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 1960s 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 noise-induced 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.

Noise exposure and public health.

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.

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

Urban effects, distance, and protected areas in an urbanizing world

Noise emitted from road, rail and air traffic and their effects on sleep

Objective To assess the effects of major multi-sport events on health and socioeconomic determinants of health in the population of the city hosting the event.

Design Systematic review.

Data sources We searched the following sources without language restrictions for papers published between 1978 and 2008: Applied Social Science Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), British Humanities Index (BHI), Cochrane database of systematic reviews, Econlit database, Embase, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) database, Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) database, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS), Medline, PreMedline, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Sportdiscus, Web of Knowledge, Worldwide Political Science Abstracts, and the grey literature.

Review methods Studies of any design that assessed the health and socioeconomic impacts of major multi-sport events on the host population were included. We excluded studies that used exclusively estimated data rather than actual data, that investigated host population support for an event or media portrayals of host cities, or that described new physical infrastructure. Studies were selected and critically appraised by two independent reviewers. 

Results Fifty four studies were included. Study quality was poor, with 69% of studies using a repeat cross-sectional design and 85% of quantitative studies assessed as being below 2+ on the Health Development Agency appraisal scale, often because of a lack of comparison group. Five studies, each with a high risk of bias, reported health related outcomes, which were suicide, paediatric health service demand, presentations for asthma in children (two studies), and problems related to illicit drug use. Overall, the data did not indicate clear negative or positive health impacts of major multi-sport events on host populations. The most frequently reported outcomes were economic outcomes (18 studies). The outcomes used were similar enough to allow us to perform a narrative synthesis, but the overall impact of major multi-sport events on economic growth and employment was unclear. Two thirds of the economic studies reported increased economic growth or employment immediately after the event, but all these studies used some estimated data in their models, failed to account for opportunity costs, or examined only short term effects. Outcomes for transport were also similar enough to allow synthesis of six of the eight studies, which showed that event related interventions—including restricted car use and public transport promotion—were associated with significant short term reductions in traffic volume, congestion, or pollution in four out of five cities.

Conclusions The available evidence is not sufficient to confirm or refute expectations about the health or socioeconomic benefits for the host population of previous major multi-sport events. Future events such as the 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games, or the 2014 Commonwealth Games, cannot be expected to automatically provide benefits. Until decision makers include robust, long term evaluations as part of their design and implementation of events, it is unclear how the costs of major multi-sport events can be justified in terms of benefits to the host population.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/340/bmj.c2369.full.pdf

The health and socioeconomic impacts of major multi-sport events: systematic review (1978-2008).

Field measurements were conducted of potential sleep disturbance associated with changes in nighttime aircraft noise exposure near three airports. One study was conducted near Stapleton International Airport (DEN) and Denver International Airport (DIA) in anticipation of the closure of the former and opening of the latter. Sleep behavior was monitored in 57 homes located near runway ends at the two airports. A second study was conducted in the vicinity of DeKalb-Peachtree Airport (PDK), a large general aviation airport that expected increased nighttime flight operations due to the Olympic Games in July and August of 1996. Similar methods of measuring nighttime noise levels and sleep disturbance in the two studies were maintained over the course of 2717 and 686 subject-nights of observations, respectively. No major differences in noise-induced sleep disturbance were observed as a function of changes in nighttime aircraft noise exposure.

Effects on sleep disturbance of changes in aircraft noise near three airports.

Behaviorally confirmed awakenings were recorded during nighttime hours for periods of approximately one month in 45 homes of 82 test participants. Measurements of awakening and of both indoor and outdoor noise exposure were made for a total of 632 subject nights near a military airfield, 783 subject nights near a civil airport, and 472 subject nights in neighborhoods with community noise exposure of nonaircraft origin. Sound exposure levels of individual noise intrusions were much more closely associated with awakenings than long‐term noise exposure levels. The slope of the relationship between awakening and sound exposure level was rather shallow, however. Although the present findings do not resemble those of laboratory studies of noise‐induced sleep interference, they are in good agreement with the results of other field studies.

Field study of noise‐induced sleep disturbance

On‐site and telephone opinion surveys were conducted to assess outdoor recreationists’ annoyance with aircraft overflights of wilderness areas. Although current technology for measuring noise exposure does not yet permit accurate and cost‐effective estimates of dosage‐response relationships in outdoor recreational settings, it was nonetheless possible to construct a rough relationship between estimated aircraft noise exposure and annoyance from the data of the on‐site study. In the second survey, telephone interviews were administered to another sample of outdoor recreationists within 2 weeks of their return from visits to 12 wilderness areas. The prevalence of aircraft noise‐induced annoyance (in any degree) among respondents in all wilderness areas ranged from 5% to 32%. The prevalence of a consequential degree of aircraft noise‐induced annoyance among respondents was less than 5% in all wilderness areas combined. Noise‐induced annoyance proved to be a more direct measure of the effects of aircraft overflights on recreationists than more global measures such as visit satisfaction or intent to revisit.

Effects of aircraft overflights on wilderness recreationists

A large-scale field study of noise-induced sleep disturbance was conducted in the vicinities of Stapleton International Airport (DEN) and Denver International Airport (DIA) in anticipation of the closure of the former and opening of the latter. Both indoor and outdoor measurements of aircraft and other nighttime noises were made during four time periods. Measurements were made in 57 homes located as close as feasible to the runway ends of the two airports. Sleep disturbance was measured by several indices of behaviorally confirmed awakening (button pushes upon awakening) and body movement (as measured with wrist-worn actimeters). A total of 2717 subject-nights of observations were made over the course of the study. Although average noise event levels measured outdoors decreased markedly at DEN after closure of the airport and increased slightly at DIA after its opening, indoor noise event levels varied much less in homes near both airports. No large differences were observed in noise-induced sleep disturbance at either airport. Indoor sound exposure levels of noise events were, however, closely related to and good predictors of actimetrically defined motility and arousal.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19960016745/downloads/19960016745.pdf

Noise-Induced Sleep Disturbance in Residences Near Two Civil Airports

Noise from aircraft ground operations often reaches residences in the vicinity of airports via grazing incidence paths that attenuate high-frequency noise more than air-to-ground propagation paths, thus increasing the relative low-frequency content of such noise with respect to overflight noise. Outdoor A-weighted noise measurements may not appropriately reflect low-frequency noise levels that can induce potentially annoying secondary emissions inside residences near runways. Contours of low-frequency noise levels were estimated in a residential area adjacent to a busy runway from multi-site measurements of composite maximum spectra of runway sideline noise in the one-third octave bands between 25 and 80 Hz, inclusive. Neighborhood residents were interviewed to determine the prevalence of annoyance attributable to runway sideline noise at frequencies below 100 Hz, and of its audible manifestations inside homes. Survey respondents highly annoyed by rattle and vibration were concentrated in areas with low-frequency sound levels due to aircraft operations in excess of 75 to 80 dB.

Richard Howe

Papers

Effects on sleep disturbance of changes in aircraft noise near three airports.

Field study of noise‐induced sleep disturbance

Effects of aircraft overflights on wilderness recreationists

Noise-Induced Sleep Disturbance in Residences Near Two Civil Airports

Field study of the annoyance of low-frequency runway sideline noise