The effects of eye masks and earplugs on sleep quality, anxiety, fear, and vital signs in patients in an intensive care unit: A randomised controlled study.

In intensive care units, environmental factors like loud noises and bright lights can cause fear, anxiety, changes in vital signs, and sleep disturbances. The aim of this study was to find out how using earplugs and eye masks during the night affected sleep quality, anxiety, fear, and vital signs of patients in an intensive care unit. A total of 70 patients, 35 in the intervention and 35 in the control group, were included in this randomised controlled study. While the patients in the intervention group were provided with earplugs and eye masks for 3 nights in addition to their routine care, only routine care was given to the patients in the control group. The 'Introductory Information Form', 'Visual Analogue Scale-Fear (VAS-F)', 'Visual Analogue Scale-Anxiety (VAS-A)', 'Vital Signs Monitoring Form', and 'Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire' were used for data collection. It was found that the mean scores of VAS-F, VAS-A, heart rate, diastolic and systolic blood pressure of the intervention group decreased significantly after the intervention, while their sleep quality increased significantly. In this study, it was found that using earplugs and eye masks for patients in an intensive care unit during the night was effective in improving patients' sleep quality and reducing fear, anxiety, and problems in vital signs.

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.

Defining the Concept of Acoustic Neuroprotection in the Neonate: A Concept Analysis.

BACKGROUND: It has long been understood and acknowledged that the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) environment and the transport environments are extremely loud, with both long- and short-term sequelae to the neonate, being well over the recommended amount of noise by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). This problem has yet to be properly addressed. The purpose of this manuscript is to define and explain the concept of acoustic neuroprotection. While we cannot change the internal structures of the neonates' auditory system, we could change the acoustics of the environment to be support neuroprotection of these sensitive patients. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Walker and Avant's concept analysis steps were followed to create and define the idea of acoustic neuroprotection, as it has not had a definition before. A total of 45 articles from multiple search engines were chosen. A combination of 2 concepts were used: acoustic protection and neurodevelopmental protection/support. The search was expanded past 20 years for lack of research and importance of seminal works. RESULTS: To achieve acoustic neuroprotection, a neonate should not be exposed to sound greater than 45 decibels (dBa) for longer than 10 s, and exposure to sound above 80 dBa should never occur. Appropriate interventions need to include supporting the neurodevelopment of the neonate through therapeutic sound, while decreasing the amount of toxic noise exposure to safe levels. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND RESEARCH: By further understanding and having a quantifiable goal of acoustic neuroprotection for neonates, neonatal clinicians can work together to create new interventions for how to better protect and support the care of our tiniest patients.

Earmuff performance in the presence of high-level impulse from a recoilless weapon firing in a confined space.

A noise attenuation performance test was conducted on earmuffs using a recoilless weapon launch platform in a confined space, along with two acoustic test fixtures (ATFs). The overpressure at the ATF's effective tympanic membrane comprised direct sound at 185 dB sound pressure level (SPL) and reflected sound at 179 dB SPL. Wearing earmuffs reduced these peaks to 162 dB SPL and 169 dB SPL, respectively. The reflected sound from walls was defined as delayed sound. An analytical model for earmuff noise attenuation simulated their effectiveness. The simulation revealed that when the earmuffs attenuated delayed sound, the acoustic impedance of acoustic leakage and the acoustic impedance of the earmuff material decreased by 96% and 50%, respectively. The negative overpressure zone between direct and delayed sound decreased the earmuffs' fit against the ATF. Additionally, the enclosed volume between the earmuff and the ear canal decreased by 12%. After the installation of bandages on the earmuffs, the overpressure peak of delayed sound was reduced by 5 dB. Furthermore, the acoustic impedance of the earmuff's sound leakage path and the acoustic impedance of the earmuff material deformation path increased by 100% and 809%, respectively.

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.

Self-reported occupational noise exposure and hearing protection device use among NHANES participants and the risk of hearing loss.

Occupational noise exposure continues to be a prevalent hazard in many industries. While the proliferation of noise dosimeters and wearable devices has made it easier to assess a worker's exposure to noise, many employees exposed to hazardous (i.e., >85 dBA) levels of noise may go their entire career without ever having their personal noise levels measured. In contrast to other occupational exposures, noise is easily perceived by the individual exposed, allowing them to develop subjective judgments regarding its characteristics. To determine whether such self-reported exposures to occupational noise are associated with hearing loss, this analysis used audiometric data and self-reported occupational exposure to loud noise from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), which has collected such data from 1999 to May 2020. Linear and logistic regressions models found a statistically significant association between self-reported noise exposure and worsened hearing at the 3, 4, 6, and 8 kHz hearing frequency as well as an elevated odds ratio for the development of hearing loss greater than 25 dB at the 2, 3, and 4 kHz audiometric frequencies. The results of this analysis suggest that in the absence of exposure measurements, workers are likely able to detect exposure to hazardous levels of noise. In these instances, additional measurements should be collected to determine if the workers should be enrolled in a hearing conservation program.

The efficacy of earplugs and eye masks for delirium severity and sleep quality in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting in cardiac intensive care units: A single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Delirium is a neuropsychiatric syndrome with a wide range of possible causes and multiple complications in patients admitted to intensive care units. It is, therefore, necessary to seek appropriate and safe strategies to prevent and manage delirium. This study is intended to examine the efficacy of eye masks and earplugs for delirium severity and sleep quality in patients with coronary artery bypass grafting in a cardiac intensive care unit. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-blind, randomised controlled trial was conducted on 114 patients who were consecutively enrolled and randomly assigned to either the experimental group or the control group. The experimental group received routine care plus eye masks and earplugs, and the control group received only routine care. The delirium severity and sleep quality were measured with the Neelon and Champagne confusion scale and the Verran and Snyder-Halpern sleep scale. RESULTS: The mean delirium severity score differed significantly between the two groups on the second, third, and fourth postoperative days (p < 0.001). Although the trend of changes in the mean delirium severity score from the first postoperative day (before the intervention) to the second, third, and fourth postoperative days was downward in the two groups (trending towards higher delirium severity), the control group experienced greater changes than the experimental group. An intragroup analysis of delirium severity detected a statistically significant difference in both the experimental and control groups (p < 0.001). The sleep quality domains (sleep disturbance, sleep effectiveness, sleep supplementation) showed a statistically significant difference between the two groups across the three intervention days (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The overnight use of eye masks and earplugs were found to have positive effects on sleep quality domains (sleep disturbance, sleep effectiveness, sleep supplementation) and delirium severity in coronary artery bypass grafting patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit for several days. It was also found that a significant interaction effect between the sleep disturbance subscale and delirium severity exists. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: (https://en.irct.ir): IRCT20210523051370N2.

[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.

[Measurement and evaluation of personal attenuation rating before and after the training of the noise-exposed workers wearing foam earplugs].

Objective: To measure and compare the difference of personal attenuation rating (PAR) of the workers wearing foam earplugs before and after the training, and to evaluate the effect of ear protector wearing training on the noise protection. Methods: In February 2023, 94 workers exposed to noise in a machinery manufacturing factory were selected as subjects. The production noise in the workplace was measured and subjects were trained to wear earplugs. The PAR values of wearing 3M 1110 foam test earplugs were measured and recorded before and after the training by using the fit testing of hearing protection device. The differences between the actual PAR values with nominal values and the noise attenuation values in related standards were compared, and the protective effect of hearing protection device before and after training was evaluated. Results: The average age of the subjects was (36.76±11.48) years old, the average length of service was (16.34±11.64) years, and the average exposure time to noise was (15.67±11.64) years. The noise detection results of the subjects' posts were ranged from 80.1 to 94.3 dB (A). The results of subjects wore 3M 1110 foam test earplugs for fit testing showed that the binaural PAR value after training was (19.3±6.4) dB (A), which was significantly higher than that before training (11.1±7.4) dB (A) (t=13.31, P<0.001). After training, 11 people (11.70%) could reach the corrected noise reduction value (NRR value), 26 people (27.66%) could reach the standard of single noise reduction value (SNR value) ×0.6, and 84 people (89.36%) could reach the standard of (NRR-7) /2. The under protection rate of hearing protectors after training (7.45%) was significantly lower than that before training (45.74%), and the difference of different protection levels before and after training was statistically significant (χ(2)=40.83, P<0.001) . Conclusion: It is suggested that enterprises should use the fit testing instead of nominal value estimation to evaluate the noise reduction effect of hearing protection device. Special training on the selection and use of hearing protection device should be strengthened, so as to ensure that workers wear them correctly and improve the protective effect of hearing protection device.

[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.

Eye-masks and earplugs compared to headband in nulliparas on increasing spontaneous vaginal delivery: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: A majority of pregnant women experience sleep disruption during pregnancy, especially in the third trimester. Lack of sleep is associated with preterm birth, prolonged labor and higher cesarean section rate. Six or less hours of night sleep in the last month of pregnancy is associated with a higher rate of caesarean births. Eye-masks and earplugs compared to headband improve night sleep by 30 or more minutes. We sought to evaluate eye-mask and earplugs compared to sham/placebo headbands on spontaneous vaginal delivery. METHODS: This randomized trial was conducted from December 2019-June 2020. 234 nulliparas, 34-36 weeks' gestation with self-reported night sleep < 6 h were randomized to eye-mask and earplugs or sham/placebo headband (both characterized as sleep aids) to be worn each night to delivery. After two weeks, interim outcome data of the average night sleep duration and the trial sleep related questionnaire was answered through the telephone. RESULTS: Spontaneous vaginal delivery rates were 60/117(51.3%) vs. 52/117(44.4%) RR 1.15 95% CI 0.88-1.51 P = 0.30 for eye-mask and earplugs or headband respectively. At 2-weeks into the intervention period, the eye-mask and earplugs arm reported longer night sleep duration 7.0 ± 1.2 vs. 6.6 ± 1.5 h P = 0.04, expressed increased satisfaction with the allocated aid 7[6.0-8.0] vs. 6[5.0-7.5] P < 0.001, agreed they slept better 87/117(74.4%) vs. 48/117(41.0%) RR 1.81 95% CI 1.42-2.30 NNTb 4 (2.2-4.7) P < 0.001 and higher compliance median[interquartile range] 5[3-7] vs. 4[ 2-5] times per week of sleep aid use P = 0.002. CONCLUSION: Eye-mask and earplugs use at home in late third trimester do not increase the spontaneous vaginal delivery rate even though self-reported night sleep duration, sleep quality, satisfaction and compliance with allocated sleep aid were significantly better than for sham/placebo headband. Trial registration This trial was registered with ISRCTN on June 11, 2019 with trial identification number: ISRCTN99834087 .

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.

Perforated Concave Earplug (pCEP): A Proof-of-Concept Earplug to Improve Sound Localization without Compromising Noise Attenuation.

Combat soldiers are currently faced with using a hearing-protection device (HPD) at the cost of adequately detecting critical signals impacting mission success. The current study tested the performance of the Perforated-Concave-Earplug (pCEP), a proof-of-concept passive HPD consisting of a concave bowl-like rigid structure attached to a commercial roll-down earplug, designed to improve sound localization with minimal compromising of noise attenuation. Primarily intended for combat/military training settings, our aim was an evaluation of localization of relevant sound sources (single/multiple gunfire, continuous noise, spoken word) compared to 3M™-Combat-Arms™4.1 earplugs in open-mode and 3M™-E-A-R™-Classic™ earplugs. Ninety normal-hearing participants, aged 20-35 years, were asked to localize stimuli delivered from monitors evenly distributed around them in no-HPD and with-HPD conditions. The results showed (1) localization abilities worsened using HPDs; (2) the spoken word was localized less accurately than other stimuli; (3) mean root mean square errors (RMSEs) were largest for stimuli emanating from rear monitors; and (4) localization abilities corresponded to HPD attenuation levels (largest attenuation and mean RMSE: 3M™-E-A-R™-Classic™; smallest attenuation and mean RMSE: 3M™-Combat-Arms™4.1; pCEP was mid-range on both). These findings suggest that the pCEP may benefit in military settings by providing improved sound localization relative to 3M™ E-A-R™-Classic™ and higher attenuation relative to 3M™-Combat Arms™-4.1, recommending its use in noisy environments.

Effect of using eye masks and earplugs in preventing delirium in intensive care patients: A single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Delirium, which is frequently encountered in intensive care patients, can be prevented with multicomponent nursing interventions, and thus the negative consequences can be reduced. AIM: To examine the effect of using eye masks and earplugs in preventing delirium in intensive care units (ICUs). STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, controlled, single-blind intervention study. This study was conducted in the medical and surgical ICUs of a tertiary hospital, and nurses were given pre-study training on delirium risks, diagnosis, prevention, and management. Data were collected using the patient information form, the Nursing Delirium Screening Scale, the Richard-Campbell Sleep Scale, and the daily follow-up form. Various environmental modifications were made in the ICUs for all patients, and evidence-based nonpharmacological nursing interventions were applied to the patients in both groups during the day and night shifts for 3 days. In addition, the patients in the intervention group were provided with eye masks and earplugs for three nights. RESULTS: The study included a total of 60 patients (30 in the intervention group and 30 in the control group). There was a statistically significant difference in the development of delirium between the intervention and control groups (night of the 2nd day, p = .019; day of the 3rd day p < .001; night of the 3rd day p ≤ .001). The average total sleep quality score of the intervention group was found to be significantly higher than the control group (p ≤ .001 for three nights). Staying in the internal medicine ICU affected (odds ratio [OR], 11.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.00-46.66; p = .017) more on the development of delirium than in coronary ICU, being in the age group of 65 and over, having a hearing impairment, coming to ICU from the operating room, and education level had an effect. CONCLUSIONS: The earplugs and eye masks used by the intensive care patients overnight were found to be effective in increasing sleep quality and preventing delirium. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The use of eye masks and earplugs is recommended for ICUs in preventing delirium.

Preliminary Investigation of Perceived Sound Quality for High-Fidelity Premolded Hearing Protection Devices.

High-fidelity premolded earplugs (HiFi HPDs) are designed to provide relatively uniform attenuation across frequencies. The primary goal of this study was an exploratory analysis of relationships between attenuation and perceptions of sound quality. Participants were 16 adults tested using commercial HiFi HPDs marketed for use at recreational music events. Survey responses did not reveal statistically significant differences in perceived sound quality across HiFi HPD brands. However, increases in music quality ratings were correlated with decreases in average attenuation at 3, 4, and 6 kHz and increasing uniformity of attenuation. The correlations were weak, however, explaining only about 15% of the variance. The data suggest listeners may prefer HiFi HPDs that provide more uniform sound attenuation at frequencies from 0.25 to 4 kHz and less attenuation from 3 to 6 kHz. The data are consistent with existing suggestions that HiFi HPDs with moderate but uniform attenuation may be preferred by those listening to music.

[Analysis of verification results of protective effects of hearing protectors in different industries].

Objective: To get insight into the current practice of noise reduction effect of workers as they wore hearing protectors in different domestic enterprises and the possible affected factors. Methods: From October 2020 to April 2021, using a random sampling method, 1197 workers exposed to noise in petrochemical factories, textile factories, and parts manufacturing factories were selected as the study subjects. The noise reduction effect of hearing protectors worn by workers in daily use was tested using a hearing protector suitability testing system. The personal sound attenuation level (PAR) was compared among workers in three enterprises, Targeted intervention and repetitive testing were conducted for workers who did not meet the noise reduction effect required by the enterprise, and the changes in PAR of workers before and after the intervention were compared. The comparison of baseline PARs between two or more groups was performed using the Mann Whitney test, the comparison of baseline PARs with post intervention PARs was performed using the Wilcoxon signed rank sum test, and the comparison of qualitative data between two or more groups was performed using the Chi square test. Results: The median baseline PAR for all workers was 15 dB. Men, age<30 years old, education level at or above college level, working experience of 5 to 15 years, and those who used hearing protectors for 5 to 15 years had higher PARs, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05). The median difference in baseline PAR among workers from three enterprises was statistically significant (H=175.06, P<0.01). The median PAR of subjects who did not pass the baseline increased from 3 dB to 21 dB after intervention (Z=-27.92, P<0.01) . Conclusion: Some workers wearing hearing protectors do not meet the required PAR, and low PARs may be related to incorrect wearing methods and incorrect selection of hearing protectors. As a tool for testing, training, and assisting in selection, the hearing protector suitability testing system is of great significance for worker hearing protection.

[Research on the protective effect of hearing protective device for workers exposed to noise in a motor manufacturing enterprise].

Objective: To understand the current situation of noise hazard in a motor manufacturing enterprise, and to explore the protective effect of workers wearing hearing protective device and its possible influencing factors. Methods: In November 2021, a total of 179 noise workers wearing hearing protective devices in a motor manufacturing company in a city were selected as research objects. Personal attenuation rating (PAR) of workers wearing hearing protective devices was measured. Baseline PAR was analyzed for different subgroups of basic demographic information, noise exposure, and the use of hearing protective devices to evaluate the effect of the intervention. Baseline PAR was compared using nonparametric tests. Results: There were 179 workers from 35 positions in 4 types of work, and the over-standard noise rate was 51.2% (42/82), among which the noise exposure intensity of motor equipment debugging workers was the highest [94.4 dB (A) ]. Compared the baseline PAR of different characteristics, it was found that the baseline PAR of male workers, workers whose daily noise exposure time were <8 h, workers who had used the hearing protective devices for 10 to 14 years, and workers who thought the hearing protective devices were comfortable were all higher, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). Baseline PAR passing rate was 43.0% (77/179), and PAR of 102 workers who did not pass baseline test increased from 0 (0, 3) dB before intervention to 14 (12, 16) dB after intervention, with statistical significance (P<0.05) . Conclusion: The noise hazard in this motor manufacturing enterprise is serious, and the protective effect of workers wearing hearing protective devices is not good. Gender, daily noise exposure time, years and comfort of wearing hearing protective device are the possible influencing factors of poor protective effect.