Noise or sound management in the neonatal intensive care unit for preterm or very low birth weight infants.

BACKGROUND: Infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) are subjected to different types of stress, including sounds of high intensity. The sound levels in NICUs often exceed the maximum acceptable level recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics, which is 45 decibels (dB). Hearing impairment is diagnosed in 2% to 10% of preterm infants compared to only 0.1% of the general paediatric population. Bringing sound levels under 45 dB can be achieved by lowering the sound levels in an entire unit; by treating the infant in a section of a NICU, in a 'private' room, or in incubators in which the sound levels are controlled; or by reducing sound levels at the individual level using earmuffs or earplugs. By lowering sound levels, the resulting stress can be diminished, thereby promoting growth and reducing adverse neonatal outcomes. This review is an update of one originally published in 2015 and first updated in 2020. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of sound reduction on the growth and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes of neonates. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. On 21 and 22 August 2023, a Cochrane Information Specialist searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, two other databases, two trials registers, and grey literature via Google Scholar and conference abstracts from Pediatric Academic Societies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs in preterm infants (less than 32 weeks' postmenstrual age (PMA) or less than 1500 g birth weight) cared for in the resuscitation area, during transport, or once admitted to a NICU or stepdown unit. We specified three types of intervention: 1) intervention at the unit level (i.e. the entire neonatal department), 2) at the section or room level, or 3) at the individual level (e.g. hearing protection). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standardised review methods of Cochrane Neonatal to assess the risk of bias in the studies. We used the risk ratio (RR) and risk difference (RD), with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), for dichotomous data. We used the mean difference (MD) for continuous data. Our primary outcome was major neurodevelopmental disability. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included one RCT, which enroled 34 newborn infants randomised to the use of silicone earplugs versus no earplugs for hearing protection. It was a single-centre study conducted at the University of Texas Medical School in Houston, Texas, USA. Earplugs were positioned at the time of randomisation and worn continuously until the infants were 35 weeks' postmenstrual age (PMA) or discharged (whichever came first). Newborns in the control group received standard care. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of silicone earplugs on the following outcomes. • Cerebral palsy (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.15 to 61.74)and Mental Developmental Index (MDI) (Bayley II) at 18 to 22 months' corrected age (MD 14.00, 95% CI 3.13 to 24.87); no other indicators of major neurodevelopmental disability were reported. • Normal auditory functioning at discharge (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.94) • All-cause mortality during hospital stay (RR 2.07, 95% CI 0.64 to 6.70; RD 0.20, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.50) • Weight (kg) at 18 to 22 months' corrected age (MD 0.31, 95% CI -1.53 to 2.16) • Height (cm) at 18 to 22 months' corrected age (MD 2.70, 95% CI -3.13 to 8.53) • Days of assisted ventilation (MD -1.44, 95% CI -23.29 to 20.41) • Days of initial hospitalisation (MD 1.36, 95% CI -31.03 to 33.75) For all outcomes, we judged the certainty of evidence as very low. We identified one ongoing RCT that will compare the effects of reduced noise levels and cycled light on visual and neural development in preterm infants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No studies evaluated interventions to reduce sound levels below 45 dB across the whole neonatal unit or in a room within it. We found only one study that evaluated the benefits of sound reduction in the neonatal intensive care unit for hearing protection in preterm infants. The study compared the use of silicone earplugs versus no earplugs in newborns of very low birth weight (less than 1500 g). Considering the very small sample size, imprecise results, and high risk of attrition bias, the evidence based on this research is very uncertain and no conclusions can be drawn. As there is a lack of evidence to inform healthcare or policy decisions, large, well designed, well conducted, and fully reported RCTs that analyse different aspects of noise reduction in NICUs are needed. They should report both short- and long-term outcomes.

Hearing protection field attenuation estimation systems and associated training for reducing workers' exposure to noise.

BACKGROUND: Global Burden of Disease studies identify hearing loss as the third leading cause of years lived with a disability. Their estimates point to large societal and individual costs from unaddressed hearing difficulties. Workplace noise is an important modifiable risk factor; if addressed, it could significantly reduce the global burden of disease. In practice, providing hearing protection devices (HPDs) is the most common intervention to reduce noise exposure at work. However, lack of fit of HPDs, especially earplugs, can greatly limit their effectiveness. This may be the case for 40% of users. Testing the fit and providing instructions to improve noise attenuation might be effective. In the past two decades, hearing protection fit-test systems have been developed and evaluated in the field. They are called field attenuation estimation systems. They measure the noise attenuation obtained by individual workers using HPDs. If there is a lack of fit, instruction for better fit is provided, and may lead to better noise attenuation obtained by HPDs. OBJECTIVES: To assess: (1) the effects of field attenuation estimation systems and associated training on the noise attenuation obtained by HPDs compared to no instruction or to less instruction in workers exposed to noise; and (2) whether these interventions promote adherence to HPD use. SEARCH METHODS: We used CENTRAL, MEDLINE, five other databases, and two trial registers, together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify studies. We imposed no language or date restrictions. The latest search date was February 2024. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs, controlled before-after studies (CBAs), and interrupted time-series studies (ITSs) exploring HPD fit testing in workers exposed to noise levels of more than 80 A-weighted decibels (or dBA) who use hearing protection devices. The unit 'dBA' reports on the use of a frequency-weighting filter to adjust sound measurement results to better reflect how human ears process sound. The outcome noise attenuation had to be measured either as a personal attenuation rating (PAR), PAR pass rate, or both. PAR pass rate is the percentage of workers who passed a pre-established level of sufficient attenuation from their HPDs, identified on the basis of their individual noise exposure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and extracted data. We categorised interventions as fit testing of HPDs with instructions at different levels (no instructions, simple instructions, and extensive instructions). MAIN RESULTS: We included three RCTs (756 participants). We did not find any studies that examined whether fit testing and training contributed to hearing protector use, nor any studies that examined whether age, gender, or HPD experience influenced attenuation. We would have included any adverse effects if mentioned by the trial authors, but none reported them. None of the included studies blinded participants; two studies blinded those who delivered the intervention. Effects of fit testing of HPDs with instructions (simple or extensive) versus fit testing of HPDs without instructions Testing the fit of foam and premoulded earplugs accompanied by simple instructions probably does not improve their noise attenuation in the short term after the test (1-month follow-up: mean difference (MD) 1.62 decibels (dB), 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.93 to 4.17; 1 study, 209 participants; 4-month follow-up: MD 0.40 dB, 95% CI -2.28 to 3.08; 1 study, 197 participants; both moderate-certainty evidence). The intervention probably does not improve noise attenuation in the long term (MD 0.15 dB, 95% CI -3.44 to 3.74; 1 study, 103 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Fit testing of premoulded earplugs with extensive instructions on the fit of the earplugs may improve their noise attenuation at the immediate retest when compared to fit testing without instructions (MD 8.34 dB, 95% CI 7.32 to 9.36; 1 study, 100 participants; low-certainty evidence). Effects of fit testing of HPDs with extensive instructions versus fit testing of HPDs with simple instructions Fit testing of foam earplugs with extensive instructions probably improves their attenuation (MD 8.62 dB, 95% CI 6.31 to 10.93; 1 study, 321 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and also the pass rate of sufficient attenuation (risk ratio (RR) 1.75, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.11; 1 study, 321 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) when compared to fit testing with simple instructions immediately after the test. This is significant because every 3 dB decrease in noise exposure level halves the sound energy entering the ear. No RCTs reported on the long-term effectiveness of the HPD fit testing with extensive instructions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: HPD fit testing accompanied by simple instructions probably does not improve noise attenuation from foam and premoulded earplugs. Testing the fit of foam and premoulded earplugs with extensive instructions probably improves attenuation and PAR pass rate immediately after the test. The effects of fit testing associated with training to improve attenuation may vary with types of HPDs and training methods. Better-designed trials with larger sample sizes are required to increase the certainty of the evidence.

The influencing factors of hearing protection device usage among noise-exposed workers in Guangdong Province: a structural equation modeling-based survey.

BACKGROUND: There are numerous complex barriers and facilitators to continuously wearing hearing protection devices (HPDs) for noise-exposed workers. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the relationship between HPD wearing behavior and hearing protection knowledge and attitude, HPD wearing comfort, and work-related factors. METHOD: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 524 noise-exposed workers in manufacturing enterprises in Guangdong Province, China. Data were collected on hearing protection knowledge and attitudes, HPD wearing comfort and behavior, and work-related factors through a questionnaire. Using structural equation modeling (SEM), we tested the association among the study variables. RESULTS: Among the total workers, 69.47% wore HPD continuously, and the attitudes of hearing protection (26.17 ± 2.958) and total HPD wearing comfort (60.13 ± 8.924) were satisfactory, while hearing protection knowledge (3.54 ± 1.552) was not enough. SEM revealed that hearing protection knowledge had direct effects on attitudes (ß = 0.333, p < 0.01) and HPD wearing behavior (ß = 0.239, p < 0.01), and the direct effect of total HPD wearing comfort on behavior was ß = 0.157 (p < 0.01). The direct effect also existed between work shifts and behavior (ß=-0.107, p < 0.05). Indirect relationships mainly existed between other work-related factors, hearing protection attitudes, and HPD wearing behavior through knowledge. Meanwhile, work operation had a direct and negative effect on attitudes (ß=-0.146, p < 0.05), and it can also indirectly and positively affect attitudes through knowledge (ß = 0.08, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The behavior of wearing HPD was influenced by hearing protection knowledge, comfort in wearing HPD, and work-related factors. The results showed that to improve the compliance of noise-exposed workers wearing HPD continuously when exposed to noise, the HPD wearing comfort and work-related factors must be taken into consideration. In addition, we evaluated HPD wearing comfort in physical and functional dimensions, and this study initially verified the availability of the questionnaire scale of HPD wearing comfort.

An acoustical environment survey of student music practice.

Chronic exposure to loud sound leads to noise-induced hearing loss. This is especially common in collegiate-level musicians. Existing methods for estimating exposure typically do not consider genre- or instrument-specific variability in soundscape/spectral characteristics. We measured sound exposure levels (SELs) across instruments, bands, and genres at a university music school. We found (1) considerable variability in SELs across instruments and bands, (2) that Jazz musicians are consistently exposed to the highest sound levels, and (3) that spectral features of music differ between instrument type and genre, and based on room size. These findings highlight the need for tailored guidelines that moderate the implementation of hearing conservation initiatives for collegiate musicians.

Face the (unamplified) music: Key findings for musicians.

Music is complex. There are risks to hearing health associated with playing due to excessive sound exposure. Face the Music is an on-going cross-sectional project to assess the risks to unamplified classical musicians. Key findings over the first fifteen years are presented based on the research undertaken with a leading conservatoire on more than 5000 classical music students. The work covers hearing health surveillance, education and awareness, sound exposure, and new technology. The future of the research programme is discussed along with opportunities in objective hearing health assessment and new acoustic solutions. A lot has changed in fifteen years, but the research was driven by a change in United Kingdom legislation. It is hoped that the research results can inform future regulation.

Advancing noise management in aviation: Strategic approaches for preventing noise-induced hearing loss.

As urbanization and population growth escalate, the challenge of noise pollution intensifies, particularly within the aviation industry. This review examines current insights into noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) in aviation, highlighting the risks to pilots, cabin crew, aircraft maintenance engineers, and ground staff from continuous exposure to high-level noise. It evaluates existing noise management and hearing conservation strategies, identifying key obstacles and exploring new technological solutions. While progress in developing protective devices and noise control technologies is evident, gaps in their widespread implementation persist. The study underscores the need for an integrated strategy combining regulatory compliance, technological advances, and targeted educational efforts. It advocates for global collaboration and policy development to safeguard the auditory health of aviation workers and proposes a strategic framework to enhance hearing conservation practices within the unique challenges of the aviation sector.

Quantification of suppressor effects on breech and action noise from AR-15 pattern firearms and its implications for the protection of human hearing.

Noise from firearms is well known to be harmful to human hearing. This problem has been addressed by various military units through the use of muzzle suppressors. However, as suppressor technology has advanced, shooters report hearing the mechanical action of gas-operated semi-automatic rifles (ArmaLite Rifle Model 15 style aka AR-15) as being louder than the suppressed muzzle noise. This study aims to evaluate if harmful noise is present in the shooter's ear, even when impulse noise emanating from the muzzle is suppressed. To characterize the impulse noise of the firearm action caused by the reciprocation of the bolt carrier group (BCG) and subsequent impact when it returns to battery (the forward locked position), the muzzle of a rifle was placed through a constructed plywood wall, and the noise of the action/breech was measured independently from the muzzle noise. This research finds that the impact of the BCG returning to battery (132 dBZ) has the potential to be harmful to the shooter's hearing even when the noise from the muzzle is effectively suppressed.

Measuring earplug noise attenuation: A comparison of laboratory and field methods.

Hearing protection device (HPD) fit-testing is a recommended best practice for hearing conservation programs as it yields a metric of the amount of attenuation an individual achieves with an HPD. This metric, the personal attenuation rating (PAR), provides hearing health care, safety, and occupational health personnel the data needed to select the optimal hearing protection for the occupational environment in which the HPD will be worn. Although commercial-off-the-shelf equipment allows the professional to complete HPD fit tests in the field, a standard test methodology does not exist across HPD fit-test systems. The purpose of this study was to compare the amount of attenuation obtained using the "gold standard" laboratory test (i.e., real-ear attenuation at threshold [REAT]) and three commercially available HPD fit-test systems (i.e., Benson Computer Controlled Fit Test System [CCF-200] with narrowband noise stimuli, Benson CCF-200 with pure tone stimuli, and Michael and Associates FitCheck Solo). A total of 57 adults, aged 18 to 63, were enrolled in the study and tested up to seven earplugs each across all fit-test systems. Once fitted by a trained member of the research team, earplugs remained in the ear throughout testing across test systems. Results revealed a statistically significant difference in measured group noise attenuation between the laboratory and field HPD fit-test systems (p < .0001). The mean attenuation was statistically significantly different (Benson CCF-200 narrowband noise was +3.1 dB, Benson CCF-200 pure tone was +2.1 dB, and Michael and Associates FitCheck Solo was +2.5 dB) from the control laboratory method. However, the mean attenuation values across the three experimental HPD fit-test systems did not reach statistical significance and were within 1.0 dB of one another. These findings imply consistency across the evaluated HPD fit-test systems and agree with the control REAT test method. Therefore, the use of each is acceptable for obtaining individual PARs outside of a laboratory environment.

Noise-Induced Hearing Loss and Use of Hearing Protection Awareness among Medical Students in Saudi Arabia: Mixed Qualitative and Quantitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Noise-Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) is a prevalent occupational hazard among healthcare professionals, including medical students. Despite its detrimental effects, the awareness and utilization of hearing protection measures among medical students in Saudi Arabia remain understudied. OBJECTIVE: Is to determine the level of awareness and understanding of NIHL among medical students in Saudi Arabia, as well as their knowledge and usage of hearing protection measures and to identify potential barriers and facilitators for hearing protection utilization. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was employed, involving a questionnaire survey and semi-structured interviews. The survey collected data on demographics, knowledge of NIHL, and hearing protection practices among medical students. Subsequently, a semi-structured interview was conducted to obtain in-depth insights into the students' experiences, attitudes, and beliefs regarding NIHL and the use of hearing protection. RESULTS: The level about NIHL was 59.32%. Better access to information is associated with increased odds of awareness (odds ratio=3.07, p=0.012). Having relatives with hearing loss increases the odds of awareness (odds ratio =2.49, p=0.034). Individuals with hearing loss or impairment have higher odds of awareness (odds ratio =2.27, p=0.046). Ear Pain, temporary hearing loss, tinnitus, or ringing in the ear: These factors are not significantly associated with awareness of noise-induced hearing loss (p>0.05). Using hearing aids is strongly associated with increased odds of awareness (odds ratio =3.94, p=0.006).The quantitative analysis provided statistical information on the prevalence rates and factors influencing hearing protection usage, while the qualitative analysis uncover nuanced perspectives and experiences. CONCLUSION: This research will contribute to the understanding of NIHL and hearing protection practices among medical students in Saudi Arabia. Improving hearing protection awareness and practices among medical students can ultimately reduce the incidence of NIHL and promote a healthier work environment within the healthcare sector.

[A study on the hearing protection and intervention effects of silicone earplug usage among manufacturing workers].

Objective: To assess the efficacy of silicone earplugs in protecting workers exposed to noise in a typical manufacturing environment, and to provide training interventions for workers who do not achieve the anticipated noise reduction levels, as well as examining the spectral characteristics of earplug attenuation. Methods: From June to August 2022, a total of 294 noise-exposed workers in two manufacturing enterprises equipped with the same type of earplug were studied by cluster sampling method, by conducting questionnaire surveys, collecting data, fitting tests, and providing trainings, the current noise exposure levels of workers in the industry as well as the perception about the earplug were understood. Additionally, the attenuation before and after intervention in workplace were measured, the spectral characteristics of noise reduction were were described and compared. Results: The percentage of workers with Personal Attenuation Rating (PAR) of 0 is 32.7% (96/294), and the baseline pass rates are all below 60%. There were no significant differences in pass rates based on gender, age, noise exposure, education level, or cognition of earplug effectiveness. After adjusting the way that earplugs are worn or changing the type of earplugs, all workers were able to meet their noise reduction requirements. The median PAR improvement for both companies is above 10 dB. The noise attenuation of the earplug vary with frequency, with lower attenuation at 4 000 Hz and higher attenuation at 8 000 Hz, showing some deviation from the nominal values. Conclusion: The difference between the actual sound attenuation value of earplugs and the nominal value is related to the noise frequency. When using silicone earplugs, attention should be paid to the spectral composition of the noise in the workplace.

[Study on the fit testing for the workers wearing hearing protection device in machinery manufacturing enterprises].

Objective: To investigate the occupational noise hazards in five machinery manufacturing enterprises, and to evaluate the individual noise reduction values and influencing factors of workers wearing hearing protection device (HPD) by individual fit testing. Methods: From November 2021 to January 2022, 5 machinery manufacturing enterprises in Bao'an District of Shenzhen were selected to conduct an occupational health survey to understand the noise exposure level of workers. The 3MTM E-A-RfitTM fitness test system was used to test the baseline individual sound attenuation value level (PAR) of the daily wear of the ear protecters for 485 workers in typical noise working positions. Workers whose PAR values could not meet the requirements of noise reduction at work were instructed to wear and repeated tests were conducted. PAR results of the workers before and after the intervention were collected and analyzed. Results: The noise workers who received the suitability test were mainly distributed in 24 types of work, the job noise exposure level was 80.2 dB (A) ~ 95.0 dB (A), and the job noise excess rate was 52.5% (138/263). The median baseline PAR [M (Q(1), Q(3)) ] for 485 workers was 6.0 (0.0, 14.0) dB. The baseline PAR of male workers, those with more than 15 years of working experience, those with more than 15 years of using ear guards, those who considered ear guards comfortable to wear, those with college degree or above, and those exposed to noise level 90 dB (A) were higher, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). A total of 275 workers (56.7%) did not pass the baseline PAR test, and there was no statistically significant difference in the intervention rate of workers in different noise groups (P>0.05). PAR in subjects who did not pass baseline after intervention increased from 0.0 (0.0, 3.0) dB to 15.0 (12.0, 18.2) dB. Conclusion: The workplace noise hazard of machinery manufacturing enterprises is serious, and there is a great difference between the baseline PAR and the nominal value of the hearing guard worn by the noise exposed workers. The intervention measures can effectively improve the protective effect of wearing ear protectors.

Safe Listening at Venues and Events with Amplified Music - United States, 2022.

Nearly one in four (24.4%) U.S. adults aged 20-69 years show evidence of noise-induced hearing loss (1). Among those reporting exposure to noise outside of work, 19.9% showed possible noise-induced hearing loss. Exposure to non-job-related noise can be substantial (2). Loud music from personal listening devices and entertainment venues might place more than 1 billion teenagers and young adults at risk for hearing loss worldwide (3). Early noise exposure might increase the risk for age-related hearing loss later in life (4). CDC analyzed data from the 2022 FallStyles survey (conducted by Porter Novelli via the Ipsos' KnowledgePanel) on U.S. adult perceptions regarding preventing hearing loss from amplified music at venues or events. More than one half of U.S. adults agreed with one or more of the following protective actions: limiting sound levels, posting warning signs, and using hearing protection when music at such events reaches potentially hazardous levels. Hearing and other health professionals can make use of existing materials available from the World Health Organization (WHO), CDC, and other professional organizations to raise awareness about noise risks and promote protective behaviors.

Traumatic-noise-induced hair cell death and hearing loss is mediated by activation of CaMKKß.

BACKGROUND: The Ca2+/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase kinases (CaMKKs) are serine/threonine-directed protein kinases that are activated following increases in intracellular calcium, playing a critical role in neuronal signaling. Inner-ear-trauma-induced calcium overload in sensory hair cells has been well documented in the pathogenesis of traumatic noise-induced hair cell death and hearing loss, but there are no established pharmaceutical therapies available due to a lack of specific therapeutic targets. In this study, we investigated the activation of CaMKKß in the inner ear after traumatic noise exposure and assessed the prevention of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) with RNA silencing. RESULTS: Treatment with short hairpin RNA of CaMKKß (shCaMKKß) via adeno-associated virus transduction significantly knocked down CaMKKß expression in the inner ear. Knockdown of CaMKKß significantly attenuated noise-induced hair cell loss and hearing loss (NIHL). Additionally, pretreatment with naked CaMKKß small interfering RNA (siCaMKKß) attenuated noise-induced losses of inner hair cell synapses and OHCs and NIHL. Furthermore, traumatic noise exposure activates CaMKKß in OHCs as demonstrated by immunolabeling for p-CaMKI. CaMKKß mRNA assessed by fluorescence in-situ hybridization and immunolabeling for CaMKKß in OHCs also increased after the exposure. Finally, pretreatment with siCaMKKß diminished noise-induced activation of AMPKα in OHCs. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that traumatic-noise-induced OHC loss and hearing loss occur primarily via activation of CaMKKß. Targeting CaMKKß is a key strategy for prevention of noise-induced hearing loss. Furthermore, our data suggest that noise-induced activation of AMPKα in OHCs occurs via the CaMKKß pathway.

Noise exposure in pediatric otolaryngology clinic: A sound survey of a single-institution tertiary care facility.

BACKGROUND: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) considers acoustic exposure of 90 decibels (dB) an occupational risk for noise-induced hearing loss. Pediatric healthcare clinicians are exposed to considerable noise especially during invasive procedures, predisposing them to noise-induced hearing loss, increased work-related stress, and increased complications associated with intense noise exposure. While there has been extensive research in noise exposure in dentistry, to date there has been no research on noise exposure in the pediatric otolaryngology clinic setting. The objective of this study is to quantify the degree of noise exposure that pediatric otolaryngologists encounter in the clinical setting. METHODS: A sound survey was performed of 420 pediatric otolaryngology clinic visits within a single-institution tertiary care facility from January 2022 to March 2022, with a total of 409 visits included. At each visit, noise was measured using a calibrated National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Sound Meter application, an iPad, and a microphone. The Equivalent Continuous Sound Pressure Level (LAeq), peak sound pressure level (SPL), C-weighted peak noise level (LCpeak), and the 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) sound level were recorded. RESULTS: The average LAeq was 61.1 dB, the median LAeq was 60.3 dB, and the average peak SPL was 80.5 dB. Only 0.5 % of visits reached an LAeq above 80 dB, however, 51 % were above 60 dB and 99 % were above 45 dB. No clinicians were exposed to noise exceeding established limits of safety. Patients younger than ten years old (p < 0.001) and those who underwent procedures such as cerumen removal (p < 0.001) elicited higher ranges of elevated noise. Multivariate analysis confirmed that increased age decreased acoustic exposure while procedures increased acoustic exposure. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that pediatric otolaryngology clinicians do not exceed hazardous noise limit exposure. However, they are exposed to levels above those which have been linked to stress, poor productivity, and stress-related disorders. This analysis also reports that patients who are younger and those that undergo procedures, specifically cerumen removal, tend to expose their providers to the highest levels of noise. This is the first study examining noise exposure in pediatric otolaryngology, and further research should evaluate the risks of noise exposure in this environment.

The relationship between hearing status, listening effort, and the need for recovery in employees of a manufacturing company.

OBJECTIVE: Hearing screening can be used to detect hearing loss, but its value for identifying employees with work functioning difficulties is unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the association between the hearing status measured with an occupational hearing-in-noise screening test, Listening Effort (LE), and Need For Recovery (NFR) in employees of a manufacturing company, and to examine whether these associations depend on the perceived noise level at the workplace. METHODS: Employees of coatings and paints manufacturing company were included. Their hearing status was assessed with an occupational hearing-in-noise screening test. An online survey was used to assess their LE, NFR, and the perceived noise level at the workplace. Responses from 143 employees were analyzed (mean age = 53 years) using hierarchical multiple regression analysis with the outcomes LE and NFR. RESULTS: Regression analysis-with adjustments for gender, age, educational level, health status, pace/amount of work, job variety, and work pleasure-revealed that hearing status was significantly associated with LE, but the interaction between hearing status and the perceived noise level was not. Hearing status nor the interaction between hearing status and the perceived noise level was significantly associated with NFR. CONCLUSION: The results confirm that poorer hearing is associated with higher LE, but not with higher NFR. These associations were unrelated to the perceived noise level at the workplace. Therefore, the value of occupational hearing screening appears to be early identification of hearing loss in employees, but not identification of work functioning difficulties.

Noise-induced hearing disorders: Clinical and investigational tools.

A series of articles discussing advanced diagnostics that can be used to assess noise injury and associated noise-induced hearing disorders (NIHD) was developed under the umbrella of the United States Department of Defense Hearing Center of Excellence Pharmaceutical Interventions for Hearing Loss working group. The overarching goals of the current series were to provide insight into (1) well-established and more recently developed metrics that are sensitive for detection of cochlear pathology or diagnosis of NIHD, and (2) the tools that are available for characterizing individual noise hazard as personal exposure will vary based on distance to the sound source and placement of hearing protection devices. In addition to discussing the utility of advanced diagnostics in patient care settings, the current articles discuss the selection of outcomes and end points that can be considered for use in clinical trials investigating hearing loss prevention and hearing rehabilitation.

D-methionine administered as late as 36 hours post-noise exposure rescues from permanent threshold shift and dose-dependently increases serum antioxidant levels.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate D-methionine's (D-met) dose and time rescue parameters from steady-state or impulse noise-induced permanent threshold shift (PTS) and determine D-met rescue's influence on serum and cochlear antioxidant levels. DESIGN: Five D-met doses at 0, 50, 100, or 200 mg/kg/dose administered starting at 1, 24, or 36 hours post steady-state or impulse noise exposure. Auditory brainstem responses at baseline and 21 days post-noise measured PTS. Serum (superoxide dismutase [SOD], catalase [CAT],, glutathione reductaseand glutathione peroxidase [GPx]) and cochlear (Glutathione [GSH] and glutathione disulphide [GSSG]) antioxidant levels measured physiological impact. STUDY SAMPLE: Chinchillas (10/study group; 6-8/confirmatory groups). RESULTS: D-met significantly reduced PTS for impulse noise (100 mg [2, 6, 14 and 20 kHz]; 200 mg [2, 14 and 20 kHz]) and steady-state noise (all dosing groups, time parameters and tested frequencies). PTS reduction did not significantly vary by rescue time. D-met significantly increased serum SOD (100 and 200 mg for 24 hour rescue) and GPx (50 mg/kg at 24 hour rescue) at 21 days post-noise. Cochlear GSH and GSSG levels were unaffected relative to control. CONCLUSION: D-met rescues from steady-state and impulse noise-induced PTS even when administered up to 36 hours post-noise and dose-dependently influences serum antioxidant levels even 21 days post-noise. D-met's broad and effective dose/time window renders it a promising antioxidant rescue agent.

Evaluation of hearing protection device effectiveness for musicians.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate musicians' personal attenuation and perceptions of three types of hearing protection devices (HPDs): formable foam earplugs and both non-custom and custom versions of uniform attenuation earplugs (UAEs) marketed to musicians. DESIGN: A mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate the HPDs. Audiometric testing obtained hearing levels at baseline and with each HPD across frequencies (125-8000 Hz) to determine personal attenuation ratings and uniformity of attenuation. Participants completed surveys over six months regarding how often they used the HPDs and their perceptions about wearing them. STUDY SAMPLE: Twenty-four musicians were recruited to participate. RESULTS: Substantial variability was observed in the attenuation achieved among participants for each HPD type, but custom UAEs provided the most consistent attenuation across frequencies. Participants' HPD preferences were influenced by multiple factors including personal instrument and specific activity. Custom UAEs were most frequently used but usage rates continually decreased over the 6-month period. CONCLUSIONS: Fit-testing is important to determine fit and sizing. Combining information on the effectiveness of HPDs with musicians' opinions about wearing them can inform recommendations for which types may be the most effective and feasible options for reducing sound exposures.

The association of sociodemographic factors and risk behavior with unsafe use of personal listening devices in adolescents.

Many young people are potentially at risk of noise-induced hearing loss due to unsafe use of personal listening devices. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to examine the association of sociodemographic factors and risk behavior with unsafe use of personal listening devices in adolescents to identify a target group for prevention. A smartphone application was developed to objectively measure music listening habits among 314 adolescents with a mean age of 13 years and 7 months (SD ±5 months). Listening habits were characterized as safe or unsafe based on the weekly noise dose. Data on sociodemographic factors and traditional health risk behaviors were obtained by questionnaires. Within the study group, 10.5% of the participants exceeded the 50%, and 4.8% the 100% recommended weekly noise dose. Adolescents with a lower socioeconomic status were more likely to engage in unsafe listening habits as compared to adolescents with a higher socioeconomic status. Additionally, risk behavior was associated with higher odds of having unsafe listening habits as compared to no risk behavior. Age, sex and educational levels were not significantly associated with unsafe listening habits. The findings of the present study indicate that interventions to promote safe listening habits should target adolescents with a lower socioeconomic status and higher risk behavior. Future research is needed to investigate how these adolescents can be motivated to adopt safe listening habits.

Design and testing of a personalized noise monitoring system.

Agricultural workers are more prone to noise-induced hearing loss than are many other workers. Hearing protection device use among agricultural workers is low, but training can increase hearing protection device use. This work proposes a system designed to automatically inform agricultural workers when they were exposed to noises that exceed the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommended exposure level. The smartphone-based system worn on the arm uses a noise dosimeter to measure noise exposures throughout the day to within ±2 A-weighted decibels of a Class 2 sound level meter. The device collects location and audio data, which are transferred to a server and presented to the worker on a locally hosted website. The website details noise exposure and helps the worker identify where exposure occurred and what specific tasks exceed NIOSH's recommended exposure limit, putting them at higher risk of noise-induced hearing loss. With this understanding, the worker is expected to adopt behavior changes and better hearing protection use at critical places and times. This pilot study evaluates the accuracy of the noise dosimeter and GPS relative to gold-standard instruments. The system was tested on a farm with outputs compared with gold-standard instruments. A-weighted, 1-sec averaged sound pressure levels and position data were collected while users were performing a variety of tasks indoors and outdoors. The smartphone's external noise dosimeter read within ±2 A-weighted decibels of the Class 2 reference dosimeter 59% of the time. The positioning devices had an average error of sub-4 m. While not perfectly matching gold-standard instruments, the device is capable of identifying and collecting information relative to loud noise events that promote noise-induced hearing loss.