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.

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

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

[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.

The sound of safety: exploring the determinants of prevention intention in noisy industrial workplaces.

Occupational noise exposure is a pervasive issue in many industries, leading to a range of health issues and sleep disturbances among workers. Additionally, there is a strong desire among these workers to prevent industrial accidents. This study, aimed at enhancing worker health and well-being, utilized a survey distributed by the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions to field workers. Data from 1285 workers were collected and analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to identify and understand the factors affecting prevention intention in noisy work environments. Our findings indicate that health problems resulting from occupational noise exposure significantly influence insomnia, perceived severity of potential accidents, perceived benefits of preventive measures, and perceived barriers. Perceived severity was significantly correlated with prevention intention, emphasizing the role of risk perception in motivating preventive behaviors. Perceived benefits were also significantly associated with prevention intention, highlighting the importance of positive outcomes in influencing workers' behaviors. Additionally, perceived barriers showed a significant relationship with prevention intention, suggesting that overcoming these barriers is crucial in promoting preventive behaviors. Demographic factors such as gender displayed a significant association with prevention intention, while age did not. This study provides valuable insights into the multifaceted factors influencing workers' intention to prevent industrial accidents in noisy environments, underlining the importance of comprehensive data collection tools in understanding these dynamics.

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.

[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.

Association between Occupational Noise Exposure and Insomnia among Night-Shift Production Workers: A 4-Year Follow-up Study.

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate whether occupational noise exposure is a risk factor for insomnia among male night-shift production workers. Methods: This study followed 623 male night-shift production workers at a tire manufacturing factory without insomnia for 4 years. Insomnia was evaluated based on the insomnia severity index at baseline and at 4-year follow-up. A score of ≥15 was defined as insomnia. The higher occupational noise exposure group was defined as those individuals exposed to 8-hour time-weighted-average noise above 80 dB (A). Results: Participants' mean age was 46.3 ± 5.6 years. Of the 623 participants, 362 (58.1%) were in the higher occupational noise exposure group. At 4-year follow-up, insomnia occurred in 3.2% (n = 20) of the participants. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, the odds ratio of insomnia was 3.36 (95% confidence interval 1.083-10.405, P = 0.036) in the higher occupational noise exposure group when compared with the lower noise exposure group after adjusting for confounders. Conclusion: Our findings suggested that occupational noise exposure affected insomnia in male night-shift production workers. To prevent insomnia, efforts are required to reduce workplace noise exposure levels. Alternatively, moving to a less noisy work environment should be considered for workers with severe insomnia.

Reinvigorating engineered noise controls: a systems approach.

OBJECTIVES: Hearing loss is a major worldwide health issue affecting an estimated 1.5 billion people. Causes of hearing loss include genetics, chemicals, medications, lifestyle habits such as smoking, and noise. Noise is probably the largest contributing factor for hearing loss. Noise arises from the workplace, ambient environment, and leisure activities. The easiest noise sources to control are workplace and environmental. Workplace noise is unique in that the employer is responsible for the noise and the worker. Also, workers may be exposed to much higher levels of noise than they would accept elsewhere. Employers follow the traditional hierarchy of controls (substitution/engineering, administrative, personal protective equipment [PPE]). Substituting or engineering a lower noise level actually reduces the hazard present to the worker but demand more capital investment. Administrative and PPE controls can be effective, but enforcement and motivation are essential to reducing risk and there is still some hearing loss for a portion of the workers. The challenge is to estimate the costs more clearly for managers. A systems engineering approach can help visualize factors affecting hearing health. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this study, a systems engineering causal loop diagram (CLD) was developed to aid in understanding factors and their interrelationships. The CLD was then modeled in VenSim. The model was informed from the authors' expertise in hearing health and exposure science. Also, a case study was used to test the model. The model can be used to inform decision-makers of holistic costs for noise control options, with potentially better hearing health outcomes for workers. RESULTS: The CLD and cost model demonstrated a 4.3 year payback period for the engineered noise control in the case study. CONCLUSIONS: Systems thinking using a CLD and cost model for occupational hearing health controls can aid organizational managers in applying resources to control risk. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2023;36(5):672-84.

Healthcare Professionals and Noise-Generating Tools: Challenging Assumptions about Hearing Loss Risk.

Hearing loss is a significant global health concern, affecting billions of people and leading to various physical, mental, and social consequences. This paper focuses on the risk of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) among specific healthcare professionals, especially ear surgeons, orthopaedic surgeons, dentists, and dental hygienists, who frequently use noisy instruments in their professions. While studies on these professionals' noise exposure levels are limited, certain conditions and factors could pose a risk to their hearing. Measures such as engineering and administrative controls, regular audiometric testing, and the use of hearing protection devices are crucial in preventing NIHL. Early detection and intervention are also vital to mitigate further damage. This paper proposes the results of a modified screening protocol, including questionnaires, audiometry, and additional diagnostic tests to identify and address potential hearing disorders. Specific healthcare professionals should remain aware of the risks, prioritize hearing protection, and undergo regular monitoring to safeguard their long-term auditory well-being.

Occupational noise exposure at sea: A socio-legal study on fish harvesters' perceptions in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.

Introduction: Noise is a significant health hazard for fish harvesters. Chronic exposure to hazardous noise levels of 85 dB (A) for an 8-h work shift can have adverse health impacts, including both auditory and non-auditory health problems such as noise-induced hearing loss, stress, hypertension, sleeping disorders, and impaired cognitive performance. Methods: A review of legislation and policies governing workplace noise exposure, as well as qualitative, semi-structured interviews, were conducted to assess how fish harvesters in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) manage onboard occupational noise exposure and perceive noise-induced health problems, as well as the barriers and challenges associated with preventing and controlling noise exposure. Results: The legal review shows no compulsory noise preventive measure at the fishing vessel design stage in Canada. Limited implementation of Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) regulations to control and prevent onboard noise by employers in Newfoundland and Labrador. Fishers reported that their workplace is noisy. Over time, fish harvesters adapted to the environment and learned to tolerate loud noise, displaying fatalistic behavior. Fish harvesters reported avoiding using hearing protection onboard due to navigation safety concerns. Fishers reported hearing loss as well as other non-auditory health problems. Inadequate noise control measures adopted by employers, a limited supply of hearing protection onboard, and a lack of regular hearing testing, training, and education were identified as the main barriers to preventing and controlling noise exposure. Conclusion: Proper implementation of NL OHS regulations and the development of hearing conservation initiatives by employers are necessary. All stakeholders, including the federal and provincial governments, WorkplaceNL, and not-for-profit fishing organizations in the province, are strongly recommended to initiate training and education campaigns to help fish harvesters understand noise exposure and adopt preventive measures.

The relationship between exposure to noise and hearing loss in orthopaedics.

Aims: In the UK, the agricultural, military, and construction sectors have stringent rules about the use of hearing protection due to the risk of noise-induced hearing loss. Orthopaedic staff may also be at risk due to the use of power tools. The UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) have clear standards as to what are deemed acceptable occupational levels of noise on A-weighted and C-weighted scales. The aims of this review were to assess the current evidence on the testing of exposure to noise in orthopaedic operating theatres to see if it exceeds these regulations. Methods: A search of PubMed and EMBASE databases was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. The review was registered prospectively in PROSPERO. Studies which assessed the exposure to noise for orthopaedic staff in operating theatres were included. Data about the exposure to noise were extracted from these studies and compared with the A-weighted and C-weighted acceptable levels described in the HSE regulations. Results: A total of 15 studies were deemed eligible. These included a total of 386 orthopaedic operations and the use of 64 orthopaedic instruments. A total of 294 operations (76%) and 45 instruments (70%) exceeded the regulations on an A-weighted scale, and 22% (10 of 46) of operations exceeded the maximum C-weighted peak acceptable level of noise. Noise-induced hearing loss was reported in 28 of 55 orthopaedic staff members (50.9%). Conclusion: Safe levels of noise can be exceeded in orthopaedic operations, and when using orthopaedic instruments. Employers have clear policies about exposure to noise in the workplace but have yet to identify orthopaedic theatres as a potential at-risk area. Orthopaedic staff need education, monitoring, and protection, while employers should consider regular assessments of staff in orthopaedic theatres and offer methods to prevent noise-induced hearing loss.

[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.

[Analysis of noise reduction measures in a noise workshop handover control room].

Objective: To explore the sound insulation, sound absorption and other noise reduction transformation methods in a noise workshop handover control room. Methods: In December 2021, through the occupational health investigation and on-site testing of the handover control room of a noise workshop, the causes of excessive noise were analyzed, and the transformation design scheme to reduce noise was proposed and the effect was analyzed. Results: Before the transformation, the peak frequency band noise intensity of the noise workshop handover control room was 112.8 dB (A), and the peak frequency was 1000 Hz. After noise reduction, the theoretical calculated control value was 61.0 dB (A), and the measured noise intensity was 59.8 dB (A) . Conclusion: The noise intensity of the handover control room is reduced after noise reduction, which is in line with the contact limit requirements of the control room in GBZ 1-2010 "Hygienic Standards for the Design of Industrial Enterprises", and has reference significance for noise control engineering.

A Systematic Literature Review of the Factors Influencing Hearing Protection Device Usage among Industrial Workers.

This systematic literature review (SLR) aims to determine the factors influencing the use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) among industrial workers. This study was guided by the PRISMA Statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) review method, and four databases comprising Scopus, Science Direct, PubMed, Wiley Online Library, and Google Scholar were employed. A total of 196 articles were identified, and 28 studies on the factors associated with HPD use among industrial workers from 2006 to 2021 met the inclusion criteria. Resultantly, five main themes emerged from this review: sociodemographic (29%), interpersonal influences (18%), situational influences (18%), cognitive-perceptual (29%), and health-promoting behavior (6%) associated with HPD use among industrial workers. A total of 17 sub-themes were identified, including age, gender, educational level, noise level, working experience, social models, interpersonal support, social norms, safety climate, training, organizational support, perceived barrier, perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefit, self-efficacy, and cues to action. The significant factors influencing workers to use HPDs are sociodemographic, interpersonal influences, situational influences, and health-promoting behavior. Future studies should focus on the cues to action toward human behavior influencing the use of HPDs, workers' health status, and comorbidities of hearing loss. Therefore, this systematic study gives valuable reference resources for up-and-coming researchers as well as new knowledge to expert professionals and academics in various industries.

Monitoring Occupational Noise Exposure in Firefighters Using the Apple Watch.

Occupational noise exposure and hearing loss are prominent in the fire service. Firefighters are routinely exposed to hazardous levels of noise arising from the tools and equipment they use, from sirens and alarm tones to the emergency response vehicles they drive. The present study utilized the Apple Watch to continuously measure environmental noise levels for on-duty firefighters. Participants included 15 firefighters from the metropolitan South Florida area, and 25 adult non-firefighter control subjects. Firefighters were recruited from a variety of roles across two stations to ensure noise exposure profiles were appropriately representative of exposures in the fire service. All participants wore an Apple Watch for up to three separate 24 h shifts and completed a post-shift survey self-reporting on perceived exposures over the 24 h study period. Cumulative exposures were calculated for each shift and noise dose was calculated relative to the NIOSH recommended exposure limit of 85 dBA as an 8 h time-weighted average. The maximum dBA recorded on the Apple Watches was statistically significant between groups, with firefighters experiencing a median of 87.79 dBA and controls a median of 77.27 dBA. Estimated Exposure Time at 85 dBA (EET-85) values were significantly higher for firefighters when compared to controls: 3.97 h (range: 1.20-14.7 h) versus 0.42 h (range: 0.05-8.21 h). Only 2 of 16 firefighters reported the use of hearing protection devices during their shifts. Overall, our results highlight the utility of a commonly used personal device to quantify noise exposure in an occupationally at-risk group.

Development and initial validation of questionnaire on predictors for the use of hearing protection devices among noise exposed manufacturing workers in Tanzania: A methodological study.

Introduction: The use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) has been an intervention of choice in many workplaces such as in the construction industry for quite some time due to impractical effects of engineering and administrative interventions. Questionnaires for assessment for HPDs use among construction workers have been developed and validated in developed countries. However, there is limited knowledge of the same, among manufacturing workers in developing countries that are assumed to have a different culture, work organizations and production processes. Methods: We conducted a stepwise methodological study to develop a questionnaire to predict the use of HPDs among noise exposed workers in manufacturing factories in Tanzania. The questionnaire included 24 items and was developed through rigorous and systematic procedures involving three steps; (i) item formulation that involved two experts, (ii) expert content review and item rating that involving eight experts with vast experience in the field, and (iii) a field pre-test that involved 30 randomly selected workers from a factory with similar characteristics as a planned study site. A modified Pender's Health Promotion Model was adopted in the questionnaire development. We analyzed the questionnaire in terms of content validity and item reliability. Results: The 24 items were categorized into seven domains i.e., perceived self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, interpersonal influences, situational influences and safety climate. The score for content validity for each item was satisfactory as the content validity index ranged between 0.75 to 1.00 for clarity, relevance, and essentiality criteria. Similarly, the scores for the content validity ratio (for all items) were 0.93, 0.88 and 0.93 for clarity, relevance, and essentiality, respectively. In addition, the overall value for Cronbach's alpha was 0.92 with domain coefficients: perceived self-efficacy 0.75; perceived susceptibility 0.74; perceived benefits 0.86; perceived barriers 0.82; interpersonal influences 0.79; situational influences; 0.70; and safety climate 0.79. The mean inter-item correlation was 0.49 suggesting good internal consistency. Discussion and conclusion: The developed and preliminary validated questionnaire can be used to predict the HPDs use among noise exposed manufacturing factory workers. Future surveys using this questionnaires warranted for further validation of the scale developed.

Hearing Conservation Programme Costs at Selected South African Companies.

The Occupational Health and Safety Act 1993 and its attending Regulations in South Africa, require employers to conduct cost analysis studies to inform decision-making related to exposure control for occupational health hazard such as noise. Cost analysis, as per South African National Standard/ISO 31000 risk assessment guideline, is an important input for the decision-making process of the risk management process. The costs of administrating a hearing conservation programme intended to minimise noise-induced hearing loss is an example of a cost analysis. This study enrolled four companies from the South African manufacturing and utilities sectors with the aim of establishing whether cost analysis is included during the noise risk assessment process; and determining administration costs of HCP administration. A HCP cost questionnaire was completed by each company's occupational hygiene professionals and risk officers. None of the companies in the study included cost analysis in their respective risk assessment processes. The overall costs, derived from the HCP cost item questionnaire, was much greater for Company A (4 290 014 Rands) than all of the other companies combined (970 685 Rands). Hearing protection device expenditures across the four companies were the greatest expense, while audiometry was the smallest expense owing to service internalisation. The HCP expenditures are incurred on periodic basis, yearly or biennial, and are internalised in companies as direct costs. Cost analysis can enhance the noise risk assessment process by providing additional input to support the decision-making process related to noise control. This challenges the occupational hygiene profession to pursue new frontiers and decision-making models in the scope of noise risk management, beyond noise measurements and hearing protection device use recommendation.

Impulse noise measurement in view of noise hazard assessment and use of hearing protectors.

Experience shows the occurrence of situations when the measurements of impulse noise parameters are made with measurement equipment unsuitable for such conditions. The results of using such equipment were compared with the results of using equipment with a sufficiently large upper limit of the measurement range. The analysis was carried out on the example of noise generated during shots from a Mossberg smooth-bore shotgun and AKM rifle, as well as produced in the forge. The use of the unsuitable equipment allowed to indicate the exceeding of the exposure limit value of the peak value of the signal (LCpeak), but this is not always possible when determining the energy properties of the signal (LEX,8h). While the inadequate properties of the measurement equipment will generally not prevent the conclusion that noise in a particular workplace is hazardous to hearing, the results of measurements cannot be used to select hearing protectors.

The effect of occupational training provided to workers in a glass factory on their use of ear protectors.

Objectives. This study aimed to determine the effect of occupational training applied to workers working in noisy parts of a glass factory on the use of ear protectors. Methods. The study was a semi-experimental pre-test and post-test design. It was carried out with 45 workers determined by purposeful sampling and working in a glass production factory who accepted to participate in the study. The data were collected with an information form and noise-related symptom chart, hearing health information questionnaire and observation. In the analysis of the study data, the number/percentage, χ2 test, Cohen κ test and analysis of variance were used. Results. It was determined that workers pre training did not use ear protectors (100%) and there were some noise-related health complaints. There was an increase in using ear protectors (57.8%) and a decrease in their health complaints post training. It was also found that the workers' pre-training hearing health information questionnaire mean score was 11.46 ± 3.20, and post training was 13.77 ± 3.42 in the first month and 15.77 ± 2.88 in the fourth month. Conclusions. Occupational training provided to the workers increased the workers' awareness level and their rate of wearing ear protectors, and health problems caused by work-related noise started to recover.

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.