Prolonged Exposure to Air Pollution Tied to Disability in Seniors

TOPLINE:
Long-term exposure to air pollution, particularly particulate matter between 2.5 and 10 μm in diameter (PM10-2.5), is associated with a higher risk of developing physical disability in older adults.
METHODOLOGY:
Researchers conducted a cohort study to examine the effect of air pollution on physical disability in later life in a large cohort representative of older adults in the United States.
They included 15,411 participants aged 65 years or older (mean age, 70.2 years; 55% women) who responded to the Health and Retirement Survey between 2000 and 2016.
They estimated the 10-year average concentrations of various air pollutants, including PM ≤ 2.5 μm in diameter (PM2.5), PM10-2.5, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and ozone (O3), at the participants’ homes using spatiotemporal prediction models.
Physical disability was assessed on the index of limitations in activities of daily living such as dressing, walking across a room, bathing, eating, getting in and out of bed, and toileting.
TAKEAWAY:
Long-term exposure to higher concentrations of PM10-2.5 was associated with a 5% increase in risk for disability (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.05 per 4.9 μg/m3; P = .02).
In contrast, long-term exposure to higher O3 levels was associated with a lower risk for disability (aHR, 0.95 per 3.7 ppb; P = .03).
No significant association was found for exposure to PM2.5 or NO2 and risk for disability.
These associations were the strongest in adults aged 65-70 and 80-85 years.
IN PRACTICE:
“This finding suggests that reducing air pollution concentrations might help reduce the occurrence of [activities of daily living] disability in the population,” the authors of the study wrote.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Jiaqi Gao, PhD, of the University of Michigan, in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and was published online on September 26, 2024, in The Lancet Healthy Longevity.
LIMITATIONS:
The study did not differentiate between permanent and temporary transitions to disability, which may have affected the interpretation of the findings. The exclusion of individuals with missing data may have introduced selection bias. Moreover, errors in estimates of exposure could arise from the model used in the analysis.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and National Institute on Aging. Some authors received grants and consulting fees from the National Institutes of Health and other sources. One author reported serving as an associate editor of Discover Social Science and Health. The remaining authors declared no competing interests.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
 
Send comments and news tips to [email protected].