Gender and other factors associated with the use of hearing protection devices at work / Gênero e fatores associados ao uso de equipamento de proteção auditiva no trabalho

OBJECTIVE To analyze whether sociodemographic, occupational, and health-related data are associated with the use of hearing protection devices at work, according to gender. METHODS A cross-sectional study was conducted in 2006, using a random sample of 2,429 workers, aged between 18 and 65 years old, from residential sub-areas in Salvador, BA, Northeastern Brazil. Questionnaires were used to obtain sociodemographic, occupational, and health-related data. Workers who reported that they worked in places where they needed to shout in order to be heard were considered to be exposed to noise. Exposed workers were asked whether they used hearing protection devices, and if so, how frequently. Analyses were conducted according to gender, with estimates made about prevalence of the use of hearing protection devices, prevalence ratios, and their respective 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS Twelve percent (12.3%) of study subjects reported that they were exposed to noise while working. Prevalence of the use of hearing protection devices was 59.3% for men and 21.4% for women. Men from higher socioeconomic levels (PR = 1.47; 95%CI 1.14;1.90) and who had previous audiometric tests (PR = 1.47; 95%CI 1.15;1.88) were more likely to use hearing protection devices. For women, greater perceived safety was associated with the use of protection devices (PR = 2.92; 95%CI 1.34;6.34). This perception was specifically related to the presence of supervisors committed to safety (PR = 2.09; 95%CI 1.04;4.21), the existence of clear rules to prevent workplace injuries (PR = 2.81; 95%CI 1.41;5.59), and whether they were informed about workplace safety (PR = 2.42; 95%CI 1.23;4.76). CONCLUSIONS There is a gender bias regarding the use of hearing protection devices that is less favorable to women. The use of such devices among women is positively influenced by their perception of a safe workplace, suggesting that gender should be considered as a factor in hearing conservation programs.

OBJETIVO Analisar se dados sociodemográficos, ocupacionais e de saúde estão associados ao uso de equipamento de proteção auditiva no trabalho, segundo gênero. MÉTODOS Estudo transversal com amostra aleatória de 2.429 trabalhadores de 18 a 65 anos de subáreas de base domiciliar em Salvador, BA, no ano de 2006. Foram aplicados questionários para obtenção de dados sociodemográficos, ocupacionais e de saúde. Foram considerados expostos ao ruído aqueles que relataram trabalhar em local onde era necessário gritar para ser ouvido. Os trabalhadores expostos foram questionados sobre uso e regularidade do uso de equipamento de proteção auditiva. A análise foi conduzida por gênero, estimando-se a prevalência do uso do equipamento de proteção auditiva, razões de prevalência e os respectivos intervalos de 95% de confiança. RESULTADOS Entre os participantes do estudo, 12,3% referiram trabalhar expostos ao ruído. A prevalência do uso do equipamento de proteção auditiva foi 59,3% e 21,4%, para homens e mulheres, respectivamente. Entre os homens, maior nível socioeconômico (RP = 1,47; IC95% 1,14;1,90) e ter realizado audiometria (RP = 1,47; IC95% 1,15;1,88) foram fatores associados ao uso do equipamento. Entre as mulheres, a percepção de maior segurança associou-se ao uso do equipamento (RP = 2,92; IC95% 1,34;6,34). Essa percepção deveu-se, especialmente, à presença de supervisores comprometidos com a segurança (RP = 2,09; IC95% 1,04;4,21), à existência de regras claras para evitar acidentes de trabalho (RP = 2,81; IC95% 1,41;5,59) e ao recebimento de informações sobre segurança no trabalho (RP = 2,42; IC95% 1,23;4,76). CONCLUSÕES Há um viés de gênero em relação ao uso do equipamento de proteção auditiva menos favorável às mulheres em comparação com os homens. O uso do equipamento entre mulheres é influenciado positivamente pela percepção de um ambiente de trabalho seguro, sugerindo que o gênero precisa ser considerado nos programas de conservação auditiva.

Change of Stages and Related Factors for Wearing of Hearing Protection Device among Noisy Workplace-workers

PURPOSE: This study was done to identify the distribution and related factors for stage of change for wearing hearing protection devices (HPDs) by workers in environments with high noise. Predictors of Use of Hearing Protection Model and Trans-theoretical Model were tested. METHODS: The participants were 755 workers from 20 noisy work places in Busan and Gyeongnam. Data were collected from January to April 2008 using self-administered questionnaires, and analyzed using multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: There were significant differences in social mode (OR=1.35, 95% CI: 1.06-1.73) between precontemplation/contemplation and preparation stage, in males (OR=2.36, 95% CI: 1.24-4.51), workers with high school education or less (OR=1.39, 95% CI: 1.28-2.78), shift workers (OR=1.50, 95% CI: 1.02-2.21), workers who previously worked in noisy places (OR=1.39, 95% CI: 1.20-2.34), and workers who had previous hearing examinations (OR=1.89, 95% CI: 1.25-2.85), in the social model (OR=1.59, 95% CI: 1.42-1.78), and self-efficacy (OR=1.05, 95% CI: 1.02-1.08) between workers in preparation and action stages, in length of time working in noisy work places (OR=2.26, 95% CI: 1.17-4.39), social model (OR=1.66, 95% CI: 1.33-2.08), and perceived benefit (OR=0.95, 95% CI: 0.93-0.97) between action and maintenance stage. CONCLUSION: Social model was a common factor showing differences between two adjacent stages for wearing HPDs. The results provide data for developing programs to encourage workers to wear HPDs and application of these programs in work settings.

Avaliação dos limiares auditivos com e sem equipamento de proteção individual / Pure tone audiometry with and without specific ear protectors

Os autores realizaram estudo caso-controle audiométrico em indivíduos com e sem protetor auricular auditivo. OBJETIVOS: O objetivo do estudo foi avaliar a real atenuação individual dado pelos protetores. MATERIAL E MÉTODO: Foram avaliados 30 indivíduos (ou 60 orelhas) de diferentes atividades profissionais, de ambos os sexos, com idades entre 20 e 58 anos, apresentando audição normal e tendo realizado repouso auditivo de 10 horas, submetidos a exame audiométrico com e sem protetor auricular auditivo, no período de fevereiro a julho de 2003, utilizando protetor tipo plugue. Avaliou-se as audiometrias nas vias aérea e óssea em freqüências de 500 a 4000Hz. RESULTADOS: Os resultados foram analisados estatisticamente e comparados aos dados fornecidos pelo fabricante. Assim se observou em ouvido real os níveis de atenuação auditiva obtidos com o uso destes produtos. CONCLUSÃO: Os resultados permitiram chegar à conclusão de que os índices fornecidos pelos fabricantes foram compatíveis com os que obtive nos testes.

The authors evaluated pure tone audiometry with and without specific ear protectors. AIM: The purpose of this case control study was to measure the level of sound attenuation by earplugs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The evaluation included sixty ears of 30 subjects of both sexes, aged between 20 and 58 years, of various professional activities, with normal hearing thresholds, and following ten hours of auditory rest. The statistical results of pure tone audiometry at 500 to 4000 Hertz with and without specific ear protectors were analyzed. RESULTS: These results were compared with those provided by the ear protector manufacturer. CONCLUSION: The results show that the rate of sound reduction was similar to the manufacturer's specifications.

Employment and acceptance of hearing protectors in classical symphony and opera orchestras.

OBJECTIVES: Prior to this study, it was not clear how familiar orchestral musicians were with the various insertable models of hearing protectors. The present study focuses on musicians and entertainers and proposes the maintenance of a noise exposure limit through the use of a hearing protector. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted by distributing a questionnaire to musicians ( n = 429) in nine orchestras in order to obtain information on the use of hearing protection and the musicians' hearing sensitivity. RESULTS: Hearing protectors were found to be seldom used by orchestral musicians. During orchestral rehearsals, < 1/6 of the test persons used Type 1 (individually fitted) hearing protectors although> 80% of the respondents indicated that they knew about them. A gap emerged between what seemed most important to musicians in hearing protectors and what was provided by the manufacturers. CONCLUSIONS: The subject of hearing protection in orchestral musicians should be investigated with a multidimensional approach which considers the following in equal measure: legal regulations, the requirements and limits of the music sector and the individual characteristics of the musicians involved.

Auditory lifestyles and beliefs related to hearing loss among college students in the USA.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the auditory life styles and beliefs of college students with reference to exposure to loud sounds in the context of the health belief model. A survey was administered to 238 (40 men, 198 women) students in the USA. Results suggest that 44% of the students use noisy equipment without ear protection and 29% (69/238) of the students work in noisy environments. Of the 69 who worked in noisy surroundings, only ten reported wearing hearing protection devices although 50 (72.46%) reported tinnitus. The use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) was associated with previous experience with hearing loss and tinnitus. Although 75% of the students were aware that exposure to loud sounds could cause hearing loss, 50% of the students appeared to be exposing themselves to potentially harmful loud music. Furthermore, 46% of the students reported not using HPDs during loud musical activities because they felt that the music was difficult to hear with HPDs. Most students in this study considered hearing loss to be serious but 76% of the students believed that they would not lose their hearing until a greater age. Although 66% of the students had experienced tinnitus, 58% of these students reported not being concerned about it. These results suggest a critical need for promoting healthy hearing behavior among college students. Possible strategies could include improved education, experience with simulated hearing loss for extended periods and availability of cosmetically appealing or invisible HPDs with uniform attenuation across the frequency range.

A systematic review of the interventions to promote the wearing of hearing protection

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Noise-induced hearing loss can only be prevented by eliminating or lowering noise exposure levels. When the source of the noise cannot be eliminated, workers have to rely on hearing protection equipment. The aim here was to summarize the evidence for the effectiveness of interventions to enhance the wearing of hearing protection among workers exposed to noise in the workplace. DATA SOURCE: Studies with random assignment were identified by an electronic search of the medical literature up to 2005. Data were double-entered into the Review Manager software, version 4.2.5. DATA SYNTHESIS: Two studies were found. A computer-based intervention tailored to individual workers’ risks and lasting 30 minutes was not found to be more effective than a video providing general information for workers. A second randomized controlled trial evaluated the effect of a four-year school-based hearing loss prevention program among schoolchildren working on their parents’ farms. The intervention group was twice as likely to wear some kind of hearing protection as was the control group (which received only minimal intervention). REVIEWERS’ CONCLUSIONS: The limited evidence does not show whether tailored interventions are more or less effective than general interventions among workers, 80 percent of whom already use hearing protection. Long-lasting school-based interventions may increase the use of hearing protection substantially. Better interventions to enhance the use of hearing protection need to be developed and evaluated in order to increase the prevention of noise-induced hearing loss among workers.

CONTEXTO E OBJETIVO: Perda auditiva induzida por ruído pode apenas ser prevenida eliminando ou diminuindo os níveis de exposição sonora. Quando a fonte do ruído não pode ser eliminada, trabalhadores devem utilizar os equipamentos de proteção auditiva. O objetivo foi sumarizar as evidências sobre efetividade das intervenções para aumentar o uso de protetores auriculares entre trabalhadores expostos a ruídos. ESTRATÉGIA DE BUSCA: Estudos randomizados foram identificados por busca eletrônica na literatura médica até 2005. Os dados foram checados duplamente e inseridos no software Review Manager software, versão 4.2.5. RESULTADO PRINCIPAL: Dois estudos foram encontrados. Uma intervenção padronizada por computador em relação ao risco de um trabalhador individual durou 30 minutos e não foi mais efetiva do que um vídeo fornecendo informações gerais entre os trabalhadores. Um segundo ensaio clínico randomizado avaliou os efeitos de um programa de prevenção auditiva de quatro anos em uma escola onde jovens trabalhavam nas fazendas de seus pais. O grupo de intervenção foi duas vezes mais provável de usar algum tipo de protetor auricular do que o grupo controle, que recebeu mínima intervenção. CONCLUSÃO DOS REVISORES: Limitada evidência não demonstrou quando as intervenções padronizadas são mais ou menos efetivas do que intervenções gerais em trabalhadores, 80 por cento deles já utilizavam o protetor auricular. Intervenções longas em escolas podem aumentar substancialmente o uso de protetores auriculares. Melhores intervenções para aumentar o uso de Equipamentos de Proteção Individual (EPIs) devem ser desenvolvidas e avaliadas com intuito de aumentar a prevenção de perda auditiva induzida por ruído em trabalhadores.

The use of hearing protection devices by older adults during recreational noise exposure.

A population-based study to assess the use of hearing protection devices by older adults during noisy recreational activities was performed. The population-based Epidemiology of Hearing Loss Study was designed to measure the prevalence of hearing loss in adults residing in Beaver Dam, Wisconsin. The use of hearing protection devices during noisy recreational activities was assessed by performing three examinations over a period of 10 years (1993-1995, no. of participants (n)=3753, aged 48-92 years; 1998-2000, n=2800, aged 53-97 years; 2003-2005, n=2395, aged 58-100 years). The recreational activities included hunting, target shooting, woodworking/carpentry, metalworking, driving loud recreational vehicles, and performing yard work using either power tools or a chain saw. The prevalence of using hearing protection devices during any of these activities increased with time (9.5%, 15.0%, and 19.9% at baseline, 5 years, and 10 years, respectively). However, the use of hearing protection devices remained low for most activities. Those under the age of 65 were twice as likely to use hearing protection devices during noisy activities than were older adults. Men, those with a hearing handicap, and those with significant tinnitus were more likely to use hearing protection devices. Smokers and the less educated were less likely to use hearing protection devices. The results demonstrated that many adults expose themselves to potentially damaging recreational noise, leaving them at risk for hearing loss.

Sleep quality in noise exposed Brazilian workers.

This study investigated the effect of chronic workplace exposure to excessive noise on sleep quality. It involved 40 male workers aged 33 to 50 years, 20 of whom had been exposed to environmental workplace noise levels of 85 dB or more on 40-hour-a-week jobs. Another 20 workers who were not exposed to excessive noise were used as controls. All subjects were interviewed and submitted to physical examination, pure tone and speech audiometry, immittance testing and nocturnal polysomnography. Comparative analysis demonstrated that the two groups were similar, except for the exposure to noise. Fisher's test comparison of pure tone and speech audiometry and immittance testing revealed mild to moderate noise-induced hearing loss (P < 0.001) in the > or = 85-dB group. Indicators of sleep continuity were abnormal in both groups, demonstrating poor sleep quality; however, sleep quantity was normal. Of the 40 individuals, 13 (32.5%) presented respiratory sleep disorders. Of those 13, 10 presented daytime somnolence according to the Epworth Scale. The Mann-Whitney test showed that sleep was identical in the two groups. Fisher's exact test revealed no association between altered sleep and hearing status in either group. Our results show that active men working 40-hour-a-week in the presence of excessive noise without adequate protection for more than eight years presented with noise-induced hearing loss but their quality or quantity of night sleep was unaffected. Sensori-neural deafness may represent an element of adaptation against noise during sleep.

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

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

Self-reported tinnitus and noise sensitivity among adolescents in Sweden.

It seems to be a common opinion among researchers within the field of audiology that the prevalence of tinnitus will increase as a consequence of environmental factors, for example exposure to loud noise. Young people are exposed to loud sounds, more than any other age group, especially during leisure time activities, i.e. at pop concerts, discotheques and gyms. A crucial factor for the prevention of hearing impairments and hearing-related symptoms in the young population is the use of hearing protection. The focus of the present study is use of hearing protection and self-reported hearing-related symptoms, such as tinnitus and noise sensitivity in a young population of high-school students (N=1285), aged 13 to 19 years. The results show that the prevalence of permanent tinnitus and noise sensitivity, reported in the total group, was 8.7% and 17.1% respectively. Permanent tinnitus was not significantly related to level of socio-economic status, but age-related differences in the prevalence rates of experienced tinnitus and noise sensitivity were found to be significant. Older students reported such symptoms to a greater extent than younger students did. Those who reported tinnitus and other hearing-related symptoms protected their hearing to the highest extent and were the ones most worried.