Area of residence as a predictor of perceived exposure to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill among reproductive-aged women

People who live nearer the coast are likely to be more directly exposed to oil spills, but behavior may be more related to perceived rather than direct exposure.  We interviewed 558 women about the physical, social, and economic effects of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill.  Current parish and ZIP code of residence were categorized as coastal or not.  Chi-square tests and logistic regression were used to examine whether area of residence predicted exposure to and changes due to the oil spill, along with age, race, marital status, education, pregnancy, and BMI. Overall, area of residence was the strongest predictor of reported oil spill exposure and changes due to the spill; the exception was that age was a stronger predictor of property and income loss, as well as some behavior changes.  Women who lived in coastal areas were more likely to report direct effects [e.g., working on the cleanup, coming into contact with oil, or damage to areas they fished (all p<0.05)], but were less likely to report that the oil spill had changed their plans (aOR 0.40, 95% CI 0.17-0.93); caused them to consider moving (0.36, 0.14-0.94); or that they were worried about becoming sick from pollutants (0.44, 0.27-0.72).  Women in non-coastal ZIP codes were more likely to report that the damage would be permanent (1.69, 1.09- 2.63).  There were no differences by area of residence in terms of avoiding seafood or the coast, or having made changes in plans for family or work.  Area of residence is a strong predictor of exposure to the oil spill, but has less effect on decisions made as a consequence.  If anything, women in coastal areas perceived less long-term risk from the spill than women living further away.