Low-Cost Earmuff Shown to Significantly Reduce Cast-Saw Noise.

Hearing protection devices reduce cast-saw noise. It would be helpful to identify the devices that are both effective and economical. Prior studies have shown that expensive noise-reduction headphones significantly reduced the anxiety associated with cast removal with a powered oscillating saw. The cost of such headphones, however, is a drawback for some practices and hospitals. It would be helpful to determine whether lower cost ear protection can provide effective cast-saw noise reduction. In addition, it is unclear whether the noise reduction ratings (NRRs), the average sound-level reduction provided by a hearing protection device in a laboratory test, provided by manufacturers accurately characterize the effectiveness for reducing cast-saw noise. Note that noise-cancelling devices do not carry an NRR because they are not designed as hearing protectors. Five ear protection devices with different NNRs were tested. The devices varied greatly in cost and included earplugs, low-cost earmuffs, and noise-cancelling headphones. To standardize the evaluation, each device was fitted to an acoustic mannequin with high-fidelity ear microphones while a fiberglass spica cast was cut. An additional test was run without hearing protection as a control. The low-cost devices significantly reduced the saw noise, with the exception of earplugs, which had highly variable performance. The noise reduction was similar between low-cost earmuffs and the high-cost earphones when the noise-cancelling feature was not active. Active noise cancelling provided further reductions in the noise level. Patients can experience high anxiety during cast removal. The current study shows that low-cost earmuffs significantly reduce cast-saw noise. Patient care settings may be more likely to offer hearing protection that is one twenty-fifth the cost of noise-cancelling headphones. An NRR appears to be a reliable guide for selecting hearing protection that reduces cast-saw noise.

Use of Personal Hearing Protection Devices at Loud Athletic or Entertainment Events Among Adults - United States, 2018.

Tens of millions of U.S. residents have a range of adverse health outcomes caused by noise exposure (1). During 2011-2012, 21 million U.S. adults who reported no exposure to loud or very loud noise at work exhibited hearing damage suggestive of noise-induced hearing loss (2). In addition to the known risk for hearing damage, nonauditory adverse health outcomes and health risks from excessive environmental sound exposure can include effects on the cardiovascular system, metabolism, blood pressure, body weight, cognition, sleep, mental health, quality of life, and overall well-being (1,3,4). CDC analyzed a representative sample of the U.S. adult population (aged ≥18 years) from a 2018 national marketing survey (50 states and the District of Columbia) that included questions about use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) (e.g., ear plugs or ear muffs) during recreational exposure to loud athletic and entertainment events; approximately 8% of respondents reported consistent use of an HPD at these types of events. Among those adults more likely to wear an HPD, 63.8% had at least some college education, and 49.1% had higher income levels. Women and older adults were significantly less likely to use HPDs. These findings suggest a need to strengthen a public health focus on the adverse health effects of excessive noise exposure at home and in recreational settings as well as a need for continued efforts to raise public awareness about the protective value of HPDs.

Providing earplugs to young adults at risk encourages protective behaviour in music venues.

For some young people, nightclubs and other music venues are a major source of noise exposure, arising from a combination of very high noise levels; relatively long attendance duration; and frequent, sustained participation over several years. Responsibility for hearing protection is largely left to individuals, many of whom choose not to wear earplugs. In order to encourage earplug use in these settings, a new approach is needed. The aim of the study was to examine whether presentation of hearing health information would result in increased use of earplugs, or whether provision of earplugs alone would be sufficient to change behaviour. A total of 51 regular patrons of music venues were allocated to either a low-information (lo-info) or high-information (hi-info) group. Both groups completed a survey about their current noise exposure, earplug usage and perceived risk of hearing damage. Both groups were also provided with one-size-fits-all filtered music earplugs. The hi-info group was also provided with audio-visual and written information about the risks of excessive noise exposure. After 4 weeks, and again after an additional 12 weeks, participants were asked about their recent earplug usage, intention to use earplugs in the future, and perceived risk of hearing damage. The results showed that after 4 weeks, the hi-info group's perceived personal risk of hearing damage was significantly higher than that of the lo-info group. After 16 weeks, these differences were no longer evident; however, at both 4 and 16 weeks, both the lo- and hi-info groups were using the earplugs equally often; and both groups intended to use earplugs significantly more often in the future. This suggests that the information was unnecessary to motivate behavioural change. Rather, the simple act of providing access to earplugs appears to have effectively encouraged young at-risk adults to increase their earplug use.

Increase in use of protective earplugs by Rock and Roll concert attendees when provided for free at concert venues.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of hearing protection use among attendees of Rock and Roll concerts at baseline and in concerts where earplugs are provided for free at concert venue entrances. DESIGN: Six concerts performed at two music venues in Toronto, Canada were evaluated. Study personnel observed and recorded the use of hearing protection at three concerts where no earplugs were distributed, and three concerts where earplugs were provided for free at the concert venue entrance. STUDY SAMPLE: A total of 955 individuals over the age of 18 were observed at six concerts. Six hundred and thirty-seven individuals (64% male) were observed at concerts where no earplugs were provided, and 318 individuals (68% male) were observed at concerts where free earplugs were provided. RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated a significant increase in hearing protection usage at concerts where earplugs were provided for free at the concert venue entrance, odds ratio 7.27 (95% CI: 3.24-16.30). CONCLUSION: The provision of free earplugs at concert venues may be a simple and inexpensive intervention that could be a component of a larger public health campaign to prevent non-occupational noise-induced hearing loss.

Description and evaluation of a hearing conservation program in use in a professional symphony orchestra.

Professional orchestral musicians risk permanent hearing loss while playing their instruments. Protecting the hearing of these musicians in the workplace is critical to their ongoing ability to play their instruments, but typical workplace hearing conservation measures can have very damaging effects on the product (music) and the musicians' abilities to hear one another sufficiently. To enable effective intervention, orchestras as employers must encourage engagement with hearing protection programs and implement controls while preserving the integrity of the music. To achieve this, typical approaches used in other industries must be redesigned to suit this unique workplace. In response to these challenges, the Queensland Symphony Orchestra (Brisbane, Australia) introduced a comprehensive hearing conservation strategy in 2005 based upon best practice at the time. This strategy-which has been regularly refined-continues to be implemented on a daily basis. This investigation aimed to assess the successes, difficulties, and practical viability of the program. To achieve this a process evaluation was carried out, incorporating archival analyses, player and management focus groups, and an interview with the program's administrator. Results show the program has successfully become integrated into the orchestra's and the musicians' daily operations and significantly contributes to managing the risk of hearing loss in this population. While there is room for improvement in the orchestra's approach-particularly regarding usable personal protective devices and improved education and training, results are encouraging. This study provides a basis for those wishing to implement or evaluate similar paradigms.

Development of the hearing protection assessment (HPA-2) questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) remains an important occupational health issue as the second most commonly self-reported occupational injury or illness. The incorrect and inconsistent use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) compromises their effectiveness in preventing NIHL. AIMS: To describe the development of an easily administered yet robust questionnaire to investigate factors that influence HPD use. METHODS: A hearing protection assessment (HPA-2) questionnaire was developed using items based on themes identified in our previous research. These fell into two classes: supports and barriers to wearing HPD, which formed two scales within the questionnaire. The questionnaire, which also included demographic items, was administered to workers from 34 manufacturing companies. The internal consistency of the scales was tested, and factor analysis was conducted to investigate the underlying structure of the scales. RESULTS: Of the 1053 questionnaires distributed, 555 completed questionnaires were received giving a response rate of 53%. The Cronbach's alpha for the barriers scale (α = 0.740) and supports scale (α = 0.771) indicated strong internal reliability of the questionnaire. The supports and barriers were further described as five key factors (risk justification, HPD constraints, hazard recognition, behaviour motivation and safety culture) that influence hearing protection behaviour. Workers who reported always using HPDs had more supports across these factors, while those who did not always wear HPDs reported more barriers. CONCLUSIONS: The HPA-2 questionnaire may be useful in both research and interventions to understand and motivate hearing protection behaviour by identifying and targeting supports and barriers to HPD use at different levels of the ecological model.

Hearing conservation and noise management practices in professional orchestras.

Hearing conservation and noise exposure management for professional orchestras is a difficult issue resistant to standard control measures as used in other industries with excessive noise problems. Although there has been a great deal of research into this area in terms of the audiological status of musicians and their exposure to noise, there are relatively few industry-specific strategies that can be adopted by an orchestra looking to address these issues. Australia does not have a uniform approach to hearing conservation management in its orchestras; however, each orchestra actively grapples with the challenges of balancing legal, practical, and artistic concerns. This study systematically investigated hearing conservation practices, noise exposure management, and audiological screening protocols in eight professional orchestras. The research involved personal interviews with staff at each orchestra, including inspection of venues and facilities. While all these orchestras were aware of the risks and were actively taking significant steps to reduce noise exposure, a range of approaches, with varying degrees of effectiveness and understanding of the issue, were found across the sector. There was limited evidence of educational programs for either the musicians at risk of excessive noise exposure or the staff responsible for devising and implementing control measures. In addition, the reported use of adequate personal hearing protection by musicians was poor. As Australia has recently introduced a national approach to workplace health and safety, a similar approach to noise and audiological management across the country's orchestral sector is proposed, drawn from existing research and practice. This will enable both consistent procedures and meaningful dialogue between the orchestras on the topics of hearing conservation, audiological monitoring, and educational practices.

Noise-induced hearing loss in agriculture: creating partnerships to overcome barriers and educate the community on prevention.

Noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is a common and preventable injury for farmers. Farmers are frequently exposed to excessive noise, ranking among the top three occupations and industries with the highest risk for hearing loss. Use of hearing protection among farmers is not common. Although the age when NIHL begins among farmers is unknown, its prevalence is higher among male adolescents who live and work on farms. The purpose of this paper is to describe how NIOSH created partnerships to promote hearing conservation for this hard-to-reach population. Partnerships included organizations and individuals who were trusted sources of information for the target population, young farmers 14-35 years of age and their families, and those who had linkages in rural communities. NIOSH engaged partners through exhibits and train-the-trainer workshops at state or national conventions. NIOSH workshops included basic information on NIHL as well as information on free or low-lost resources that participants could use in training others at schools and community events. People with hearing conservation expertise have an important role and many opportunities to improve the knowledge and implementation of hearing conservation among those in agriculture.

Hearing protection for clubbers is music to their ears.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: while it is difficult to promote the use of hearing protectors in noisy workplaces and leisure settings, some nightclub attendees choose to wear earplugs when exposed to loud music. This qualitative study investigated the perceptions of clubbers about the advantages and disadvantages of earplug use in nightclubs. Such first-hand information could potentially be used to educate non-wearers about the features of different earplug types, the experience of wearing earplugs and their relative merits. METHODS: structured telephone interviews were conducted with 20 regular clubbers who wear different types of earplugs at nightclubs. Participants were asked about their experience of wearing earplugs and, in particular, what they perceive to be the advantages and disadvantages of earplugs. RESULTS: participants' responses revealed that cheaper foam earplugs are considered less satisfactory than more expensive earplugs, which are relatively discreet and comfortable, facilitate communication with others, create minimal music distortion and, in some cases, improve music sound quality. In terms of effectiveness, all types of earplugs were considered beneficial in reducing the after-effects of loud music and providing hearing protection. CONCLUSIONS: the perceived advantages of earplugs, which are often not recognised by non-earplug wearers, should be communicated in order to encourage the use of earplugs among clubbers.

Improving hearing health for farming families.

INTRODUCTION: Occupational noise injury and hearing loss are common features of agricultural workforces internationally. Farmsafe Australia has identified hearing health as one of its 4 key priority goals and targets. Currently, approximately 60-70% of Australian farmers have measurable hearing loss, compared with 27% of those in the general Australian community. This article describes the findings of a community based demonstration project to address hearing health issues conducted in the Australian state of New South Wales. This program sought to implement local demonstration projects in 3 communities to identify what works well in hearing health promotion with farmers and what could be applied more broadly throughout Australia. METHODS: Local advisory groups were established in each community to guide project development and implementation. Project implementation focused on 3 major aspects: (1) increasing awareness of priority noise injury prevention and hearing health practices; (2) improving access to hearing health services; and (3) networking services in local communities. Area-specific training was undertaken for stakeholders to maximize local information links. Service utilization data were monitored and analysed. RESULTS: There was variability among sites; however in general there was an increased awareness of hearing health issues by farming families and expanded opportunities for farmers to access screening services. Utilization rates of hearing services also increased markedly in one community. Local hearing health networks were strengthened by linkages to key stakeholders outside the health sector. Previously unidentified methods of promoting hearing health (eg using agricultural retail outlets that supply hearing protection equipment and are accepted by farmers as an information source) were identified and utilized. CONCLUSIONS: Hearing health promotion with farmers in local communities can be enhanced through utilization and strengthening of local networks. Integration of hearing health initiatives with other agencies already working with farming families will be important in developing and enhancing long-term sustainable outcomes. Continued work at a national level to assist in stimulating local action will be required to build on the potential gains in reducing noise injury in the farming community.

[Risk assessment of hearing loss in orchestral musicians]. / Ocena ryzyka uszkodzenia sluchu u muzyków orkiestrowych.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess sound exposure and the risk of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) in orchestral musicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Questionnaire inquiries and sound pressure level measurements were carried out in 63 musicians. Based on these data the risk assessment of the NIHL was performed according to ISO 1999:1990 (PN-ISO 1999:1990). RESULTS: The classical orchestral musicians are usually exposed to sound at equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure levels of 81-90 dB (10-90th percentile), for 20-48 h (10-90th percentile) per week. Occupational exposures to such sound levels over 40 years of employment cause the risk of hearing impairment (expressed as mean hearing threshold level for 2, 3 and 4 kHz equal or greater than 25 dB) in the range of 13-33% and 9-33% in females and males, respectively. The highest risk is related to playing clarinet (up to 33%), tube (up to 34%), trumpet (up to 37%), trombone (up to 40%), percussion section (up to 41%) and horn (up to 47%). About 46% of respondents noticed hearing impairment. Nearly every fifth musician complained of tinnitus while almost half (48%) of them--of hyperacusis. However, only 14% of musicians declared present or past usage of hearing protective devices (HPDs) while over twice of them (30%) intended to use HPDs in the future.

Assessment of noise exposure in a hospital kitchen.

In March 2007, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) was asked to evaluate the noise exposure of employees in the Nutrition and Food Services Department of a large hospital, because of noise concerns raised after the installation of the PowerSoak dishwashing system. Eleven employees (two cooks, eight food service workers, and a materials handler) contributed 13 full-shift and two task-based personal noise dosimetry measures over two days. The noise levels for two food service workers assigned to the pots and pans room (85.1 and 85.2dBA), a cook working in the food preparation area (85.9 dBA), and a food service worker assigned to the dishwashing room (89.5 dBA) exceeded the NIOSH Recommended Exposure Limit (REL); however, none of the measures exceeded the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL). The noise level from the PowerSoak dishwashing system alone was not excessive, but additional noise from the food preparation area (primarily from blenders and utensils), and from metal-to-metal contact between stainless steel pots and pans and metal racks, may explain exposures above the NIOSH REL for employees in the pots and pans room. The cooks were exposed to many intermittent impact noise sources, such as, metal-to-metal contact between utensils and the use of industrial-size blenders. We recommended that metal-to-metal contact be reduced as much as possible throughout the Nutrition and Food Services Department, and hearing protectors be provided to employees in the dishwashing room until engineering controls were in place.

Predictors of hearing protection use in construction workers.

OBJECTIVES: Although noise-induced hearing loss is completely preventable, it remains highly prevalent among construction workers. Hearing protection devices (HPDs) are commonly relied upon for exposure reduction in construction, but their use is complicated by intermittent and highly variable noise, inadequate industry support for hearing conservation, and lax regulatory enforcement. METHODS: As part of an intervention study designed to promote HPD use in the construction industry, we enrolled a cohort of 268 construction workers from a variety of trades at eight sites and evaluated their use of HPDs at baseline. We measured HPD use with two instruments, a questionnaire survey and a validated combination of activity logs with simultaneous dosimetry measurements. With these measurements, we evaluated potential predictors of HPD use based on components of Pender's revised health promotion model (HPM) and safety climate factors. RESULTS: Observed full-shift equivalent noise levels were above recommended limits, with a mean of 89.8 +/- 4.9 dBA, and workers spent an average of 32.4 +/- 18.6% of time in each shift above 85 dBA. We observed a bimodal distribution of HPD use from the activity card/dosimetry measures, with nearly 80% of workers reporting either almost never or almost always using HPDs. Fair agreement (kappa = 0.38) was found between the survey and activity card/dosimetry HPD use measures. Logistic regression models identified site, trade, education level, years in construction, percent of shift in high noise, and five HPM components as important predictors of HPD use at the individual level. Site safety climate factors were also predictors at the group level. CONCLUSIONS: Full-shift equivalent noise levels on the construction sites assessed were well above the level at which HPDs are required, but usage rates were quite low. Understanding and predicting HPD use differs by methods used to assess use (survey versus activity card/dosimetry). Site, trade, and the belief that wearing HPD is not time consuming were the only predictors of HPD use common to both measures on an individual level. At the group level, perceived support for site safety and HPD use proved to be predictive of HPD use.

The impact of hearing conservation programs on incidence of noise-induced hearing loss in Canadian workers.

BACKGROUND: Noise exposure remains one of the most ubiquitous of occupational hazards. Hearing conservation program legislation and the programs themselves were designed to lower risk of resulting occupational noise-induced hearing loss, but there has been no broad-based effort to assess the effectiveness of this policy. METHODS: The incidence of a 10-dB standard threshold shift was examined in a group of Canadian lumber mill workers, using annual audiogram series obtained from the Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia for the period 1979-1996 and using Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Mean cumulative noise exposure was 98.1 dB-years. The audiograms from 22,376 individuals, among whom there were 2,839 threshold shifts of 10 dB or greater (i.e., a "standard threshold shift"), were retained in multivariable analyses. After adjusting for potential confounders, continuous use of hearing protection, and initial hearing tests later in the study period, the risk for standard threshold shift was reduced by 30%. Risk increased sixfold, however, in those with the highest noise exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Hearing conservation programs may be effective in reducing overall incidence of hearing loss. In the absence of noise control at source, however, highly exposed workers remain at unnecessary risk.

Staging workers' use of hearing protection devices: application of the transtheoretical model.

The threat of noise-induced hearing loss is a serious concern for many workers. This study explores use of the transtheoretical model as a framework for defining stages of workers' acceptance of hearing protection devices. A secondary analysis was performed using a cross-section of data from a randomized, controlled clinical trial of an intervention to increase use of hearing protection. Use of hearing protection devices was well distributed across the theorized stages of change. Chi-square analysis and analysis of variance revealed significant differences between stages for the variables studied. Discrete stages of hearing protection device use can be identified, laying the foundation for further work investigating use of the transtheoretical model for promoting hearing protection device use. The model can provide a framework for tailoring interventions and evaluating their effects. With further development of the transtheoretical model, nurses may be able to easily identify workers' readiness to use hearing protection devices and tailor training toward that goal.

Ethnic differences in predictors of hearing protection behavior between Black and White workers.

The purpose of the study is to determine whether there are ethnic differences in predictors of hearing protection behavior between Black and White workers. The Predictors of Use of Hearing Protection Model (PUHPM) derived from Pender's Health Promotion Model (Pender, 1987) was used as a conceptual model. A total of 2,119 (297 Blacks, 1,822 Whites) were included in the analysis. Internal consistency of instrument items was assessed using theta reliability estimates. Significant predictors of the use of hearing protective devices (HPDs) for Black and White workers and differences in predictors between the two groups were examined using multiple regression with interaction terms. Ethnic differences in scale or individual item scores were assessed using chi-square and t-test analyses. Different factors influenced hearing protection behavior among Black and White workers. The model was much less predictive of Blacks' hearing protection behavior than Whites' (R2 = .12 vs. .36). Since the PUHPM was not as effective in predicting hearing protection behavior for Blacks as for Whites, future studies are needed to expand the PUHPM through qualitative study and to develop culturally appropriate models to identify factors that better predict hearing protection behavior as a basis for developing effective interventions.

The influence of socio-economic status on adolescent attitude to social noise and hearing protection.

The focus of the present study, of 1285 adolescents, was young people's attitudes towards noise and their use of hearing protection at discos and pop concerts. Comparisons were made between adolescents from different age groups, and with different socio-economic status. Logistic regressions indicated that "worry before attending noisy activities" and "hearing symptoms" such as tinnitus and noise sensitivity could, to some degree, explain the use of hearing protection in noisy environments. Another conclusion to be drawn from this study was that adolescents' attitudes and behaviours regarding hearing protection use differed between levels of socio-economic status. Individuals with high SES expressed more negative attitudes and used ear protection to a greater extent than those with lower SES. This result might indicate differences in the development of future auditory problems among individuals with different levels of socio-economic status. The cause of hearing impairment and tinnitus may not be restricted merely to noise exposure. Psychological aspects, such as attitudes towards noisy environments and the individual's behaviour regarding the use of hearing protection may be considered as important factors in the understanding of why the prevalence of hearing related problems has increased among adolescents.