Skip header and navigation

6 records – page 1 of 1.

Annoyance, sleep and concentration problems due to combined traffic noise and the benefit of quiet side.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature272613
Source
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015 Feb;12(2):1612-28
Publication Type
Article
Date
Feb-2015
Author
Theo Bodin
Jonas Björk
Jonas Ardö
Maria Albin
Source
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015 Feb;12(2):1612-28
Date
Feb-2015
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Anger
Attention
Female
Geographic Information Systems
Health Surveys
Housing
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Noise, Transportation - adverse effects - prevention & control
Risk Reduction Behavior
Sleep
Sweden
Abstract
Access to a quiet side in one's dwelling is thought to compensate for higher noise levels at the most exposed façade. It has also been indicated that noise from combined traffic sources causes more noise annoyance than equal average levels from either road traffic or railway noise separately.
2612 persons in Malmö, Sweden, answered to a residential environment survey including questions on outdoor environment, noise sensitivity, noise annoyance, sleep quality and concentration problems. Road traffic and railway noise was modeled using Geographic Information System.
Access to a quiet side, i.e., at least one window facing yard, water or green space, was associated with reduced risk of annoyance OR (95%CI) 0.47 (0.38-0.59), and concentration problems 0.76 (0.61-0.95). Bedroom window facing the same environment was associated to reduced risk of reporting of poor sleep quality 0.78 (0.64-1.00). Railway noise was associated with reduced risk of annoyance below 55 dB(A) but not at higher levels of exposure.
Having a window facing a yard, water or green space was associated to a substantially reduced risk of noise annoyance and concentration problems. If this window was the bedroom window, sleeping problems were less likely.
Notes
Cites: J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Aug;116(2):949-5715376661
Cites: Br J Psychiatry. 1979 Apr;134:382-9444788
Cites: Environ Health Perspect. 2001 Apr;109(4):409-1611335190
Cites: N Engl J Med. 1993 Apr 29;328(17):1230-58464434
Cites: Arch Intern Med. 1994 Oct 10;154(19):2219-247944843
Cites: Environ Health. 2012;11(1):1422404876
Cites: Sci Total Environ. 2012 May 1;424:48-5622444069
Cites: J Hypertens. 2012 Jun;30(6):1075-8622473017
Cites: Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2012 Dec;9(12):4292-31023330222
Cites: Environ Health Perspect. 2013 Feb;121(2):217-2223229017
Cites: Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013 Jun;10(6):2258-7023736655
Cites: Lancet. 2014 Apr 12;383(9925):1325-3224183105
Cites: Noise Health. 2006 Jan-Mar;8(30):1-2917513892
Cites: Noise Health. 2008 Apr-Jun;10(39):46-5418580038
Cites: Epidemiology. 2009 Mar;20(2):272-919116496
Cites: Noise Health. 2010 Apr-Jun;12(47):110-920472956
Cites: Eur Heart J. 2011 Mar;32(6):737-4421266374
Cites: J Acoust Soc Am. 2011 Oct;130(4):1936-4221973348
Cites: Sleep. 2008 Apr;31(4):569-7718457245
Cites: J Acoust Soc Am. 2007 Nov;122(5):2642-5218189556
Cites: Noise Health. 2007 Jan-Mar;9(34):1-717851221
Cites: Behav Sleep Med. 2007;5(1):1-2017313321
PubMed ID
25642690 View in PubMed
Less detail

Evaluating roadside noise barriers using an annoyance-reduction criterion.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature152710
Source
J Acoust Soc Am. 2008 Dec;124(6):3561-7
Publication Type
Article
Date
Dec-2008
Author
Mats E Nilsson
Mikael Andéhn
Paulina Lesna
Author Affiliation
Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. mats.nilsson@psychology.su.se
Source
J Acoust Soc Am. 2008 Dec;124(6):3561-7
Date
Dec-2008
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Acoustic Stimulation
Adult
Affect
Attitude
Auditory Perception
Environmental Exposure
Female
Humans
Linear Models
Logistic Models
Loudness Perception
Male
Models, Biological
Motor Vehicles
Noise, Transportation - adverse effects - prevention & control
Pressure
Psychoacoustics
Questionnaires
Sound Spectrography
Sweden
Abstract
A common indicator of effectiveness for roadside noise barriers is the reduction in A-weighted sound pressure level (L(A)). The present experimental study considered alternative indicators using an annoyance-reduction criterion. A large number of 8 s experimental sounds were created from binaural recordings conducted at various distances from a highway at a location with a 4.6 m high roadside barrier (barrier sounds) and at a location along the same road with no barrier (nonbarrier sounds). Eighteen listeners scaled the annoyance of the experimental sounds with the method of magnitude estimation. The barrier sounds recorded 10-45 m from the road and nonbarrier sounds recorded 50-200 m from the road were of similar L(A). Despite this, the barrier sounds were found to be more annoying than the nonbarrier sounds. The annoyance difference corresponded to approximately a 3 dB increase in L(A) and was mainly related to the barrier sounds' higher relative level of low-frequency sound. This suggests that L(A) reduction may not be a valid indicator of the annoyance reduction caused by a noise barrier. The loudness level (ISO 532B) and a low-frequency corrected sound pressure level (L(A) ( *)) were found to be better than L(A) as indicators of the barrier's annoyance-reduction efficiency.
PubMed ID
19206785 View in PubMed
Less detail

Longitudinal surveys on effects of changes in road traffic noise-annoyance, activity disturbances, and psycho-social well-being.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature71119
Source
J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Feb;115(2):719-29
Publication Type
Article
Date
Feb-2004
Author
Evy Ohrström
Author Affiliation
Department of Environmental Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy at Göteborg University, Box 414, SE 405 30 Göteborg, Sweden. evy.ohrstrom@envmed.gu.se
Source
J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Feb;115(2):719-29
Date
Feb-2004
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Activities of Daily Living - psychology
Adaptation, Psychological
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
City Planning
Female
Humans
Longitudinal Studies
Male
Middle Aged
Noise, Transportation - adverse effects - prevention & control
Public Opinion
Social Environment
Sound Spectrography
Sweden
Abstract
The adverse effects of long-term exposure to a high volume of road traffic were studied in socio-acoustic surveys in 1997 and in 1999 after a substantial reduction in road traffic. The results obtained in 1997 showed a similar response pattern as in previously performed studies in the area in 1986 [Ohrström, J. Sound Vib. 122, 277-290 (1989)]. In 1999, road traffic had been reduced from 25000 to 2400 vehicles per day, and this resulted not only in a large decrease in annoyance and activity disturbances, but also in a better general well-being. The results suggest that a reduction in both noise and other pollutants from road traffic contribute to these effects. To be able to use the outdoor environment and to have the possibility to keep windows open is essential for general well-being and daily behavior, which implies that access both to quiet indoor and outdoor sections of the residency is of importance for achievement of a healthy sound environment. More knowledge of long-term health consequences of exposure to noise and simultaneous pollutants from road traffic is needed. Studies should focus more on "softer" health outcomes and well-being than hitherto and preferably be performed in connection with traffic abatement measures.
PubMed ID
15000184 View in PubMed
Less detail

Long-term effects of noise reduction measures on noise annoyance and sleep disturbance: the Norwegian facade insulation study.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature113304
Source
J Acoust Soc Am. 2013 Jun;133(6):3921-8
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-2013
Author
Astrid H Amundsen
Ronny Klæboe
Gunn Marit Aasvang
Author Affiliation
Institute of Transport Economics (TOI), Gaustadale`en 21, 0349 Oslo, Norway. astrid.amundsen@toi.no
Source
J Acoust Soc Am. 2013 Jun;133(6):3921-8
Date
Jun-2013
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Construction Materials
Consumer Satisfaction
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Housing
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Noise, Transportation - adverse effects - prevention & control
Norway
Questionnaires
Sleep Deprivation - etiology - prevention & control
Sleep Disorders - etiology - prevention & control
Sound Spectrography
Urban Population
Young Adult
Abstract
The Norwegian facade insulation study includes one pre-intervention and two post-intervention surveys. The facade-insulating measures reduced indoor noise levels by 7?dB on average. Before the intervention, 43% of the respondents were highly annoyed by noise. Half a year after the intervention, the proportion of respondents who were highly annoyed by road traffic noise had been significantly reduced to 15%. The second post-intervention study (2?yr after the first post-intervention study) showed that the proportion of highly annoyed respondents had not changed since the first post-intervention study. The reduction in the respondents' self-reported sleep disturbances (due to traffic noise) also remained relatively stable from the first to the second post-intervention study. In the control group, there were no statistically significant differences in annoyance between the pre-intervention and the two post-intervention studies. Previous studies of traffic changes have reported that people "overreact" to noise changes. This study indicated that when considering a receiver measure, such as facade insulation, the effect of reducing indoor noise levels could be predicted from exposure-response curves based on previous studies. Thus no evidence of an "overreaction" was found.
PubMed ID
23742346 View in PubMed
Less detail

Noise annoyance and activity disturbance before and after the erection of a roadside noise barrier.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature169560
Source
J Acoust Soc Am. 2006 Apr;119(4):2178-88
Publication Type
Article
Date
Apr-2006
Author
Mats E Nilsson
Birgitta Berglund
Author Affiliation
Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet and Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, SE-106 91 Sweden. mats.nilsson@psychology.su.se
Source
J Acoust Soc Am. 2006 Apr;119(4):2178-88
Date
Apr-2006
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Architectural Accessibility
Attitude
Automobiles
Communication
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Loudness Perception
Noise, Transportation - adverse effects - prevention & control
Questionnaires
Sound Spectrography
Speech Perception
Sweden
Abstract
Questionnaire studies were conducted in a residential area before and after the erection of a 2.25 m high noise barrier of conventional type along a heavily traveled road (19,600 vehicles/24 h). The interval between studies was two years. Houses closest to the barrier received a sound-level reduction from -70.0 to 62.5 dB Lden at the most exposed facade. The sound-level reduction decreased with distance to the road, and was negligible for houses at more than 100 m distance. Up to this distance, the noise barrier reduced residents' noise annoyance outdoors and indoors as well as improved speech communication outdoors. Indoors, speech communication and sleep disturbance were slightly but nonsignificantly improved. Predictions of the number of annoyed persons from published exposure-response curves (in Lden) agreed with the percentage of residents being annoyed when indoors, before and after the barrier. Conversely, the percentage of residents being annoyed when outdoors clearly exceeded the predictions. These results suggest that these exposure-response curves may be used in predicting indoor situations, but they should not be applied in situations where outdoor annoyance is at focus.
PubMed ID
16642832 View in PubMed
Less detail

6 records – page 1 of 1.