An international study of asthma, published in the early online version of the European Respiratory Journal, has for the first time, included the number of incidents caused by air pollution and shows that the costs for childhood asthma have risen sharply.
Leading researcher Sylvia Brandt, a University of Massachusetts Amherst resource economist, and her team in California and Switzerland state that the overall financial burden of asthma caused by pollution is substantially higher than originally indicated by traditional risk assessments, and in light of the growing evidence that asthma can be caused and trigger attacks from exposure to traffic-related air pollution, it should be included. The team conducted their study in Long Beach and Riverside, Calif., communities with high regional air pollution levels and large roads close to residential neighborhoods.
According to their findings, the total additional asthma-specific costs at the study site due to traffic-related pollution amounts to approximately $18 million per year, with nearly half of the cost accounting for new asthma cases caused by pollution.
This is the first study that has used updated techniques to count asthma cases attributable to air pollution and included a broader range of health care costs, including parents’ missed work days, extra doctor visits and travel time along with prescriptions. The findings revealed that a single incident of bronchitic symptoms cost an average $972 in Riverside and $915 in Long Beach. Bronchitic symptoms, such as daily congestion, cough, phlegm, or continuous bronchitis for three months are a critical outcome for asthmatic children.
The researchers add that individuals living in cities with high traffic-related air pollution bear a higher burden of these costs, compared with those in less polluted areas, saying that the total annual cost for a typical asthma case was $3,819 in Long Beach and $4,063 in Riverside, and “the largest share of the cost of an asthma case was the indirect cost of asthma-related school absences.” A significant economic consequence is absence from school they note, as “they often lead to parents or caregivers missing work.”
Brandt highlights the relevancy of their findings and says they are applicable to many settings, saying:
“families with children who have asthma are bearing a high cost. The total annual estimate between $3,800 and $4,000 represents 7 percent of median household income in our study in these two communities. This is troublesome because that is higher than the 5 percent considered to be a bearable or sustainable level of health care costs for a family.”
The researchers state that Riverside and Long Beach account for approximately 7% percent of California’s total population, which indicates a “truly substantial” cost across the state due to asthma related air pollution.
Brandt and her team assessed numerous surveys regarding children with asthma’s health care visits, as well as their earlier estimates of the number of asthma cases due to pollution, in order to estimate the yearly costs of childhood asthma. In addition, they also estimated the cost of asthma exacerbation caused by regional air pollutants and believe that their new approach of estimating the financial burden of asthma applies to many urban areas and is superior in accounting for the full impact of traffic-related pollution.
She concludes:
“Traditional risk assessment methods for air pollution have underestimated both the overall burden of asthma and the cost of the disease associated with air pollution. Our findings suggest the cost has been substantially underestimated and steps must be taken to reduce the burden of traffic-related pollution.”
Written By Petra Rattue