhoben. Ein Debriefing mit umfangreichen Fragebogen komplettierte jede Versuchsnacht. Die geflogenen Bahnverlaufe zeigten eine Dispersion von der Vorgabe, wenn ein Sinkflug eingeleitet werden sollte. Der SCDA fuhrte zu einer Larmreduktion zwischen 2 und 5 dB im L max -Bereich zwischen 50 und 70 dB, daruber und darunter ergaben sich Erhohungen im Vergleich zum LDLP. Die physiologischen Daten und die regelmasigen Befragungen wahrend der Simulationen ergaben keine relevanten Unterschiede, die auf die unterschiedlichen Anflugverfahren zuruckzufuhren waren. Auch die fliegerische Leistung wurde als gleich gut beurteilt. Dagegen differenzierten die Piloten im Debriefing zwischen den Verfahren, wobei das SCDA haufig als nicht so sicher und arbeitsintensiver bezeichnet wurde sowie die Akzeptanz geringer war. Das SCDA kann als grundsatzlich durchfuhrbar und fliegbar bewertet werden. Einschrankungen ergeben sich z.Z. aus den Randbedingungen der Untersuchung und den technischen Unzulanglichkeiten. Es wird empfohlen, weitere Untersuchungen unter realen Flugbedingungen durchzufuhren, und technische Verbesserungen und Erprobungen zur Pilotenunterstutzung zur weiteren Beurteilung des SCDA vorzunehmen.
01 Jan 2011
TL;DR: Policy-makers and their advisers are provided with technical support in their quantitative risk assessment of environmental noise and can use the procedure for estimating burdens presented here to prioritize and plan environmental and public health policies.
Abstract: The health impacts of environmental noise are a growing concern. At least one million healthy life years are lost every year from traffic-related noise in the western part of Europe. This publication summarises the evidence on the relationship between environmental noise and health effects, including cardiovascular disease, cognitive impairment, sleep disturbance, tinnitus, and annoyance. For each one, the environmental burden of disease methodology, based on exposure-response relationship, exposure distribution, background prevalence of disease and disability weights of the outcome, is applied to calculate the burden of disease in terms of disability-adjusted life-years. Data are still lacking for the rest of the WHO European Region. This publication provides policy-makers and their advisers with technical support in their quantitative risk assessment of environmental noise. International, national and local authorities can use the procedure for estimating burdens presented here to prioritize and plan environmental and public health policies.
TL;DR: Based on the available evidence, transportation noise affects objectively measured sleep physiology and subjectively assessed sleep disturbance in adults and for children’s sleep.
Abstract: 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.
TL;DR: In this article, the effects of air, road and rail traffic noise on sleep and recuperation were investigated for 11 consecutive nights, which included eight noise exposure nights and one noise-free control night.
Abstract: Study Objectives: Traffic noise disturbs sleep and may impair recuperation. There is limited information on single and combined effects of air, road and rail traffic noise on sleep and recuperation. Design: Repeated measures Setting: Polysomnographic laboratory study Participants: 72 healthy subjects, mean ± standard deviation 40 ± 13 years, range 18-71 years, 32 male Interventions: Exposure to 40, 80, or 120 rail, road, and/or air traffic noise events Measurements and Results: Subjects were investigated for 11 consecutive nights, which included eight noise exposure nights and one noise-free control night. Noise effects on sleep structure and continuity were subtle, even in nights with combined exposure, most likely due to habituation and an increase in arousal thresholds both within and across nights. However, cardiac arousals did not habituate across nights. Noise exposure significantly affected subjective assessments of sleep quality and recuperation, whereas objective performance was unaffected, except for a small increase in mean PVT reaction time (+4 ms, adjusted P 3 kHz) noise event components. Conclusions: Road, rail, and air traffic noise differentially affect objective and subjective assessments of sleep. Differences in the degree of noise-induced sleep fragmentation between traffic modes were explained by the specific spectral and temporal composition of noise events, indicating potential targets for active and passive noise control. Field studies are needed to validate our findings in a setting with higher ecologic validity.
01 Feb 2016-Sleep Medicine
TL;DR: The concept of race/ethnicity in biomedical research is contextualized and the potential role of socioeconomic position in the patterning of sleep is introduced, and future research directions to address this issue are proposed.
Abstract: Sleep represents a set of biological functions necessary for the maintenance of life. Performing these functions, though, requires that an individual engage in behaviors, which are affected by social and environmental factors. Race/ethnicity and socioeconomic position represent categories of factors that likely play a role in the experience of sleep in the community. Previous studies have suggested that racial/ethnic minorities and the socioeconomically disadvantaged may be more likely to experience sleep patterns that are associated with adverse health outcomes. It is possible that disparities in sleep represent a pathway by which larger disparities in health emerge. This review (1) contextualizes the concept of race/ethnicity in biomedical research, (2) summarizes previous studies that describe patterns of sleep attainment across race/ethnicity groups, (3) discusses several pathways by which race/ethnicity may be associated with sleep, (4) introduces the potential role of socioeconomic position in the patterning of sleep, and (5) proposes future research directions to address this issue.
TL;DR: The results show the limitations of traditional noise mapping for railway epidemiological studies based exclusively on ordinary transits and confirm the role of vibrations as enhancing factor for disturbance.
Abstract: The noise impact of the whole railway infrastructure was characterized in the urban environment of Pisa, Italy. The ordinary train transits were considered, nevertheless it was given particular attention also to the noise sources referable to railway operations like manoeuvring, loading and unloading, truck movements, braking, squeals and whistles. These kinds of noise are usually neglected in the noise modelling and are hereafter called "unconventional noises". The characteristics of the railway infrastructure and the receptors' distribution guided the measuring point selection and led to a survey with a sample of 119 people ranging between the ages of 35 and 70 and residents in the area for at least 5 years. The differences between the ordinary noise modelling and the measured noise, including the unconventional ones, were investigated. Dose-effect relationships for %HA and measured or simulated railways noise were calculated and compared with others in literature. The last paragraph of this paper is dedicated to the exposure to railway vibration and its relation with noise exposure. The results show the limitations of traditional noise mapping for railway epidemiological studies based exclusively on ordinary transits and confirm the role of vibrations as enhancing factor for disturbance.