Practical Experience of Using the Index of Comparative Health Hazard to Substantiate the List of Pollutants for Monitoring

Introduction: When selecting the most hazardous pollutants for inclusion in air quality monitoring programs, it is important to consider criteria of population health risk.

Objective: To substantiate the list of priority air pollutants for 10 new cities of the Krasnoyarsk and Irkutsk Regions enrolled in the Clean Air Federal Project using the index of comparative hazard to population health and results of air quality testing to elaborate monitoring programs for the period until the results of summary calculations for the territory are obtained.

Materials and methods: We used data provided by the Federal Supervisory Natural Resources Management Service (Rosprirodnadzor) on actual annual emissions (Form No. 2-TP (Air) for 2022) from sources of air pollution located in the cities of Angarsk, Achinsk, Zima, Irkutsk, Lesosibirsk, Minusinsk, Svirsk, Usolye-Sibirskoye, Cheremkhovo, and Shelekhov. Compliance with sanitary and epidemiological requirements for ambient air quality was established based on data from monitoring sites of the Federal Service for Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring (Roshydromet) and the Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing (Rospotrebnadzor) for 2020–2022. To substantiate the lists of air pollutants to be monitored within the framework of public health surveillance, we ranked chemicals according to Russian Risk Assessment Guidelines R 2.1.10.3968–23. Results: Based on the results of assessing contributions to the total index of comparative carcinogenic hazard, certain chemicals were proposed to be included into monitoring programs due to their carcinogenic potential when inhaled (acetaldehyde, benzo(a)pyrene, benzene, buta-1,3-diene, lead, carbon, formaldehyde, chromium (IV), etc.). Evaluation of percent contributions to the total index of comparative non-carcinogenic hazard revealed the need to expand monitoring programs to include the following highly hazardous chemicals: dialuminum trioxide, dihydrosulfide, dimethylamine, manganese and its compounds, sulfuric acid, fluorides, and chlorine. According to the findings, 10 to 24 pollutants were recommended for inclusion in the 2023–2024 public health surveillance program.

Conclusion: The use of comparative hazard indices and consideration of their contributions to the corresponding total indices of comparative carcinogenic and/or non-carcinogenic hazard allowed us to substantiate the lists of pollutants to be included in the public health surveillance programs in 10 new cities enrolled in the Clean Air Federal Project for 2023–2024 and to expand them by including admixtures posing human health risks.

1. Marklund N, Bellander BM, Godbolt AK, Levin H, McCrory P, Thelin EP. Тreatments and rehabilitation in the acute and chronic state of traumatic brain injury. J Intern Med. 2019;285(6):608-623. doi: 10.1111/joim.12900

2. Nemkova SA. Current possibilities of complex diagnosis and treatment of the consequences of traumatic brain injury. Zhurnal Nevrologii i Psikhiatrii im. S.S. Korsakova. 2019;119(10):94-102. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17116/jnevro201911910194

3. Shukri AA, Nogovitsina EM. Recent advances in neurosurgical intervention for severe traumatic brain injury. Vestnik Avitsenny. 2021;23(4):595-608. (In Russ.) doi: 10.25005/2074-0581-2021-23-4-595-608

4. Rebko AA. Mild traumatic brain injury: Current point of view on the problem. Problemy Zdorov’ya i Ekologii. 2020;(2(64)):21-27. (In Russ.)

5. Solov’eva YA, Shurygin AA. Mortality from traumatic brain injuries of the adult population in the city of Chelyabinsk and the Chelyabinsk region. Sovremennye Problemy Zdravookhraneniya i Meditsinskoy Statistiki. 2023;(3):1046-1069. (In Russ.) doi: 10.24412/2312-2935-2023-3-1046-1069

6. Capizzi A, Woo J, Verduzco-Gutierrez M. Traumatic brain injury: An overview of epidemiology, pathophysiology, and medical management. Med Clin North Am. 2020;104(2):213-238. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2019.11.001

7. Wilson L, Stewart W, Dams-O’Connor K, et al. The chronic and evolving neurological consequence of traumatic brain injury. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16(10):813-825. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30279-X

8. Сhendrasekhar A, Kuczabski B, Cohen D, et al. Delayed sequelae related to mild traumatic brain injury in children. Glob Pediatr Health. 2020;7:2333794X20947988. doi: 10.1177/2333794X20947988

9. Brush NG, Simonova NV, Arkhipova MI, Shpinev AV. Results of the study of cognitive functions in patients with brain injury. Yakutskiy Meditsinskiy Zhurnal. 2022;(2(78)):23- 26. (In Russ.) doi: 10.25789/YMJ.2022.78.06

10. Zhakupova YaT, Atamanov AA, Mokina YaV. The characteristics of cognitive impairments in patients with remote effects of craniocerebral traumas. Sovremennaya Nauka: Aktual’nye Problemy Teorii i Praktiki. Seriya: Poznanie. 2021;(9):20-25. (In Russ.) doi: 10.37882/2500-3682.2021.09.05

11. Zlobina OYu, Aykhaeva AV, Razumovich AG. Characteristics of psychiatric sequela of cranio-brain injury in the psychiatric outpatients. Nauchnoe Obozrenie. Meditsinskie Nauki. 2022;(1):21-27. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17513/srms.1228

12. Andelic N, Howe EI, Hellstrøm T, et al. Disability and quality of life 20 years after traumatic brain injury. Brain Behav. 2018;8(7):e01018. doi: 10.1002/brb3.1018

13. Thapa K, Khan H, Singh TG, Kaur A. Traumatic brain injury: Mechanistic insight on pathophysiology and potential therapeutic targets. J Mol Neurosci. 2021;71(9):1725- 1742. doi: 10.1007/s12031-021-01841-7

14. Likhterman LB, Kravchuk AD, Okhlopkov VA. Theory about traumatic brain injury effects. Part III. Conceptual approaches to treatment of traumatic brain injury effects. Klinicheskiy Razbor v Obshchey Meditsine. 2021;(7):45- 51. (In Russ.) doi: 10.47407/kr2021.2.7.00088

15. Karaseva TA, Shcherbakova DA, Petrova EV, Agafonkin AA. [Clinical features of psychoorganic syndrome long after traumatic brain injury.] Rossiyskiy Neyrokhirurgicheskiy Zhurnal im. Prof. A.L. Polenova. 2021;13(S1):186. (In Russ.)

16. Yelchaninova EYu, Rucheykina NYu, Tibeykina OA. [Relationship between traumatic brain injury and the risk and features of the course of multiple sclerosis.] Scientist (Russia). 2023;(4(26)):186-189. (In Russ.)

17. Semin DA, Orlova VM, Snegireva TG. Quality of life and mental health of patients after traumatic brain injury. Head and Neck (Russian edition). 2022;10(S2S2):120- 122. (In Russ.) doi: 10.25792/HN.2022.10.2.S2.120-122

18. Mulyadi M, Harianto S, Tonapa SI, Lee BO. Early quality-of-life changes in mild traumatic brain injury: A prospective study. J Trauma Nurs. 2023;30(2):75-82. doi: 10.1097/JTN.0000000000000706

19. Poritz JMP, Sherer M, Kisala PA, Tulsky D, Leon-Novelo L, Ngan E. Responsiveness of the Traumatic Brain Injury – Quality of Life (TBI–QOL) measurement system. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020;101(1):54-61. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.11.018

20. Kolesnikov AN, Antropova OS, Koktyshev IV, Buteva LV. Model prediction the development of cognitive impairment in patients with cranial-brain traum at the personalized approach. Arkhiv Klinicheskoy i Eksperimental’noy Meditsiny. 2019;28(1):6-9. (In Russ.)

21. Brush NG, Simonova NV, Arkhipova MI, Shpinyov AV. [Assessment of cognitive functions in patients with remote traumatic brain injury.] Kardiovaskulyarnaya Terapiya i Profilaktika. 2022;21(S2):30-31. (In Russ.) doi: 10.15829/1728-8800-2022-S2

22. Kiselev NI, Lim VG, Novikov AV, Bordina OV, Ternovoy KS. Complex rehabilitation of a patient with marked motor and cognitive impairments after a brain injury. Zhurnal Nevrologii i Psikhiatrii im. S.S. Korsakova. 2020;120(5):88- 92. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17116/jnevro202012005188

23. Shpichko AI. Rehabilitation of patients with the consequences of severe traumatic brain injury. Klinicheskaya Nevrologiya. 2020;(1):21-25. (In Russ.)

24. Tagil AO, Timoschenkov AD, Soldatenkova AY. Relation of the clinical picture of the cranial – brain injury with the data of instrumental research methods. Smolenskiy Meditsinskiy Al’manakh. 2019;(1):267-268. (In Russ.)

25. Alekseenko YuV. Mild traumatic brain injury. Lecture. Nevrologiya i Neyrokhirurgiya. Vostochnaya Evropa. 2022;12(4):444-458. (In Russ.) doi: 10.34883/PI.2022.12.4.038

26. Annikov YuG, Krom IL, Erugina MV, Orlova MM, Dolgova EM, Bochkareva GN. The value of health-related quality of life in objectivizing the long-term prognosis of patients with post-traumatic brain injury. Medical News of North Caucasus. 2023;18(2):189-190. doi: 10.14300/mnnc.2023.18043

27. Belkin AA, Rudnik EN, Belkin VA, Pinchuk EA, Lipovka NS. Optimization of step-by-step care for patients in intensive care units based on grade 6 of the rehabilitation routing scale. Fizicheskaya i Reabilitatsionnaya Meditsina, Meditsinskaya Reabilitatsiya. 2021;3(1):142-148. (In Russ.) doi: 10.36425/rehab64082

28. Sereda AN, Koneva ES, Kim VV, et al. Topical issues of improving medical and social rehabilitation of disabled people with the consequences of traumatic brain injury at the municipal level. Vestnik Vserossiyskogo Obshchestva Spetsialistov po Mediko-Sotsial’noy Ekspertize, Reabilitatsii i Reabilitatsionnoy Industrii. 2021;(3):73-80. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17238/issn1999-2351.2021.3.73-80

29. Gerber LH, Deshpande R, Moosvi A, et al. Narrative review of clinical practice guidelines for treating people with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. NeuroRehabilitation. 2021;48(4):451-467. doi: 10.3233/NRE-210024