Is PM1 similar to PM2.5? A new insight into the association of PM1 and PM2.5 with children’s lung function

Mo Yang,Yu-Ming Guo,Michael S Bloom,Shyamali C Dharmagee,Lidia Morawska,Joachim Heinrich,Bin Jalaludin,Iana Markevychd,Luke D Knibbsf,Shao Lin,Steve Hung Lan,Pasi Jalava,Mika Komppula,Marjut Roponen,Maija-Riitta Hirvonen,Qi-Hua Guan,Zi-Mian Liang,Hong-Yao Yu,Li-Wen Hu,Bo-Yi Yang,Xiao-Wen Zeng,Guang-Hui Dong,Michael S. Bloom,Shyamali C. Dharmagee
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.106092
IF: 11.8
2020-12-01
Environment International
Abstract:Experimental data suggests that PM<sub>1</sub> is more toxic than PM<sub>2.5</sub> although the epidemiologic evidence suggests that the health associations are similar. However, few objective exposure data are available to compare the associations of PM<sub>1</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> with children lung function. Our objectives are a) to evaluate associations between long-term exposure to PM<sub>1</sub>, PM<sub>2.5</sub> and children's lung function, and b) to compare the associations between PM<sub>1</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub>. From 2012 to 2013, we enrolled 6,740 children (7-14 years), randomly recruited from primary and middle schools located in seven cities in northeast China. We measured lung function including forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), peak expiratory flow (PEF), and maximal mid-expiratory flow (MMEF) utilizing two portable electronic spirometers. We dichotomized continuous lung function measures according the expected values for gender and age. The spatial resolution at which PM<sub>1</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> estimated were estimated using a machine learning method and the temporal average concentrations were averaged from 2009 to 2012. A multilevel regression model was used to estimate the associations of PM<sub>1</sub>, PM<sub>2.5</sub> exposure and lung function measures, adjusted for confounding factors. Associations with lower lung function were consistently larger for PM<sub>1</sub> than for PM<sub>2.5</sub>. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) per interquartile range greater PM<sub>1</sub> ranged from 1.53 for MMEF (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-1.96) to 2.14 for FEV1 (95% CI: 1.66-2.76) and ORs for PM<sub>2.5</sub> ranged from 1.36 for MMEF (95%CI: 1.12-1.66) to 1.82 for FEV1 (95%CI: 1.49-2.22), respectively. PM<sub>1</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> had significant associations with FVC and FEV1 in primary school children, and on PEF and MMEF in middle school children. Long-term PM<sub>1</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> exposure can lead to decreased lung function in children, and the associations of PM<sub>1</sub> are stronger than PM<sub>2.5</sub>. Therefore, PM<sub>1</sub> may be more hazardous to children's respiratory health than PM<sub>2.5</sub> exposure.
environmental sciences
What problem does this paper attempt to address?