2013—2019年宁波市高温热浪对中暑的滞后影响

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-503X.2022.01.014

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

高温热浪日趋严重，给居民身体健康带来了重大的威胁。采用2013-2019年6-9月逐日气象观测数据及同期中暑病例数据为基础资料，重点利用分布滞后非线性模型（DLNM）定量分析了宁波市高温热浪对中暑的滞后影响。结果表明：高温热浪（不分等级）引起中暑的单日相对危险度RR值（95%CI）在发生当天达到最大值；累计RR值（95% CI）在滞后0-4 d达到最大值；不同等级高温热浪（一般高温热浪、危害高温热浪和强危害高温热浪）引起中暑的最大单日RR值（95% CI）均出现在发生当天，最大累计RR值（95% CI）都发生在滞后0-3 d；高温热浪引起中暑的单日及累计RR值（95% CI）低龄组（< 65岁）明显小于高龄组（≥ 65岁），随着高温热浪等级的增加，引起中暑的单日及累计RR值（95% CI）逐渐增高。

关键词: 高温热浪, 中暑, 分布滞后非线性模型(DLNM), 相对危险度

Abstract:

Heat-wave has been becoming more serious, posing a major threat to residents' health.In this paper, the lagged effects of heat-wave on heatstroke were investigated based on the statistical characteristics of meteorological and heatstroke data from June to September during 2013-2019 in Ningbo by using distributed lag non-linear model (DLNM).The results show that the one-day relative risk (RR) value (95% CI) of heatstroke caused by heat-waves (no hierarchy) reaches the maximum value (P>0.05) on the first day, and the cumulative RR value (95% CI) reaches the maximum value (P>0.05) for the lag of 0-4 day.The maximum one-day RR value (CI) of heatstroke caused by different levels of heat-waves including general, hazardous and severe hazardous heat-waves appears on the first day, and the maximum cumulative RR value (CI) appears on the lag of 0-3 day.In addition, The one-day and cumulative RR values (CIs) of heatstroke caused by heat-wave in the young group (< 65 years old) are significantly lower than in the elderly group (≥ 65 years old).With the heat-wave level enhancing, the one-day and cumulative RR values (CIs) increase gradually.

Key words: Heat-wave, Heatstroke, Distributed lag non-linear model (DLNM), Relative risk

中图分类号:

鹿文涵,谷少华,孙仕强,张程明,朱宪春. 2013—2019年宁波市高温热浪对中暑的滞后影响[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2022, 38(1): 106-112.

Wen-han LU,Shao-hua GU,Shi-qiang SUN,Cheng-ming ZHANG,Xian-chun ZHU. Quantitative analysis of the lagged effects of heat-wave on heatstroke in Ningbo from 2013 to 2019[J]. Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 2022, 38(1): 106-112.

图/表 6

图1

表1

图2

表2

图3

表3

参考文献 32

1	Stocker T S , Qin D , Plattner G K , et al. Climate Change 2013:the Physical Science Basis.An overview of the Working Group 1 contribution to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC)[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
2	Parry M, Canziani O, Palutikof J, et al. IPCC, 2007: Summary for Policymakers. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability[M]. Cambridge University Press, 2007.
3	Chung J Y , Honda Y , Hong Y C , et al. Ambient temperature and mortality: an international study in four capital cities of East Asia[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2009, 408 (2): 390- 396. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.09.009
4	Tan J G , Zheng Y F , Tang X , et al. The urban heat island and its impact on heat waves and human health in Shanghai[J]. International Journal of Biometeorology, 2010, 54 (1): 75- 84. doi: 10.1007/s00484-009-0256-x
5	Xie Z Q , Du Y , Zeng Y , et al. Accelerated human activities affecting the spatial pattern of temperature in the Yangtze River Delta[J]. Quaternary International, 2010, 226 (1/2): 112- 121.
6	陈敏, 耿福海, 马雷鸣, 等. 近138年上海地区高温热浪事件分析[J]. 高原气象, 2013, 32 (2): 2597- 2607.
7	Habeeb D , Vargo J , Stone B . Rising heat wave trends in large US cities[J]. Natural Hazards, 2015, 76 (3): 1651- 1665. doi: 10.1007/s11069-014-1563-z
8	Knowlton K , Rotkin-Ellman M , King G , et al. The 2006 California heat wave: impacts on hospitalizations and emergency department visits[J]. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2009, 117 (1): 61- 67. doi: 10.1289/ehp.11594
9	栾桂杰, 李湉湉, 殷鹏, 等. 2010年北京市高温热浪对居民死亡的影响[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2015, 5 (6): 525- 529.
10	潘洁, 杨军, 李萌萌, 等. 分布滞后非线性模型在气象因素对手足口病发病影响研究中的应用[J]. 环境与健康杂志, 2016, 33 (5): 377- 380.
11	Huang W , Kan H D , Kovats S . The impact of the 2003 heat wave on mortality in Shanghai, China[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2010, 408 (11): 2418- 2420. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.02.009
12	张璟, 刘学, 阚海东. 上海市日平均气温对居民死亡数的滞后效应研究[J]. 中华流行病学杂志, 2012, 33 (12): 1252- 1257. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-6450.2012.12.012
13	黄卓, 陈辉, 田华. 高温热浪指标研究[J]. 气象, 2011, 37 (3): 345- 351. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4965.2011.03.007
14	顾思南. 宁波市气候变化及其成因简析[C]//第五届长三角气象科技论坛论文集. 上海: 浙江省气象学会, 2008.
15	卢晶晶, 吕劲文, 钱峥. 宁波市高温中暑气象等级评定方法研究[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2016, 32 (4): 91- 97. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-503X.2016.04.012
16	孙仕强, 鹿文涵, 郭建民, 等. 2012-2016年宁波市中暑流行特征及热浪对其影响分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2019, 35 (1): 66- 71. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-503X.2019.01.009
17	王羱, 桑悦洋, 张立凤. 2013年夏季浙江省高温干旱环流异常分析[J]. 气象科学, 2015, 35 (2): 140- 149.
18	张尚印, 张海东, 徐祥德, 等. 我国东部三市夏季高温气候特征及原因分析[J]. 高原气象, 2005, 24 (5): 829- 835. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0534.2005.05.026
19	张尚印, 张德宽, 徐祥德, 等. 长江中下游夏季高温灾害机理及预测[J]. 南京气象学院学报, 2005, 28 (6): 840- 846. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7097.2005.06.017
20	纪玲玲, 袭祝香, 陈卓, 等. 吉林省高温天气气候特征及其过程等级评估[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2020, 36 (3): 49- 54. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-503X.2020.03.007
21	Seposo X T , Dang T N , Honda Y . Exploring the effects of high temperature on mortality in four cities in the Philippines using various heat wave definitions in different mortality subgroups[J]. Global Health Action, 2017, 10 (1): 1368969. doi: 10.1080/16549716.2017.1368969
22	Sherbakov T , Malig B , Guirguis K , et al. Ambient temperature and added heat wave effects on hospitalizations in California from 1999 to 2009[J]. Environmental Research, 2018, 160, 83- 90. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2017.08.052
23	谭玉龙, 尹岭, 王式功, 等. 不同地区温度变化对缺血性心脑血管疾病影响的比较研究[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2019, 35 (3): 94- 99. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-503X.2019.03.012
24	谷少华, 王爱红, 边国林, 等. 宁波市气象条件与中暑的关联性分析[J]. 中华流行病学杂志, 2016, 37 (8): 1131- 1136. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-6450.2016.08.016
25	何玲玲, 陈正洪. 武汉市居民中暑与气象因子的统计特点研究[J]. 气候与环境研究, 2009, 14 (5): 531- 536. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9585.2009.05.08
26	Li Y H , Li C C , Luo S Q , et al. Impacts of extremely high temperature and heatwave on heatstroke in Chongqing, China[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017, 24 (9): 8534- 8540. doi: 10.1007/s11356-017-8457-z
27	崔亮亮, 周敬文, 耿兴义, 等. 2011-2014年济南市高温中暑病例流行病学特征及风险分析[J]. 环境与健康杂志, 2015, 32 (9): 809- 812.
28	Hutter H P , Moshammer H , Wallner P , et al. Heatwaves in Vienna: effects on mortality[J]. Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift, 2007, 119 (7/8): 223- 227.
29	陈静, 韩军彩, 张素果, 等. 基于暑热指数的河北省中暑气象等级预报指标研究[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2013, 29 (5): 86- 91.
30	Bell M L , Zanobetti A , Dominici F . Evidence on vulnerability and susceptibility to health risks associated with short-term exposure to particulate matter: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. American Journal of Epidemiology, 2013, 178 (6): 865- 876. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwt090
31	Knight E M , Brown T M , Gümüsgöz S , et al. Age-related changes in core body temperature and activity in triple-transgenic Alzheimer's disease (3xTgAD) mice[J]. Disease Models & Mechanisms, 2013, 6 (1): 160- 170.
32	Kim C T , Lim Y H , Woodward A , et al. Heat-attributable deaths between 1992 and 2009 in Seoul, South Korea[J]. PLoS One, 2015, 10 (2): e0118577. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118577

统计项目	指标	平均值±标准差	最小值	P25	中位数	P75	最大值
气象要素	日最高气温T_max/℃	22.36±8.89	-2.50	15.40	23.50	29.10	42.10
气象要素	日平均湿度RH_avg/(%)	75.83±12.24	12.24	68.00	76.00	84.00	100.00
每日中暑病例数	全部人群	8.61±11.48	0.00	1.00	4.00	12.00	75.00
年龄组	低龄组(＜65)	6.53±9.72	0.00	1.00	2.00	8.00	65.00
年龄组	高龄组(≥65)	2.09±4.18	0.00	0.00	0.00	2.00	46.00

滞后天数/d	人群
滞后天数/d	全部人群	低龄组(＜65岁)	高龄组(≥65)
Lag0	1.37(1.29—1.47)	1.33(1.24—1.42)	1.41(1.29—1.53)
Lag0-1	1.74(1.56—1.94)	1.64(1.47—1.83)	1.82(1.58—2.10)
Lag0-2	2.04(1.79—2.34)	1.89(1.64—2.17)	2.18(1.81—2.61)
Lag0-3	2.24(1.93—2.60)	2.05(1.76—2.39)	2.43(1.97—2.99)
Lag0-4	2.33(1.99—2.73)	2.12(1.80—2.49)	2.57(2.05—3.22)

滞后天数	高温热浪等级	年龄组
滞后天数	高温热浪等级	全部人群	低龄组(＜65岁)	高龄组(≥65岁)
	一般	1.11(1.08—1.15)	1.10(1.06—1.13)	1.17(1.11—1.23)
lag0	危害	1.23(1.59—1.32)	1.20(1.13—1.28)	1.37(1.23—1.52)
	强危害	1.37(1.25—1.51)	1.32(1.20—1.44)	1.60(1.36—1.88)
	一般	1.21(1.14—1.27)	1.17(1.12—1.23)	1.31(1.20—1.43)
lag0-1	危害	1.44(1.30—1.60)	1.38(1.24—1.52)	1.72(1.44—2.05)
	强危害	1.73(1.48—2.03)	1.61(1.39—1.88)	2.26(1.73—2.94)
	一般	1.26(1.19—1.35)	1.23(1.16—1.30)	1.41(1.27—1.57)
lag0-2	危害	1.60(1.41—1.81)	1.51(1.34—1.70)	2.00(1.61—2.47)
	强危害	2.02(1.68—2.44)	1.85(1.54—2.22)	2.82(2.05—3.89)
	一般	1.30(1.22—1.39)	1.26(1.18—1.34)	1.47(1.31—1.65)
lag0-3	危害	1.69(1.48—1.93)	1.59(1.40—1.81)	2.16(1.72—2.72)
	强危害	2.21(1.81—2.69)	2.00(1.65—2.43)	3.18(2.26—4.49)

[1]	孙仕强, 鹿文涵, 郭建民, 钱燕珍, 卢晶晶. 2012—2016年宁波市中暑流行特征及热浪对其影响分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2019, 35(1): 66-71.
[2]	付桂琴, 刘华悦, 贾俊妹. 石家庄地区气温对慢性阻塞性肺病住院人数的影响[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2017, 33(2): 101-106.
[3]	卢晶晶, 吕劲文, 钱峥. 宁波市高温中暑气象等级评定方法研究[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2016, 32(4): 91-97.
[4]	党冰刘博尹岭周忠玉何史林黎檀实尚可政王式功. 气象条件对北京夏季中暑的影响及预测研究[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2015, 31(2): 67-72.
[5]	杨红龙,潘婕,张镭 . SRES A2 情景下中国区域性高温热浪事件变化特征[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2015, 31(1): 51-59.
[6]	陈静,韩军彩,张素果,阎访,杨鹏. 基于暑热指数的河北省中暑气象等级预报指标研究[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2013, 29(5): 86-91.