Background: Noise annoyance (NA) contributes considerably to the cumulative burden of disease from environmental noise in Europe. Exposure-response functions are the basis for assessment of its socio-economic impact which is essential for environmental health policy. These functions have not been implemented in Bulgaria.
Aim: In order to determine the socio-economic impact of road traffic NA in Plovdiv and Bulgaria several objectives were set: to establish a preliminary exposure-response relationship between road traffic noise and NA; to compare it to Miedema and Oudshoorn`s curve recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO); and to quantify the burden of high NA.
Material and methods: Based on data collected during a survey on cardio-metabolic environmental risk factors in Plovdiv we generated an exposure-response function derived from a logistic model and compared it to Miedema and Oudshoorn`s polynomial. Employing the official WHO methodology we calculated the disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) lost in Plovdiv due to high NA and monetized the value of these DALYs. Then we extended the analyses to the total Bulgarian urban population.
Results: The logistic function in our study bared close resemblance to Miedema and Oudshoorn`s polynomial (range 55-75 dB). Based on the latter, an annual loss of 1 188.17 DALYs was estimated in Plovdiv which translated into € 14.26 million assuming € 12 000 per DALY. On a national scale the results were even more alarming (6 399.60 DALYs and € 76.80 million).
Conclusion: Road traffic NA appears to have a considerable socio-economic impact in the country which calls for decisive actions by involved authorities. Future use of Miedema and Oudshoorn`s polynomial is substantiated.
World Health Organization (WHO). Burden of Disease from Environmental Noise, Regional Office for Europe; 2011.
Basner M, Babisch W, Davis A, et al. Auditory and non-auditory effects of noise on health. Lancet. 2014;383(9925):1325-32.
Heinonen-Guzejev M. Noise sensitivity - medical, psychological and genetic aspects [dissertation]. University of Helsinki: Helsinki University Printing House Helsinki; 2008.
Guski R. Personal and social variables as co-determinants of noise annoyance. Noise Health. 1999;1:45-56.
Ndrepepa A, Twardella D. Relationship between noise annoyance from road traffic noise and cardiovascular diseases: a meta-analysis. Noise Health. 2011;13:251-259.
Dzhambov AM, Dimitrova DD. Evaluation of the social and economic burden of road traffic noise-attributed myocardial infarction in Bulgarian urban population. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol. 2015;66(1):15-21.
Monitor. `Noise terrorizes two million Bulgarians`. [Newspaper article from September 17, 2014]. Available at: http://www.webcitation.org/6WMOVXGnk. Accessed: February 12, 2015. Bulgarian.
Laszlo HE, McRobie ES, Stansfeld SA, et al. Annoyance and other reaction measures to changes in noise exposure - a review. Sci Total Environ. 2012;435-436: 551-62.
Miedema HM, Oudshoorn CG. Annoyance from transportation noise: relationships with exposure metrics DNL and DENL and their confidence intervals. Environ Health Perspect. 2001;109(4):409-16.
Miedema HM, Vos H. Noise annoyance from stationary sources: relationships with exposure metric day-evening-night level (DENL) and their confidence intervals. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004;116:334-43
Takuchev N, Vasileva I, Petrova S. Dispersion Modeling of the Air Pollution, Emitted by the Traffic in the Transport Tunnel under the Old Town of Plovdiv, Bulgaria. Ecol Balk. 2014;6:73-86.
Dzhambov AM, Dimitrova DD. Validating a short Bulgarian version of a psychometric instrument for multidimensional noise sensitivity assessment. Folia Med (Plovdiv). 2014;56(2):116-25.
Pedersen TH. The `Genlyd` Noise Annoyance Model. Dose-Response Relationships Modelled by Logistic Functions, AV 1102/07. DELTA, 2007. Available at: http://share.madebydelta.com/wp-content/publications/akustik/paper_og_rapport/The_Genlyd_Noise_Annoyance_Model.pdf. Accessed: February 18, 2015.
Agay-Shay K, Peled A, Crespo AV, Pet al. Green spaces and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Occup Environ Med. 2014;71:562-9.
Directive 2002/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise. Off J Eur Commun. 2002;L189:12-25.
Galea S, Tracy M. Participation rates in epidemiologic studies. Ann Epidemiol. 2007;17:643-53.
Altman DG, Gardner MJ. Regression and Correlation. In: Altman DG, Machin D, Bryant TN, Gardner MJ. (Eds.). Statistics with Confidence (2nd Ed.). BMJ Books; 2000.
Newcombe, Robert G. Two-Sided Confidence Intervals for the Single Proportion: Comparison of Seven Methods. Stat Med. 1998;17: 857-72.
Brown DW. Economic value of disability-adjusted life years lost to violence: estimates for WHO Member States. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2008;24(3):203-9.
European Commission, EUROSTAT. GDP and beyond, Measuring quality of life in the EU; 2014. Available at http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/3-19032014-CP/EN/3-19032014-CP-EN.PDF. Accessed: July 22, 2014.
Paunovic K, Belojević G. Burden of myocardial infarction attributable to road-traffic noise: A pilot study in Belgrade. Noise Health. 2014;16:374-9.
Ristovska G, Gjorgjev D, Polozhani A, et al. Environmental noise and annoyance in adult population of Skopje: a cross-sectional study. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol. 2009;60(3):349-55.
Environmental Protection Department, Hksar Government. Final report for the provision of service for the study of health effects of transportation noise in Hong Kong; 2012.
World Health Organization (WHO). Evaluation and Use of Epidemiological Evidence for Environmental Health Risk Assessment. Guideline document. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2000.
Gjestland T. The socio-economic impact of noise: a method for assessing noise annoyance. Noise Health. 2007;9(35):42-4.
Training of Professionals in Environment and Health. Public Health Services Gelderland Midden. Published by European Commission Directorate General for Health and Consumers, Luxembourg; 2011.
Email this article (Login required) 
