Knowledge and attitude of infantry soldiers to hearing conservation.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined British infantry soldiers' knowledge of hearing conservation and explored the various factors that influenced their behavior. METHOD: This followed qualitative methodology. Data were collected through focus group discussion and semistructured interviews. Twenty-three soldiers from a typical infantry unit were involved in this study. Data analysis involved both question and content analysis. Validity of the research instrument and reliability were ensured. RESULTS: All of the soldiers felt their hearing could be affected by their job. Even though many were not aware of the presence of a hearing conservation policy, they knew about specific aspects of the policy. A number of factors prevented the proper use of the personal hearing protection devices even though they were aware of their effectiveness in the reduction of noise hazard. These included communication difficulties, discomfort, and the impracticability of using them in certain circumstances. There was also a suggestion of a preponderance of noise-induced hearing loss on the left, which is the side often left unprotected to aid communication. Suggestions were put forward on ways of improving the hearing conservation program. CONCLUSION: An effective Army hearing conservation program should be comprehensive. It should incorporate appropriate knowledge, sociological issues, and economic considerations such as choice making and opportunity cost. There should be a well-structured hearing education program with targeted and appropriate behavioral modification. It should be compulsory and include lectures and videos given at least once a year. Improvements are required to increase the proper use of personal hearing protection devices and thus reduce the morbidity associated with noise-induced hearing loss.

Seatbelt use among military personnel during operational deployment.

OBJECTIVE: This study analyzed the wearing of seatbelts among British Forces personnel in Iraq and explored the various factors that prevented their use. METHODS: Questionnaires were administered to 237 British Forces personnel in southern Iraq from December 2003 to January 2004. Data analysis was by percentages. RESULTS: A total of 78% of respondents knew the seatbelt regulations (i.e., to wear seatbelts always). Respondents perceived the biggest threats to driving to be bad roads, speeding, security dangers, and Iraqi drivers. Seatbelt usage by drivers was 52% always, 25% sometimes, and 22% never. This was similar to usage by front seat passengers (52%, 27%, and 21%, respectively). The main reasons for not wearing seatbelts for drivers and front seat passengers were inhibition of exit and weapons. A total of 66% of back seat passengers in Land Rovers never wore seatbelts. CONCLUSIONS: The wearing of seatbelts is mandatory. The Ministry of Defence seatbelt policy is clear and is understood by most service personnel. However, this study shows a disparity between awareness regarding the mandatory use of seatbelts and actual use. Soldiers perceive the use of seatbelts as restrictive in a hostile environment. More effective education is needed and should emphasize the importance of seatbelt usage even in hostile areas such as Iraq.