Long-term effect of mobile phone use on sleep quality: Results from the cohort study of mobile phone use and health (COSMOS).
Cell phone
Cohort study
Electromagnetic fields
Insomnia
Sleep disturbance
Journal
Environment international
ISSN: 1873-6750
Titre abrégé: Environ Int
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 7807270
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2020
07 2020
Historique:
received:
21
10
2019
revised:
19
03
2020
accepted:
23
03
2020
pubmed:
12
4
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
entrez:
12
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure (RF-EMF) from mobile phone use on sleep quality has mainly been investigated in cross-sectional studies. The few previous prospective cohort studies found no or inconsistent associations, but had limited statistical power and short follow-up. In this large prospective cohort study, our aim was to estimate the effect of RF-EMF from mobile phone use on different sleep outcomes. The study included Swedish (n = 21,049) and Finnish (n = 3120) participants enrolled in the Cohort Study of Mobile Phone Use and Health (COSMOS) with information about operator-recorded mobile phone use at baseline and sleep outcomes both at baseline and at the 4-year follow-up. Sleep disturbance, sleep adequacy, daytime somnolence, sleep latency, and insomnia were assessed using the Medical Outcome Study (MOS) sleep questionnaire. Operator-recorded mobile phone use at baseline was not associated with most of the sleep outcomes. For insomnia, an odds ratio (OR) of 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.51 was observed in the highest decile of mobile phone call-time (>258 min/week). With weights assigned to call-time to account for the lower RF-EMF exposure from Universal Mobile Telecommunications Service (UMTS, 3G) than from Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM, 2G) the OR was 1.09 (95% CI 0.89-1.33) in the highest call-time decile. Insomnia was slightly more common among mobile phone users in the highest call-time category, but adjustment for the considerably lower RF-EMF exposure from the UMTS than the GSM network suggests that this association is likely due to other factors associated with mobile phone use than RF-EMF. No association was observed for other sleep outcomes. In conclusion, findings from this study do not support the hypothesis that RF-EMF from mobile phone use has long-term effects on sleep quality.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure (RF-EMF) from mobile phone use on sleep quality has mainly been investigated in cross-sectional studies. The few previous prospective cohort studies found no or inconsistent associations, but had limited statistical power and short follow-up. In this large prospective cohort study, our aim was to estimate the effect of RF-EMF from mobile phone use on different sleep outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study included Swedish (n = 21,049) and Finnish (n = 3120) participants enrolled in the Cohort Study of Mobile Phone Use and Health (COSMOS) with information about operator-recorded mobile phone use at baseline and sleep outcomes both at baseline and at the 4-year follow-up. Sleep disturbance, sleep adequacy, daytime somnolence, sleep latency, and insomnia were assessed using the Medical Outcome Study (MOS) sleep questionnaire.
RESULTS
Operator-recorded mobile phone use at baseline was not associated with most of the sleep outcomes. For insomnia, an odds ratio (OR) of 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.51 was observed in the highest decile of mobile phone call-time (>258 min/week). With weights assigned to call-time to account for the lower RF-EMF exposure from Universal Mobile Telecommunications Service (UMTS, 3G) than from Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM, 2G) the OR was 1.09 (95% CI 0.89-1.33) in the highest call-time decile.
CONCLUSION
Insomnia was slightly more common among mobile phone users in the highest call-time category, but adjustment for the considerably lower RF-EMF exposure from the UMTS than the GSM network suggests that this association is likely due to other factors associated with mobile phone use than RF-EMF. No association was observed for other sleep outcomes. In conclusion, findings from this study do not support the hypothesis that RF-EMF from mobile phone use has long-term effects on sleep quality.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32276731
pii: S0160-4120(19)33919-4
doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2020.105687
pmc: PMC7272128
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
105687Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/L01341X/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/L01632X/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/S019669/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Department of Health [UK]
Pays : International
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: M.F. is vice chairman of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, an independent body setting guidelines for non-ionizing radiation protection. She has served as advisor to a number of national and international public advisory and research steering groups concerning the potential health effects of exposure to non-ionizing radiation, for example the World Health Organization. H.K. is the chair of the Committee on Electromagnetic Fields of the Health Council of The Netherlands. All other authors have declared no conflict of interest.
Références
J Sleep Res. 2012 Dec;21(6):620-9
pubmed: 22724534
Science. 1977 Aug 12;197(4304):687-9
pubmed: 17922
BMC Public Health. 2011 Jan 31;11:66
pubmed: 21281471
Sleep Med. 2017 Oct;38:37-43
pubmed: 29031754
Cancer Epidemiol. 2011 Feb;35(1):37-43
pubmed: 20810339
Environ Health Toxicol. 2016 Dec 29;32:e2017001
pubmed: 28111420
Sleep Med Rev. 2014 Jun;18(3):195-213
pubmed: 23809904
Environ Res. 2016 Feb;145:50-60
pubmed: 26618505
Sleep. 2004 Dec 15;27(8):1567-96
pubmed: 15683149
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2011 May;110(5):1432-8
pubmed: 21415172
Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2004 Feb;207(2):141-50
pubmed: 15031956
Am J Hum Biol. 2010 Sep-Oct;22(5):613-8
pubmed: 20737608
Front Psychiatry. 2016 Oct 24;7:175
pubmed: 27822187
Bioelectromagnetics. 2011 Jan;32(1):4-14
pubmed: 20857453
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1996 May;51(3):M108-15
pubmed: 8630703
Neuropsychobiology. 1996;33(1):41-7
pubmed: 8821374
Pharmacopsychiatry. 2012 Jul;45(5):167-76
pubmed: 22290199
Int J Epidemiol. 2019 Oct 1;48(5):1567-1579
pubmed: 31302690
Sleep Med Rev. 2015 Jun;21:72-85
pubmed: 25444442
Bioelectromagnetics. 2015 Sep;36(6):480-4
pubmed: 26179386
JAMA. 2013 Feb 20;309(7):706-16
pubmed: 23423416
Prev Med. 1994 May;23(3):328-34
pubmed: 8078854
PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37455
pubmed: 22624036
J Sleep Res. 2012 Feb;21(1):50-8
pubmed: 21489004
Appl Ergon. 2013 Mar;44(2):237-40
pubmed: 22850476
Headache. 2005 Jul-Aug;45(7):904-10
pubmed: 15985108
Chest. 2014 Nov;146(5):1387-1394
pubmed: 25367475
Sleep Disord. 2014;2014:843126
pubmed: 24955254
J Sleep Res. 2013 Oct;22(5):573-80
pubmed: 23509952
Soc Sci Med. 2016 Jan;148:93-101
pubmed: 26688552
Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2008;10(4):473-81
pubmed: 19170404
Chronobiol Int. 2008 Apr;25(2):333-48
pubmed: 18484368
J Sleep Res. 2011 Mar;20(1 Pt 1):73-81
pubmed: 20561179
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Nov 29;15(12):
pubmed: 30501032
Pediatrics. 2014 Sep;134(3):e921-32
pubmed: 25157012
Occup Environ Med. 2015 Nov;72(11):812-8
pubmed: 26311820