1. Background
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of death and a major cause of hospital admission around the world. In the United States (US), it has been reported that about 610,000 deaths, 70.7 million outpatient physician office visits, and 4.5 million emergency department (ED) visits are attributable to CVD every year [
1]. The estimated health care costs and the value of lost productivity due to CVD is more than
$400 billion per year [
2,
3].
Older adults tend to be the most vulnerable population to CVD, with about two-thirds of CVD deaths occurring among the elderly population [
4]. In New York State (NYS), an annual official report indicated that the main significant increase in CVD mortality starts at age 65 and older [
5]. Therefore, the risk of CVD among older adults is an important public health concern.
Older adults are also more susceptible to heat stress because they are more likely to have chronic medical conditions that alter the normal body response to heat. In addition, older adults are more likely to take prescription medicines that affect the body’s ability to control its temperature or sweat [
6]. A study examining the association between temperature and mortality in the US found that older adults are particularly vulnerable to heat-related death because of their impaired heat-adaption capabilities [
5]. Another study conducted in China estimated that about 17.1% of CVD mortality in 15 megacities could be attributed to the impact of ambient temperature [
7]. Song et al. (2017), in a literature review, indicated that heat exposure was not found to have a major impact on cardiovascular morbidity among the general population [
8]; however, Bunker et al. (2016) reported a significant heat effect on cardiovascular morbidity among the elderly population [
9]. The heat effect on morbidity may be more serious among the elderly population. However, significant gaps remain in our understanding of the association between extreme heat and CVD morbidity, especially ambient heat’s effect on urgent care use such as emergency department (ED) visits, and CVD subtypes among older adults.
The association between extreme heat and public health outcomes is complicated due to several factors, such as the different lag effects of extreme heat on different health outcomes, and possible interactions between exposure to extreme heat and other seasonal, geographic or demographic variables. For example, previous studies have suggested a higher population health risk during transitional months as compared with typical summer and winter [
10], while others have suggested that residents in certain areas (coastal area or mountainous area) [
11], or with certain population characteristics (poor ability to acclimate to heat) [
12], were more vulnerable to environmental hazards than other groups. However, there is a scarcity of information about how these factors potentially modify the association between extremely hot days and CVD ED among older adults.
To address these knowledge gaps, this study aims to: (1) assess the association between extremely hot days and total and specific CVD ED visits among older adults in summer and transitional months in NYS, while considering lag effects; and (2) evaluate whether the association is modified by geographic or demographic variables and disease subtypes.
4. Discussion
We observed significant associations between extremely hot days and ED visits due to CVDs among older adults during summer after controlling for PM
2.5 concentration, relative humidity, and barometric pressure. Our overall results of 2.3% excess odds for elderly ED visits on the 5th day and 1.3% excess odds for elderly ED visits on the 6th day after their exposure to extremely hot days in summer are similar to those of other heat and morbidity studies. For example, Green et al. (2010) found that a 10 °F increase in mean apparent temperature was associated with a 3.5% increase in CVDs hospital admission [
19]. Dawson et al. (2008) detected that a 1 °C (1.8 °F) increase in mean temperature during the preceding 24 hours was associated with a 2.1% increase in ischemic stroke hospital admission [
28]. Giang et al. (2014) performed an analysis of the effect of temperature on CVDs hospital admission among the elderly in Vietnam and found an increased risk of CVDs admissions from lag day 5 to lag day 10 [
29].
While we found positive associations between extremely hot days and ED visits for CVDs in summer, we found non-significant, even protective effects in transitional months. However, this finding is in fact reasonable in light of the biological mechanisms involved in temperature change and CVDs, which other studies have mentioned as well [
19,
20,
22]. When the weather turns warmer in spring, the long-term cold-stress weakens, leading to systemic vasodilation, and blood pressure returns to the normal range. In summer, extreme high temperature may increase plasma viscosity and serum cholesterol levels, which could lead more ischemic heart diseases and cerebrovascular diseases and trigger a sudden rise in blood viscosity and cardiac output, which may cause cardiac dysrhythmias and hypertension [
30]. As the temperatures in both transitional months in NYS were over 10 °F lower than that in the summer, it would be difficult to observe the heat effect in these transitional months. Springtime is a period of relief from cold temperatures, during which warmer temperatures may be better for the cardiovascular system, particularly for older adults.
The positive effect of heat on ischemic heart diseases (IHD) was observed to be acute, with ED visits occurring on the same day of extreme heat. A systematic review of the literature indicated that an immediate elevated risk of myocardial infarction hospitalization was associated with each 1 °C ambient temperature increase (RR: 1.016, 95%CI: 1.004–1.028) [
31], which is consistent with the immediate heat effect on the ischemic heart disease ER visits in our study.
We compared the CVD results from extreme heat days defined by different temperature percentiles (90th, 95th, and 97th percentiles) to determine which indicators are more sensitive to extreme heat. We found that there are no significant differences in odds ratios among these indicators and found that the excess odds for elderly ED visits on the 6th day after exposure to extremely hot days in summer is consistent across these percentiles.
Interestingly, different lag effects were found for various CVD subtypes in this study. Hypertensive heart diseases (HHD) and cardiac dysrhythmias showed delayed effects in summer—at lag day 5 and lag day 6, respectively. These lag effects are consistent with previous studies [
15,
25,
26]. Schwartz et al. (2004) estimated the effects of temperature and humidity on CVD hospital admissions of elderly in 12 US cities, and they found that heat effects on hospital admissions mainly occur within 7 days after exposure [
15]. Guo et al. (2013) found the most pronounced heat effect of temperature (RR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.09–1.39) on IHD mortality in lag days 0–13 compared to the heat effect on lag days 0–2 when they studied ischemic heart disease mortality in five metropolis areas in China [
32]. Wang et al. (2015) used time series analysis to evaluate the extreme heat effect on IHD and HHD mortalities in China [
33]. They found that the deaths of IHD and HHD in Beijing showed high susceptibility to the extremely high temperature in lag days 0–14 in summer (IHD RR: 1.15,95%: 1.05–1.24; HHD RR:1.39, 95%: 1.01–1.92). Lin et al. (2009) performed an analysis of the heat effect on CVD hospital admission in New York City (NYC) and found extreme temperature resulted in increased lagged hospital admissions for CVD at lag day 1 (2.5%), lag day 2 (2.1%) and lag day 3 (3.6%) [
14]. The positive associations found between extremely hot days and lagged CVD sub-category (IHD, HHD, and cardiac dysrhythmias) mortality and mobility from all these prior studies are consistent with our findings.
Some studies have found significant increases in cardiovascular mortality associated with heat in specific demographic and geographic groups, but this kind of effect on morbidity has rarely been assessed. Although neither gender- nor race-specific effect differences were shown in our study, a significantly higher risk of CVD ED visits due to extreme heat was found in Long Island in summer. A study focused on the relationship between heat and CVD hospitalization in NYC showed a similar result. Lin et al. (2009) found a 3.61% increased risk for CVD hospitalization when daily mean temperature was above the heat threshold in NYC. They also found older adults to be one of the most vulnerable groups in the study [
14]. Generally, coastal areas experience lower temperatures than inland regions, so even though the 95th percentile is a low temperature, it may be higher than what the residents are used to. Thus, we see the impact of heat at lower temperatures than in inland populations. Humidity, barometric pressure, and high temperatures together amplify the effect of heat alone. We speculated that the main reason for this is that Long Island had the highest relative humidity and barometric pressure compared to NYC or upstate areas in summer. These two factors, combined with high temperature, could form an unusually humid heat wave, which may impact older adults’ health. One study from California which may support this hypothesis indicated that compared to exposure to dry heat waves in inland areas, humid heat waves in the coastal area made citizens, especially older adults, more uncomfortable [
11]. Additionally, during humid heat wave periods, there will be unprecedented high temperatures during both daytime and nighttime, and with early morning being one of the highest risk times of CVDs, this may compound the risk of older adult heart attacks hospitalization.
Study Strengths and Limitations
This is one of few studies evaluating the association between heat and CVDs among older adults using ED data. Older people are more vulnerable to extreme temperatures, and ED visit data can provide an indication of early and acute heat-related effects. Additional strengths include controlling for personal confounders like age, gender, race, and ethnicity through the case-crossover study design and controlling for other potential confounders such as air pollution and other meteorological factors. Assessing PM
2.5 concentrations as a potential confounder has been shown to both impact CVDs hospitalizations [
34,
35] and to be associated with the temperature distribution. This is the only study that evaluates heat’s impacts on specific CVD types and by summer and transitional months in New York State.
This study has some limitations which we should report. First, the weather data come from stationary monitoring stations, and we assume that all the monitoring values are similar within each weather region. There are a limited number of monitor stations, and this leads to missing data. Violations of this assumption will lead results toward the null, and thus, our results may be underestimated, but this is a limitation across similar studies using weather monitor data [
20]. We minimized this bias by averaging the stations’ monitor values if there is more than one station in that region, or in cases of missing monitor values in certain days. Second, time–activity pattern information is not included in the study. Some unmeasured behavioral factors that may bias our results include air conditioner usage and the time older adults spent outdoors. Even though this information was not available in our current dataset, our study design—case-crossover—which compared cases to themselves during the study period, can minimize this bias, as the older adult’s time–activity patterns are not likely to change considerably during the study period. In addition, our use of ED data may only catch the severe CVDs, as every case invariably ends up in hospitalization data. Finally, we may be only capturing a small percent of IHD events. However, considering that most CVDs would go to urgent care or ED/hospitalization, this implies that ED visit may be a good indicator for CVD recruitment.