The effects of traveling in different transport modes on galvanic skin response (GSR) as a measure of stress: An observational study.

Active travel Cycling Propensityscores Stress reduction Walking

Journal

Environment international
ISSN: 1873-6750
Titre abrégé: Environ Int
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 7807270

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2021
Historique:
received: 16 12 2020
revised: 02 07 2021
accepted: 05 07 2021
pubmed: 18 7 2021
medline: 3 9 2021
entrez: 17 7 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Stress is one of many ailments associated with urban living, with daily travel a potential major source. Active travel, nevertheless, has been associated with lower levels of stress compared to other modes. Earlier work has relied on self-reported measures of stress, and on study designs that limit our ability to establish causation. To evaluate effects of daily travel in different modes on an objective proxy measure of stress, the galvanic skin response (GSR). We collected data from 122 participants across 3 European cities as part of the Physical Activity through Sustainable Transport Approaches (PASTA) study, including: GSR measured every minute alongside confounders (physical activity, near-body temperature) during three separate weeks covering 3 seasons; sociodemographic and travel information through questionnaires. Causal relationships between travel in different modes (the "treatment") and stress were established by using a propensity score matching (PSM) approach to adjust for potential confounding and estimating linear mixed models (LMM) with individuals as random effects to account for repeated measurements. In three separate analyses, we compared GSR while cycling to not cycling, then walking to not walking then motorized (public or private) travel to any activity other than motorized travel. Depending on LMM formulations used, cycling reduces 1-minute GSR by 5.7% [95% CI: 2.0-16.9%] to 11.1% [95% CI: 5.0-24.4%] compared to any other activity. Repeating the analysis for other modes we find that: walking is also beneficial, reducing GSR by 3.9% [95% CI: 1.4-10.7%] to 5.7% [95% CI: 2.6-12.3%] compared to any other activity; motorized mode (private or public) in reverse increases GSR by up to 1.1% [95% CI: 0.5-2.9%]. Active travel offers a welcome way to reduce stress in urban dwellers' daily lives. Stress can be added to the growing number of evidence-based reasons for promoting active travel in cities.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Stress is one of many ailments associated with urban living, with daily travel a potential major source. Active travel, nevertheless, has been associated with lower levels of stress compared to other modes. Earlier work has relied on self-reported measures of stress, and on study designs that limit our ability to establish causation.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate effects of daily travel in different modes on an objective proxy measure of stress, the galvanic skin response (GSR).
METHODS
We collected data from 122 participants across 3 European cities as part of the Physical Activity through Sustainable Transport Approaches (PASTA) study, including: GSR measured every minute alongside confounders (physical activity, near-body temperature) during three separate weeks covering 3 seasons; sociodemographic and travel information through questionnaires. Causal relationships between travel in different modes (the "treatment") and stress were established by using a propensity score matching (PSM) approach to adjust for potential confounding and estimating linear mixed models (LMM) with individuals as random effects to account for repeated measurements. In three separate analyses, we compared GSR while cycling to not cycling, then walking to not walking then motorized (public or private) travel to any activity other than motorized travel.
RESULTS
Depending on LMM formulations used, cycling reduces 1-minute GSR by 5.7% [95% CI: 2.0-16.9%] to 11.1% [95% CI: 5.0-24.4%] compared to any other activity. Repeating the analysis for other modes we find that: walking is also beneficial, reducing GSR by 3.9% [95% CI: 1.4-10.7%] to 5.7% [95% CI: 2.6-12.3%] compared to any other activity; motorized mode (private or public) in reverse increases GSR by up to 1.1% [95% CI: 0.5-2.9%].
DISCUSSION
Active travel offers a welcome way to reduce stress in urban dwellers' daily lives. Stress can be added to the growing number of evidence-based reasons for promoting active travel in cities.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34273874
pii: S0160-4120(21)00389-5
doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106764
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Observational Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

106764

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Xiuleng Yang (X)

Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Emma McCoy (E)

Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Esther Anaya-Boig (E)

Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.

Ione Avila-Palencia (I)

Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), Barcelona, Spain; Urban Health Collaborative, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Christian Brand (C)

Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom; Transport Studies Unit (TSU), School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.

Glòria Carrasco-Turigas (G)

Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), Barcelona, Spain; CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain; Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain.

Evi Dons (E)

Centre for Environmental Sciences, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium; Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), Mol, Belgium.

Regine Gerike (R)

TU Dresden, Institute of Transport Planning and Road Traffic, Germany.

Thomas Goetschi (T)

School of Planning, Public Policy & Management (PPPM), University of Oregon, Eugene, USA.

Mark Nieuwenhuijsen (M)

Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), Barcelona, Spain; CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain; Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain.

Juan Pablo Orjuela (J)

Transport Studies Unit (TSU), School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, United Kingdom.

Luc Int Panis (L)

Centre for Environmental Sciences, Hasselt University, Hasselt, Belgium; Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), Mol, Belgium.

Arnout Standaert (A)

Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), Mol, Belgium.

Audrey de Nazelle (A)

Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, Imperial College London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: anazelle@imperial.ac.uk.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH