IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v22y2025i5p803-d1660544.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness of Strategies Addressing Environmental Noise: A Systematic Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Nick Verhaeghe

    (Department of Public Health, Interuniversity Centre for Health Economics Research (i-CHER), Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Jette, Belgium
    Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Interuniversity Centre for Health Economics Research (i-CHER), Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)

  • Bo Vandenbulcke

    (Department of Public Health, Interuniversity Centre for Health Economics Research (i-CHER), Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Jette, Belgium)

  • Max Lelie

    (Department of Public Health, Interuniversity Centre for Health Economics Research (i-CHER), Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Jette, Belgium)

  • Lieven Annemans

    (Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Interuniversity Centre for Health Economics Research (i-CHER), Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)

  • Steven Simoens

    (Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, ON2 Herestraat 49-Box 424, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Koen Putman

    (Department of Public Health, Interuniversity Centre for Health Economics Research (i-CHER), Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 103, 1090 Jette, Belgium
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Environmental noise, a significant public health concern, is associated with adverse health effects, including cardiovascular diseases, cognitive impairments, and psychological distress. Noise reduction strategies are essential for mitigating these effects. Despite evidence of their health benefits, limited information exists on the cost-effectiveness of such strategies to guide resource allocation. This study systematically reviewed economic evaluation studies of interventions aimed at reducing environmental noise to assess their cost-effectiveness and inform policymaking. A systematic review following PRISMA 2020 guidelines was conducted across MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Eligible studies were full economic evaluations addressing environmental noise reduction strategies, assessing both costs and health effects. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Quality appraisal employed the CHEERS 2022 checklist. Narrative synthesis was used to analyze findings due to heterogeneity in study designs, methodologies, and outcomes. Costs were standardized to 2024 euros. From 2906 identified records, five studies met the inclusion criteria, primarily focused on traffic-related noise. Three studies conducted cost-utility analyses, and two employed cost–benefit analyses. Reported interventions included sound insulation, take-off trajectory adjustments, and noise barriers. Economic evaluations varied significantly in methodologies, cost categories, and health outcomes. The health economic studies yielded mixed results, ranging from findings that demonstrated cost-effectiveness to those where the costs exceeded the benefits. There are currently too few health economic evaluations to draw robust conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of environmental noise mitigation strategies. Future research should adopt standardized approaches and robust sensitivity analyses to enhance evidence quality, enabling informed policy and resource allocation decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Nick Verhaeghe & Bo Vandenbulcke & Max Lelie & Lieven Annemans & Steven Simoens & Koen Putman, 2025. "Cost-Effectiveness of Strategies Addressing Environmental Noise: A Systematic Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 22(5), pages 1-15, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:22:y:2025:i:5:p:803-:d:1660544
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/5/803/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/5/803/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:22:y:2025:i:5:p:803-:d:1660544. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.