Analysis of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) noise standard violations over 50 years: 1972 to 2019.

INTRODUCTION: Noise exposure has long been an occupational health concern and has been an important area of focus of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) since its founding. Nevertheless, it remains unclear what effects OSHA's noise standards have had on employer efforts to reduce risks. Consequently, a review of OSHA noise standard violations was performed to clarify the violation trends between 1972 and 2019. METHODS: Using the OSHA Information System, researchers identified 119 305 violations involving four noise standards between 1972 and 2019: 29 CFR 1910.95, occupational noise exposure in general industry; 1926.52, occupational noise exposure in construction; 1926.101, hearing protection in construction, and 1904.10, recording criteria for cases involving occupational hearing loss. Violation frequencies of noise standard subparagraphs and relationships to factors such as industry differences were analyzed using descriptive statistics and t tests. RESULTS: The most commonly violated noise standard was 1910.95 in manufacturing. Such violations rose between 1972 and 1985 and then declined steadily. Whether in general industry or construction, four noise standards were most-frequently cited: lack of feasible administrative or engineering controls (1910.95[b] and 1926.52[d]) and inadequate hearing conservation program (1910.95[c] and 1926.52[b]). These violations were more highly penalized (mean = $1036.50) than other subparagraph violations (mean = $915.80). Programmed and unprogrammed inspections generated similar violation quantities except between 1980 and 1985, when programmed inspections exhibited a sharp spike in violations. CONCLUSION: The study identified trends in OSHA noise standard violations and possible explanations for those trends. The study findings can support development of more practical noise-exposure protection policy.

Historical review of efforts to reduce noise-induced hearing loss in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Noise-induced hearing loss is a centuries-old problem that is still prevalent in the United States and worldwide. AIM: To describe highlights in the development of hearing loss prevention in the U.S. from World War II to the present. METHODS: Literature review. RESULTS: Approaches to occupational noise-induced hearing loss prevention in the United States over the past seven decades are described using a hierarchy of controls framework and an interdisciplinary perspective. Historical timelines and developmental milestones related to occupational noise-induced hearing loss prevention are summarized as a life course. DISCUSSION: Lessons are drawn for other countries in their hearing conservation efforts. CONCLUSION: Future developments building on the hearing loss prevention work of the past 70 years can prevent the problem of occupational NIHL in the 21st century. Am. J. Ind. Med. 60:569-577, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

A review of the history, development and application of auditory weighting functions in humans and marine mammals.

This document reviews the history, development, and use of auditory weighting functions for noise impact assessment in humans and marine mammals. Advances from the modern era of electroacoustics, psychophysical studies of loudness, and other related hearing studies are reviewed with respect to the development and application of human auditory weighting functions, particularly A-weighting. The use of auditory weighting functions to assess the effects of environmental noise on humans-such as hearing damage-risk criteria-are presented, as well as lower-level effects such as annoyance and masking. The article also reviews marine mammal auditory weighting functions, the development of which has been fundamentally directed by the objective of predicting and preventing noise-induced hearing loss. Compared to the development of human auditory weighting functions, the development of marine mammal auditory weighting functions have faced additional challenges, including a large number of species that must be considered, a lack of audiometric information on most species, and small sample sizes for nearly all species for which auditory data are available. The review concludes with research recommendations to address data gaps and assumptions underlying marine mammal auditory weighting function design and application.

What can 35 years and over 700,000 measurements tell us about noise exposure in the mining industry?

OBJECTIVE: To analyse over 700,000 cross-sectional measurements from the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MHSA) and develop statistical models to predict noise exposure for a worker. DESIGN: Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the data. Two linear regression models were used to predict noise exposure based on MSHA-permissible exposure limit (PEL) and action level (AL), respectively. Twofold cross validation was used to compare the exposure estimates from the models to actual measurement. The mean difference and t-statistic was calculated for each job title to determine whether the model predictions were significantly different from the actual data. STUDY SAMPLE: Measurements were acquired from MSHA through a Freedom of Information Act request. RESULTS: From 1979 to 2014, noise exposure has decreased. Measurements taken before the implementation of MSHA's revised noise regulation in 2000 were on average 4.5 dBA higher than after the law was implemented. Both models produced exposure predictions that were less than 1 dBA different than the holdout data. CONCLUSION: Overall noise levels in mines have been decreasing. However, this decrease has not been uniform across all mining sectors. The exposure predictions from the model will be useful to help predict hearing loss in workers in the mining industry.

The worker's ear: a history of noise-induced hearing loss.

Hearing loss afflicts millions of people throughout the world, and many of those millions are workers who have been exposed to excessive noise. People have always been surrounded by a variety of sounds in their environments, but the invention of gunpowder and the Industrial Revolution introduced new sounds of greater intensity than ever before. It is only within the past 40 years that serious efforts to reduce excessive noise at work sites have been initiated. In the latter half of the 20th century, many governments imposed regulations to limit workers' exposure to loud sounds. Because of this recent action, some people may believe that the recognition of occupational noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is relatively new. However, a review of selected historical and medical manuscripts, books, and articles show that the association of hearing changes with loud noise exposure was recognized for centuries before systematic attempts were made to limit the exposure. Delays in implementing controls to limit noise exposure were due to cultural reasons, technical problems in controlling noise generation, and a lack of understanding of the mechanics of hearing loss. A historical perspective on this issue may remind health care providers that they need to continue to emphasize hearing conservation measures as occupational noise exposures change with the shift of industrial activities between countries.

Heritage of army audiology and the road ahead: the Army Hearing Program.

Noise-induced hearing loss has been documented as early as the 16th century, when a French surgeon, Ambroise Paré, wrote of the treatment of injuries sustained by firearms and described acoustic trauma in great detail. Even so, the protection of hearing would not be addressed for three more centuries, when the jet engine was invented and resulted in a long overdue whirlwind of policy development addressing the prevention of hearing loss. We present a synopsis of hearing loss prevention in the US Army and describe the current Army Hearing Program, which aims to prevent noise-induced hearing loss in soldiers and to ensure their maximum combat effectiveness.

Hearing loss in Union Army veterans from 1862 to 1920.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the prevalence of hearing loss (HL) in Union Army (UA) veterans by year, birth cohort, and occupation, and to compare Civil War pension and contemporary disability programs by examining monthly dollar awards. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of medical records for 17,722 UA veteran pension applicants, a subset of some 35,000 soldiers retrieved randomly from the Military Archives. METHODS: The diagnosis of HL was based on review of medical records, which used gross measurements because of the unavailability of audiometric testing. RESULTS: One third (5,891 or 33%) of pensioners sampled received compensation for HL. The veterans with HL suffered predominantly from left-sided HL (4,091 or 70%), which is consistent with noise-induced HL in a right-handed individual firing a rifle. Comparison of civilian occupations reveals minimal variation in prevalence of HL. Civil War pensions for unilateral HL averaged $134.04 per year, representing nearly one third of the average annual income in 1890. Bilateral HL received nearly twice that amount. Today, military veterans receive $1,248 annually for unilateral loss and $27,288 annually for bilateral loss. Social Security disability benefits are granted only for bilateral HL, with an average 60-year-old individual receiving $11,400 per year. CONCLUSION: HL was a common disability among UA Civil War veterans, with noise exposure a likely etiology for the HL. The differing levels of compensation for HL may reflect differing perceptions on the incapacitating effects of HL.

TRAUMA ACUSTICO POR ALTA VELOCIDAD EN PROFESIONALES ODONTOLOGOS DE SUCRE

Es evidente que los equipos de alta velocidad determinan trauma acústico en odontólogos que desarrollan actividades profesionales con equipos de esas características, dependiendo el grado de Trauma Acústico de las carcterísticas del ambiente. El trauma acústico está en relación directa con el tiempo de ejercicio profesional y la intensidad del ruido. El mayor porcentaje de profesionales odontólogos, independientemente de la intensidad del ruido se presenta en aquellos que desarrollan actividades en ambientes que carecen de elementos que amortiguan el ruido. Los profesionales que tienen la compresora dentro del ambiente están sujetos a mayor trauma acústico

Occupational deafness: the continuing challenge of early German and Scottish research.

Systematic studies in occupational deafness were first carried out in the late 19th century, in America, Germany, Russia, and Scotland. The studies by Gottstein and Kayser, in 1881 in Germany, and by Barr, in 1886 in Scotland, are identified as the two principal landmarks. The physicians who carried them out should be seen as occupying a place in the mainstream of development of industrial medicine. Gottstein and Kayser's study of personnel in a railway works reflected a contemporary concern about railway safety; Barr's, of boilermakers, a feeling for the difficulties in hearing in the everyday world experienced by the victims of occupational deafness. Barr's evaluation of such difficulties through self-report, we argue, reveals more of the quality of hearing handicap than the present century's apparently objective tests. Both studies relied on occupation-based epidemiology, which was able to identify occupational deafness, distinguish its etiology, and locate the site of its pathology. We argue that occupation-based epidemiology has since been neglected in favour of dose-response epidemiology to the detriment of research in occupational deafness and in industrial medicine generally. Dose-response epidemiology seems the more scientific but, in practice, it is afflicted by even more uncertainty than occupation-based epidemiology. To compound the uncertainty, there are two incompatible mathematical expressions for the dose-response relation for noise, both separately enshrined in legislation in various parts of the world. We conclude by advocating more secondary research in industrial medicine. Barr points us to a further topic for such research, the place of temporary threshold shift in the development of knowledge about occupational deafness as a problem for industrial medicine.

Charles Dickens and the ear, nose, and throat.

Charles Dickens is known as a novelist, humorist, humanist, and a social reformist. One of his many abilities was an astute power of observation, and some of his writings included descriptions considered as original medical knowledge. Among the hundreds of characters portrayed by Dickens, many had depictions or diseases of interest to the otolaryngologist. Dickens described deaf children and was interested in the methods used in their teaching. He had a keen interest in children and their welfare and described his visits to the Childrens Hospital in London and to Parkins Institute at Boston. He described both temporary and permanent deafness following exposure to loud noise. Dickens was a medical critic and most of his writings on the subject were humorous, though mixed at times with a spicy element of satire.