Occupational exposure to noise and dust in Swedish soft paper mills and mortality from ischemic heart disease and ischemic stroke: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate whether occupational noise exposure increases the mortality from ischemic heart disease (IHD) and stroke, and if exposure to paper dust modified the risks. METHODS: We studied 6686 workers from soft paper mills, with occupational noise exposure, < 85 dBA, 85-90 dBA and > 90 dBA, and high (> 5 mg/m3) exposure to paper dust. Person-years 1960-2019 were stratified according to gender, age, and calendar-year. Expected numbers of deaths were calculated using the Swedish population as the reference and standardized mortality ratios (SMR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were assessed. RESULTS: SMR for IHD was 1.12 (95% CI 0.88-1.41) for noise < 85 dBA, 1.18 (95% CI 0.90-1.55) for 85-90 dBA, and 1.27 (95% CI 1.10-1.47) among workers exposed > 90 dBA. Joint exposure to high noise exposure and high exposure to paper dust resulted in slightly higher IHD mortality (SMR 1.39, 95% CI 1.15-1.67). SMR for ischemic stroke was 0.90 (95% CI 0.37-2.15) for noise < 85 dBA, 1.08 (95% CI 0.45-2.59) for 85-90 dBA, and 1.48 (95% CI 0.99-2.00) among workers exposed > 90 dBA. High noise exposure and high exposure to paper dust resulted in higher ischemic stroke mortality (SMR 1.83, 95% CI 1.12-2.98). CONCLUSION: Noise levels > 90 dBA was associated with increased IHD mortality. Combined exposures of noise and paper dust may further increase the risks. Our results do not provide support for a causal relationship for ischemic stroke. Residual confounding from smoking has to be considered. Workers need to be protected from occupational noise levels exceeding 90 dBA.

Cancer incidence among workers in soft paper mills: A cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To elucidate whether occupational exposure to soft paper dust increases the incidence of cancer. METHODS: We studied 7988 workers in Swedish soft paper mills from 1960 to 2008, of whom 3233 (2 187 men and 1046 women) had more than 10 years of employment. They were divided into high exposure (>5 mg/m3 for >1 year) or lower exposure to soft paper dust based on a validated job-exposure matrix. They were followed from 1960 to 2019, and person-years at risk were stratified according to gender, age, and calendar-year. The expected numbers of incident tumors were calculated using the Swedish population as the reference, and standardized incidence ratios (SIR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were assessed. RESULTS: Among high-exposure workers with more than 10 years of employment, there was an increased incidence of colon cancer (SIR 1.66, 95% CI 1.20-2.31), small intestine cancer (SIR 3.27, 95% CI 1.36-7.86), and thyroid gland cancer (SIR 2.68, 95% CI 1.11-6.43), as well as lung cancer (SIR 1.56, 95% CI 1.12-2.19). Among the lower-exposed workers there was an increased incidence of connective tissue tumors (sarcomas) (SIR 2.26, 95% CI 1.13-4.51) and pleural mesothelioma (SIR 3.29, 95% CI 1.37-7.91). CONCLUSION: Workers in soft paper mills with high exposure to soft paper dust have an increased incidence of large and small intestine tumors. Whether the increased risk is caused by paper dust exposure or some unknown associated factors is unclear. The increased incidence of pleural mesothelioma is probably linked to asbestos exposure. The reason for increased incidence of sarcomas is unknown.

Characterization of perceived biohazard exposures, personal protective equipment, and training resources among a sample of formal U.S. solid waste workers: A pilot study.

In the United States, the majority of waste workers work with solid waste. In solid waste operations, collection, sorting, and disposal can lead to elevated biohazard exposures (e.g., bioaerosols, bloodborne and other pathogens, human and animal excreta). This cross-sectional pilot study aimed to characterize solid waste worker perception of biohazard exposures, as well as worker preparedness and available resources (e.g., access to personal protective equipment, level of training) to address potential biohazard exposures. Three sites were surveyed: (1) a family-owned, small-scale waste disposal facility, (2) a county-level, recycling-only facility, and (3) an industrial-sized, large-scale facility that contains a hauling and landfill division. Survey items characterized occupational biohazards, resources to mitigate and manage those biohazards, and worker perceptions of biohazard exposures. Descriptive statistics were generated. The majority of workers did not report regularly coming into contact with blood, feces, and bodily fluids (79%). As such, less than one-fifth were extremely concerned about potential illness from biological exposures (19%). Yet, most workers surveyed (71%) reported an accidental laceration/cut that would potentially expose workers to biohazards. This study highlights the need for additional research on knowledge of exposure pathways and perceptions of the severity of exposure among this occupational group.

Fraction of acute work-related injuries attributable to hazardous occupational noise across the USA in 2019.

INTRODUCTION: The contribution of hazardous noise-a ubiquitous exposure in workplaces-to occupational injury risk is often overlooked. In this ecological study, the fraction of US workplace acute injuries resulting in days away from work in 2019 attributable to hazardous occupational noise exposure was estimated. METHODS: Using the NoiseJEM, a job exposure matrix of occupational noise, and 2019 Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics data, the proportion of workers experiencing hazardous occupational noise (≥85 dBA) was estimated for every major US Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) group. Population attributable fractions (PAFs) were calculated for each major SOC group using the relative risk (RR) taken from a published 2017 meta-analysis on this relationship. RESULTS: About 20.3 million workers (13.8%) are exposed to hazardous levels of occupational noise. Nearly 3.4% of acute injuries resulting in days away from work in 2019 (95% CI 2.4% to 4.4%) were attributable to hazardous occupational noise, accounting for roughly 14 794 injuries (95% CI 10 367 to 18 994). The occupations with the highest and the lowest PAFs were production (11.9%) and office and administrative support (0.0%), respectively. DISCUSSION: Hazardous noise exposure at work is an important and modifiable factor associated with a substantial acute occupational injury burden.

Retrospective assessment of the association between noise exposure and nonfatal and fatal injury rates among miners in the United States from 1983 to 2014.

BACKGROUND: Mining is a significant economic force in the United States but has historically had among the highest nonfatal injury rates across all industries. Several factors, including workplace hazards and psychosocial stressors, may increase injury and fatality risk. Mining is one of the noisiest industries; however, the association between injury risk and noise exposure has not been evaluated in this industry. In this ecological study, we assessed the association between noise exposure and nonfatal and fatal occupational injury rates among miners. METHODS: Federal US mining accident, injury, and illness data sets from 1983 to 2014 were combined with federal quarterly mining employment and production reports to quantify annual industry rates of nonfatal injuries and fatalities. An existing job-exposure matrix for occupational noise was used to estimate annual industry time-weighted average (TWA, dBA) exposures. Negative binomial models were used to assess relationships between noise, hearing conservation program (HCP) regulation changes in 2000, year, and mine type with incidence rates of injuries and fatalities. RESULTS: Noise, HCP regulation changes, and mine type were each independently associated with nonfatal injuries and fatalities. In multivariate analysis, each doubling (5 dB increase) of TWA was associated with 1.08 (95% confidence interval: 1.05, 1.11) and 1.48 (1.23, 1.78) times higher rate of nonfatal injuries and fatalities, respectively. HCP regulation changes were associated with 0.61 (0.54, 0.70) and 0.49 (0.34, 0.71) times lower nonfatal injury and fatality rates, respectively. CONCLUSION: Noise may be a significant independent risk factor for injuries and fatalities in mining.

Evaluation of a wearable consumer noise measurement device in a laboratory setting.

Exposure to noise occurs throughout daily life and, depending on the intensity, duration, and context, can lead to hearing loss, disturbed sleep, decreased academic achievement, and other negative health outcomes. Recently, smartwatches that use the device's onboard microphone to measure noise levels were released. This study evaluated the accuracy of these smartwatches in a controlled laboratory setting. For broadband pink noise, a total of 11 441 measurements were collected. The results showed that, on average, the smartwatch reported 3.4 dBA lower than the reference system on average. For the octave-band, a total of 18 449 measurements were collected. The smartwatch measured lower than the reference microphone from the 125 Hz to 1000 Hz octave bands, were somewhat in agreement at 2000 Hz, measured higher sound pressure levels than the reference microphone at 4000 Hz, and then lower at 8000 Hz. Despite not meeting the ANSI criteria for sound level meters, in some cases, these smartwatches still provide a reasonable degree of accuracy and have the potential for use in studies that require the measurement of personal noise exposure over an extended period.

Toward a better understanding of nonoccupational sound exposures and associated health impacts: Methods of the Apple Hearing Study.

Globally, noise exposure from occupational and nonoccupational sources is common, and, as a result, noise-induced hearing loss affects tens of millions of people. Occupational noise exposures have been studied and regulated for decades, but nonoccupational sound exposures are not well understood. The nationwide Apple Hearing Study, launched using the Apple research app in November 2019 (Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA), is characterizing the levels at which participants listen to headphone audio content, as well as their listening habits. This paper describes the methods of the study, which collects data from several types of hearing tests and uses the Apple Watch noise app to measure environmental sound levels and cardiovascular metrics. Participants, all of whom have consented to participate and share their data, have already contributed nearly 300 × 106 h of sound measurements and 200 000 hearing assessments. The preliminary results indicate that environmental sound levels have been higher, on average, than headphone audio, about 10% of the participants have a diagnosed hearing loss, and nearly 20% of the participants have hearing difficulty. The study's analyses will promote understanding of the overall exposures to sound and associated impacts on hearing and cardiovascular health. This study also demonstrates the feasibility of collecting clinically relevant exposure and health data outside of traditional research settings.

Beware the Grizzlyman: A comparison of job- and industry-based noise exposure estimates using manual coding and the NIOSH NIOCCS machine learning algorithm.

Recently, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) released an updated version of the NIOSH Industry and Occupation Computerized Coding System (NIOCCS), which uses supervised machine learning to assign industry and occupational codes based on provided free-text information. However, no efforts have been made to externally verify the quality of assigned industry and job titles when the algorithm is provided with inputs of varying quality. This study sought to evaluate whether the NIOCCS algorithm was sufficiently robust with low-quality inputs and how variable quality could impact subsequent job estimated exposures in a large job-exposure matrix for noise (NoiseJEM). Using free-text industry and job descriptions from >700,000 noise measurements in the NoiseJEM, three files were created and input into NIOCCS: (1) N1, "raw" industries and job titles; (2) N2, "refined" industries and "raw" job titles; and (3) N3, "refined" industries and job titles. Standardized industry and occupation codes were output by NIOCCS. Descriptive statistics of performance metrics (e.g., misclassification/discordance of occupation codes) were evaluated for each input relative to the original NoiseJEM dataset (N0). Across major Standardized Occupational Classifications (SOC), total discordance rates for N1, N2, and N3 compared to N0 were 53.6%, 42.3%, and 5.0%, respectively. The impact of discordance on the major SOC group varied and included both over- and under-estimates of average noise exposure compared to N0. N2 had the most accurate noise exposure estimates (i.e., smallest bias) across major SOC groups compared to N1 and N3. Further refinement of job titles in N3 showed little improvement. Some variation in classification efficacy was seen over time, particularly prior to 1985. Machine learning algorithms can systematically and consistently classify data but are highly dependent on the quality and amount of input data. The greatest benefit for an end-user may come from cleaning industry information before applying this method for job classification. Our results highlight the need for standardized classification methods that remain constant over time.

Feasibility of a daily noise monitoring intervention for prevention of noise-induced hearing loss.

BACKGROUND: Despite the existence of hearing conservation programmes complying with regulatory standards, noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) remains one of the most prevalent occupational diseases. Compulsory daily monitoring of noise exposure has been associated with decreased NIHL risk. We report on the experience of a voluntary daily noise monitoring intervention among noise-exposed workers. METHODS: Workers at three locations of a metals manufacturing company voluntarily used an in-ear noise monitoring device that could record and download, on a daily basis, the noise exposure inside of their hearing protection. We compared the hearing loss rates (in decibels hearing level/year) in these volunteers to controls from the same company matched for job title, age, gender, race, plant location, and baseline hearing level. RESULTS: Over the follow-up period, 110 volunteers for whom controls could be identified monitored daily noise exposures an average of 150 times per year. Noise exposures inside of hearing protection were lower than ambient noise levels estimated from company records. While there was no significant difference in hearing loss rates between volunteers and controls, volunteers downloading exposures 150 times per year or had less hearing loss than those who downloaded less frequently. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that voluntary daily noise exposure monitoring by workers is feasible and that greater frequency of downloading is associated with less hearing loss. If further development of noise monitoring technology can improve usability and address barriers to daily use, regular self-monitoring of noise exposure could improve the effectiveness of hearing conservation programmes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01714375.

Hearing loss as a predictor for hearing protection attenuation among miners.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated risk factors for poor earplug fit, with a focus on the association between hearing loss and personal attenuation ratings (PARs). METHODS: Earplug fit was assessed by obtaining PARs using a real ear at attenuation threshold (REAT) system. Hearing loss was assessed using the unoccluded hearing thresholds measured during the REAT testing and the results of a speech-in-noise test. Potential predictors of PARs were modelled using both simple and multiple linear regression. Hearing loss was the primary predictor of interest. RESULTS: Data were collected from 200 workers at ten above-ground mining sites in the Midwestern USA. Workers reported wearing their hearing protection on average 73.9% of the time in a high noise environment (mean 8-hour time-weighted average noise exposure 85.5 dBA, range 65-103 dBA). One-quarter (26.7%) of workers were found to have a hearing loss (hearing threshold ≥25 dB across 1-4 kHz), and 42% reported symptoms of tinnitus. Workers with a hearing loss had a significantly lower PAR than those without a hearing loss (ß=-5.1, SE=1.7). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the adjusted regression models suggest that workers with hearing loss achieved significantly lower PARs than those without hearing loss. This association between hearing loss and hearing protection devices (HPD) fit brings into focus the potential benefit of fit checks to be included in hearing conservation programmes. Workers found to have hearing loss should be prioritised for fit testing, as their hearing impairment may be associated with poor HPD fit.

Cardiovascular mortality in a Swedish cohort of female industrial workers exposed to noise and shift work.

PURPOSE: The aim was to study mortality due to cardiovascular disease as well as total mortality, among female industrial workers, and the association to occupational noise and shift work. METHODS: Women from cohorts of soft tissue paper mills (N = 3013) and pulp and paper mills (N = 1483) were merged into one cohort. Job exposure matrices were developed and used for classification of shift work and noise exposure. Every year was classified as shift work excluding nights or shift work including nights. Noise was classified into seven 5 dB(A) bins from < 75 to ≥ 100 dB(A). Mortality from cardiovascular diseases and total mortality during 1956-2013 was calculated as a standardized mortality ratio (SMR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using the female general population as a reference. RESULTS: Fatal myocardial infarctions (N = 144) were increased in the total cohort, SMR 1.20 (95% CI 1.01-1.41) but not total mortality. The SMR for myocardial infarction for women exposed to noise ≥ 90 dB(A) for > 10 years was 1.41 (95% CI 1.02-1.89) and for those exposed to night shifts > 10 years, 1.33 (95% CI 0.91-1.89). Shift workers without nights ≤ 65 years, with noise exposure ≥ 90 dB(A), had SMR 2.41 (95% CI 1.20-4.31) from myocardial infarction. There was no increased mortality from cerebrovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS: Female paper mill workers had an increased mortality from acute myocardial infarction, especially before retirement age, when exposed to noise ≥ 90 dB(A) and with long-time employment. Exposure to shift work and noise usually occurred concurrently.

Occupational exposure to soft paper dust and mortality.

OBJECTIVES: Occupational exposure to soft paper dust is associated with impaired lung function. Whether there is an increased risk for asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is unclear. METHODS: We studied 7870 workers from three Swedish soft paper mills, and defined high-exposed workers, as having been exposed to soft paper dust exceeding 5 mg/m3 for at least 5 years. The remaining workers were classified as 'low exposed'. Person-years at risk were calculated and stratified according to gender, age and calendar-year. The follow-up time was from 1960 to 2013. The expected numbers of deaths were calculated using the Swedish population as reference and standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) with 95% CIs were assessed. RESULTS: There was an increased mortality due to obstructive lung disease (asthma and COPD), among high-exposed workers, SMR 1.89, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.83, based on 23 observed cases. High-exposed workers had an increased mortality from asthma, SMR 4.13, 95% CI 1.78 to 8.14, based on eight observed cases. The increased asthma mortality was also observed among high-exposed men, SMR 4.38, 95% CI 1.42 to 10.2, based on five observed cases. The asthma mortality among low-exposed workers, both men and women, was not increased. The COPD mortality was not clearly increased among high-exposed workers (SMR 1.52, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.50). CONCLUSION: High occupational exposure to soft paper dust increases the mortality due to asthma, and the results suggest that soft paper dust levels in workplaces should be below 5 mg/m3.

Lung function and paper dust exposure among workers in a soft tissue paper mill.

PURPOSE: To study respiratory effects of exposure to soft paper dust exposure, a relationship that is rarely studied. METHODS: Soft tissue paper mill workers at a Swedish paper mill were investigated using a questionnaire and lung function and atopy screening. Spirometry without bronchodilation was performed with a dry wedge spirometer, and forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) were obtained and expressed as percent predicted. Exposure to soft paper dust was assessed from historical stationary and personal measurements of total dust, in addition to historical information about the work, department, and production. The impact of high exposure to soft paper dust (> 5 mg/m3) vs. lower exposure ≤ 5 mg/m3, as well as cumulative exposure, was analyzed using multiple linear regression models. Multivariate models were adjusted for smoking, atopy, gender, and body mass index. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-eight current workers (124 male and 74 female) were included. There were significant associations between both cumulative exposure and years of high exposure to soft paper dust and impaired lung function. Each year of high exposure to soft paper dust was associated with a 0.87% decrease in FEV1 [95% confidence interval (CI) - 1.39 to - 0.35] and decreased FVC (- 0.54%, 95% CI - 1.00 to - 0.08) compared to the lower exposed workers. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that occupational exposure to soft paper dust (years exceeding 5 mg/m3 total dust) is associated with lung function impairment and increased prevalence of obstructive lung function impairment.

A semi-quantitative job exposure matrix for dust exposures in Swedish soft tissue paper mills.

BACKGROUND: Total paper dust exposure has been associated with respiratory problems among workers in the soft tissue paper industry. However, a comprehensive job exposure matrix (JEM) has not been developed for application to this industry. Our study was intended to address this need and to support further studies of mortality and morbidity in a cohort of Swedish workers from this industry. METHODS: We evaluated four participating soft tissue paper mills in Sweden. We combined information on process and equipment status from the mills with knowledge of the mills obtained through research efforts and paper dust measurements made at all four mills to develop a semi-quantitative JEM with seven dust exposure levels. The JEM was targeted at workers enrolled into a soft tissue paper mill cohort and working any time between 1960 and 2009. RESULTS: The JEM includes a total of 14 421 cells, with each cell corresponding to the exposure for a job title, department, or work location for a one-year period. Exposure levels in the JEM were estimated to decline at three of the four mills from 1971 to 2009, but overexposures (ie, exceedances of the relevant occupational exposure limits) remained common at the end of the period. CONCLUSIONS: The JEM results highlight the need for ongoing exposure control efforts in the soft tissue paper industry, and will inform ongoing epidemiological studies of the health effects of exposure to paper dust in Sweden. It is freely available for use by other researchers.

Patterns and trends in OSHA occupational noise exposure measurements from 1979 to 2013.

OBJECTIVES: Noise is one of the most common exposures, and occupational noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is highly prevalent. In addition to NIHL, noise is linked to numerous non-auditory health effects. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) maintains the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) database of compliance-related measurements performed in various industries across the USA. The goal of the current study was to describe and analyse personal noise measurements available through the OSHA IMIS, identifying industries with elevated personal noise levels or increasing trends in worker exposure over time. METHODS: Through a Freedom of Information Act request, we obtained OSHA's noise measurements collected and stored in IMIS between 1979 and 2013 and analysed permissible exposure limit (PEL) and action level (AL) criteria measurements by two-digit industry code. RESULTS: The manufacturing industry represented 87.8% of the 93 920 PEL measurements and 84.6% of the 58 073 AL measurements. The highest mean noise levels were found among the agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting industry for PEL (93.1 dBA) and the mining, quarrying and oil and gas extraction group for AL (93.3 dBA). Overall, measurements generally showed a decreasing trend in noise levels and exceedances of AL and PEL by year, although this was not true for all industries. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that, despite reductions in noise over time, further noise control interventions are warranted both inside and outside of the manufacturing industry. Further reductions in occupational noise exposures across many industries are necessary to continue to reduce the risk of occupational NIHL.

Hearing Protector Attenuation and Noise Exposure Among Metal Manufacturing Workers.

OBJECTIVES: This study utilized personal noise measurements and fit-testing to evaluate the association between noise exposures and personal attenuation rating (PAR) values among participating workers, and second, to compare the attenuated exposure levels received by the workers and the British Standards Institute's recommended noise exposure range of 70 to 80 dBA. DESIGN: We measured hearing protection device (HPD) attenuation among a sample of 91 workers at 2 US metal manufacturing facilities, through performance of personal noise dosimetry measurements and HPD fit-testing over multiple work shifts. We compared this testing with participant questionnaires and annual audiometric hearing threshold results. RESULTS: The average 8-hr time-weighted average noise exposures for study participants was 79.8 dBA (SD = 7.0 dBA), and the average PAR from fit-testing was 20.1 dB (±6.7 dB). While differences existed between sites, 84% of the 251 PAR measurements resulted in effective protection levels below the recommended 70 dBA (indicating overprotection), while workers were underprotected (i.e., effective exposures >80 dBA) during <1% of monitored shifts. Our results also demonstrated a significant positive relationship between measured noise exposure and PAR among non-custom-molded plug users (p = 0.04). Non-custom-molded plug wearers also showed a significant increase in PAR by sequential fit-test interaction (p = 0.01), where on average, subsequent fit-testing resulted in increasingly higher HPD attenuation. Workers at site 1 showed higher PARs. PARs were significantly related to race, even when adjusting for site location. While age, hearing threshold level, task, and self-reported tinnitus showed no significant effect on individual PAR in an unadjusted model, site, race, and sand- or water-blasting activities were significant predictors in adjusted models. Within-worker variability in time-weighted averages and PARs across repeated measurements was substantially lower than variability between workers. CONCLUSIONS: Careful selection of HPDs is necessary to minimize instances of overprotection to workers in low and moderate occupational noise environments. The use of fit-testing in hearing conservation programs to evaluate PAR is recommended to avoid overprotection from noise exposure while also minimizing instances of under-attenuation.

Noise exposure limit for children in recreational settings: Review of available evidence.

It is universally recognized that prolonged exposure to high levels of non-impulsive noise will lead to noise-induced hearing loss. These high levels of noise have traditionally been found in an occupational setting, but exposure to high levels of noise is increasingly common in recreational settings. There is currently no established acceptable risk of hearing loss in children. This review assumed that the most appropriate exposure limit for recreational noise exposure in children would be developed to protect 99% of children from hearing loss exceeding 5 dB at the 4 kHz audiometric test frequency after 18 years of noise exposure. Using the ISO 1999:2013 model for predicting hearing loss, it was estimated that noise exposure equivalent to an 8-h average exposure (LEX) of 82 dBA would result in about 4.2 dB or less of hearing loss in 99% of children after 18 years of exposure. The 8-h LEX was reduced to 80 dB to include a 2 dB margin of safety. This 8-h LEX of 80 dBA is estimated to result in 2.1 dB or less of hearing loss in 99% of children after 18 years of exposure. This is equivalent to 75 dBA as a 24-h equivalent continuous average sound level.

Risk of noise-induced hearing loss due to recreational sound: Review and recommendations.

This review was conducted to address three questions related to recreational sound exposure: (1) what criteria are used to determine noise exposure limits, (2) are there differences in the risk of hearing loss from occupational noise versus recreational sound, and (3) what is an appropriate exposure limit for recreational sound? For the first question, most standards specify an 8-h occupational noise exposure limit (LEX) of 85 dBA. This limit assumes that some workers exposed at the limit will develop hearing loss. To eliminate the risk of hearing loss, a 24-h equivalent continuous level (LEQ24h) limit of 70 dBA is appropriate. For the second question, there is some evidence that the effects of occupational noise on hearing may be worse than energetically equivalent recreational sound. Limits developed for noise are nevertheless applicable to recreational sound, and use of existing statistical models to predict hearing loss from recreational sound is appropriate, with the caveat that these models are limited to durations ≤40 years. For the third question, a recreational sound limit of 80 dBA LEX, equivalent to a 75 dBA LEQ24h, will virtually eliminate the risk of recreationally induced hearing loss in adults. Lower limits may be warranted for vulnerable or susceptible individuals.

Hearing loss, lead (Pb) exposure, and noise: a sound approach to ototoxicity exploration.

To determine the state of the research on ototoxic properties of Pb, evaluate possible synergistic effects with concurrent noise exposure, and identify opportunities to improve future research, we performed a review of the peer-reviewed literature to identify studies examining auditory damage due to Pb over the past 50 years. Thirty-eight studies (14 animal and 24 human) were reviewed. Of these, 24 suggested potential ototoxicity due to Pb exposure, while 14 found no evidence of ototoxicity. More animal studies are needed, especially those investigating Pb exposure levels that are occupationally and environmentally relevant to humans. Further investigations into potential interactions of Pb in the auditory system with other hazards and compounds that elicit ototoxicity are also needed in animal models. To better assess the effects of Pb exposure on the human auditory system and the possibility of a synergism with noise, future epidemiological studies need to carefully consider and address four main areas of uncertainty: (1) hearing examination and quantification of hearing loss, (2) Pb exposure evaluation, (3) noise exposure evaluation, and (4) the personal characteristics of those exposed. Two potentially confounding factors, protective factors and mixtures of ototoxicants, also warrant further exploration.

Assessing ototoxicity due to chronic lead and cadmium intake with and without noise exposure in the mature mouse.

Exposure to heavy metals may lead to hearing impairment. However, experimental studies have not explored this issue with and without noise exposure in mature animals with environmentally relevant doses. The aim of this study was to investigate ototoxicity produced by lead (Pb) and cadmium (Cd) and noise, singly and in combination, in the adult CBA/CaJ mouse. Metals were delivered via drinking water (0.03 mM, 1 mM, and 3 mM Pb; or 30, 100, and 300 µM Cd) for 12 weeks, resulting in environmentally- and occupationally relevant mean (± standard deviations) blood levels of Pb (2.89 ± 0.44, 38.5 ± 4.9, and 60.1 ± 6.6 µg/dl, respectively) and Cd (1.3 ± 0.23, 6.37 ± 0.87, 27.2 ± 4.1 µg/L, respectively). Metal treatment was also combined with a noise exposure consisting of a 105 dB broadband (2-20 kHz) stimulus for 2 hr or a sham exposure. Auditory performance was determined by comparing auditory brainstem responses (ABR) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) at baseline and after 11 weeks of metal treatment. Metal-exposed animals did not develop significant auditory deficits and did not exhibit morphological damage to cochlear hair cells. In contrast, noise-exposed animals, including those exposed to combinations of metals and noise, demonstrated significant hair cell loss, reduced DPOAE amplitudes, and ABR threshold shifts of 42.2 ± 13 dB at 32 kHz (105 dB noise alone). No significant potentiation or synergistic effects were found in groups exposed to multiple agents. This study establishes a highly reproducible adult mouse model that may be used to evaluate a variety of environmental exposure mixtures.