Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO) , Boeretang 200, 2400 Mol, Belgium.
Centre for Environmental Sciences, Hasselt University , Agoralaan Building D, 3590 Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Environ Sci Technol. 2017 Feb 7;51(3):1859-1867. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.6b05782. Epub 2017 Jan 27.
Physical activity and ventilation rates have an effect on an individual's dose and may be important to consider in exposure-response relationships; however, these factors are often ignored in environmental epidemiology studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate methods of estimating the inhaled dose of air pollution and understand variability in the absence of a true gold standard metric. Five types of methods were identified: (1) methods using (physical) activity types, (2) methods based on energy expenditure, METs (metabolic equivalents of task), and oxygen consumption, (3) methods based on heart rate or (4) breathing rate, and (5) methods that combine heart and breathing rate. Methods were compared using a real-life data set of 122 adults who wore devices to track movement, black carbon air pollution, and physiological health markers for 3 weeks in three European cities. Different methods for estimating minute ventilation performed well in relative terms with high correlations among different methods, but in absolute terms, ignoring increased ventilation during day-to-day activities could lead to an underestimation of the daily dose by a factor of 0.08-1.78. There is no single best method, and a multitude of methods are currently being used to approximate the dose. The choice of a suitable method for determining the dose in future studies will depend on both the size and the objectives of the study.
体力活动和通风率会影响个体的剂量,在暴露反应关系中可能需要考虑这些因素;然而,这些因素在环境流行病学研究中往往被忽视。本研究旨在评估估算空气污染吸入剂量的方法,并在缺乏真正金标准的情况下了解其可变性。确定了五种类型的方法:(1) 使用(身体)活动类型的方法;(2) 基于能量消耗、代谢当量(任务代谢当量)和耗氧量的方法;(3) 基于心率或(4) 呼吸率的方法;以及(5) 结合心率和呼吸率的方法。使用在三个欧洲城市中佩戴设备追踪运动、黑碳空气污染和生理健康标志物的 122 名成年人的真实生活数据集对方法进行了比较,为期 3 周。不同的估计分钟通气量的方法在相对意义上表现良好,不同方法之间相关性很高,但在绝对意义上,忽略日常活动中通气量的增加可能导致每日剂量低估 0.08-1.78 倍。没有一种单一的最佳方法,目前有多种方法被用于近似剂量。在未来的研究中选择合适的方法来确定剂量将取决于研究的规模和目标。