Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 4.298
Filter
1.
J Acoust Soc Am ; 155(5): 3267-3273, 2024 May 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38742961

ABSTRACT

Music is complex. There are risks to hearing health associated with playing due to excessive sound exposure. Face the Music is an on-going cross-sectional project to assess the risks to unamplified classical musicians. Key findings over the first fifteen years are presented based on the research undertaken with a leading conservatoire on more than 5000 classical music students. The work covers hearing health surveillance, education and awareness, sound exposure, and new technology. The future of the research programme is discussed along with opportunities in objective hearing health assessment and new acoustic solutions. A lot has changed in fifteen years, but the research was driven by a change in United Kingdom legislation. It is hoped that the research results can inform future regulation.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Music , Humans , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/prevention & control , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/etiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Occupational Diseases/prevention & control , Occupational Diseases/psychology , Occupational Diseases/etiology , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Risk Factors , United Kingdom , Risk Assessment , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Young Adult , Male , Female , Adult , Acoustics , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
2.
Sci Rep ; 14(1): 10762, 2024 05 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38730002

ABSTRACT

Excessive occupational exposure to noise results in a well-recognized occupational hearing loss which is prevalent in many workplaces and now it is taken as a global problem. Therefore, this study aims to assess the prevalence of noise-induced hearing loss and associated factors among workers in the Bishoftu Central Air Base in Ethiopia. An institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 260 central air base workers through face-to-face interviews, an environment noise survey, and an audiometric test for data collection. Data were entered by Epi-data version 3.1 and SPSS was used to analyze the data. Finally, a statistical analysis such as descriptive and binary logistic regression analysis was applied. A P-value < 0.05 at 95% CI was considered statistically significant. The overall prevalence of noise-induced hearing loss and hearing impairments was 24.6 and 30.9%, respectively. The highest prevalence of noise-induced hearing loss was recorded for workers who were exposed to noise levels greater than 90 dBA. Out of 132 workers exposed to the average noise level of 75 dB A, only 5% of workers were affected with noise-induced hearing loss, while 128 workers exposed to an average noise level equal to or greater than 90 dB A, 19.6% of workers were identified with noise-induced hearing loss. Regarding sex, around 21.9% of male workers were identified with noise-induced hearing loss. Workers who were exposed to a high noise level workplace previously or before the Central Air Base workplace were five times (AOR = 5.0, 95% CI 1.74-14.36) more likely affected by noise-induced hearing loss than those workers not previously exposed. Those workers who were exposed to greater or equal to 90dBA noise level were 4.98 times (AOR = 4.98, 95% CI 2.59-9.58) more likely to be exposed to noise-induced levels than those who were exposed to less than 90dBA noise level. Moreover, male air base workers were 3.5 times more likely exposed to hearing impairment than female workers (AOR = 3.5, 95% CI 1.01-12.0). This study identified that the prevalence of noise-induced hearing loss and hearing impairments was significantly high. So implementation of a hearing conservation program, giving noise education, and supplying adequate hearing protective devices (HPDs) are essentials.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Noise, Occupational , Occupational Exposure , Humans , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/epidemiology , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/etiology , Ethiopia/epidemiology , Male , Adult , Prevalence , Female , Cross-Sectional Studies , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Young Adult , Risk Factors , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Occupational Diseases/etiology
3.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 5: CD015066, 2024 05 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38757544

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Ear Protective Devices , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Noise, Occupational , Occupational Exposure , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Humans , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Noise, Occupational/prevention & control , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/prevention & control , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Occupational Diseases/prevention & control
4.
BMJ Open ; 14(5): e079955, 2024 May 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38760055

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to predict the risk of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) through a back-propagation neural network (BPNN) model. It provides an early, simple and accurate prediction method for NIHL. DESIGN: Population based, a cross sectional study. SETTING: Han, China. PARTICIPANTS: This study selected 3266 Han male workers from three automobile manufacturing industries. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Information including personal life habits, occupational health test information and occupational exposure history were collected and predictive factors of NIHL were screened from these workers. BPNN and logistic regression models were constructed using these predictors. RESULTS: The input variables of BPNN model were 20, 16 and 21 important factors screened by univariate, stepwise and lasso-logistic regression. When the BPNN model was applied to the test set, it was found to have a sensitivity (TPR) of 83.33%, a specificity (TNR) of 85.92%, an accuracy (ACC) of 85.51%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 52.85%, a negative predictive value of 96.46% and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) is: 0.926 (95% CI: 0.891 to 0.961), which demonstrated the better overall properties than univariate-logistic regression modelling (AUC: 0.715) (95% CI: 0.652 to 0.777). The BPNN model has better predictive performance against NIHL than the stepwise-logistic and lasso-logistic regression model in terms of TPR, TNR, ACC, PPV and NPV (p<0.05); the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of NIHL is also higher than that of the stepwise and lasso-logistic regression model (p<0.05). It was a relatively important factor in NIHL to find cumulative noise exposure, auditory system symptoms, age, listening to music or watching video with headphones, exposure to high temperature and noise exposure time in the trained BPNN model. CONCLUSIONS: The BPNN model was a valuable tool in dealing with the occupational risk prediction problem of NIHL. It can be used to predict the risk of an individual NIHL.


Subject(s)
Automobiles , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Manufacturing Industry , Neural Networks, Computer , Occupational Diseases , Occupational Exposure , Humans , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/diagnosis , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/epidemiology , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/etiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Male , China/epidemiology , Adult , Middle Aged , Risk Assessment/methods , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Occupational Diseases/etiology , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Logistic Models , Risk Factors , ROC Curve , East Asian People
5.
Article in Chinese | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38802307

ABSTRACT

Objective: To analyze the characteristics of high-frequency average hearing loss in both ears of noise exposed workers in Tianjin in 2020, and quantitatively analyze the influencing factors of high-frequency hearing loss in both ears of workers. Methods: In March 2023, Collect and organize basic information about noise-hazardous enterprises and personal information of workers exposed to noise. Data from the Tianjin Occupational Disease and Health Hazard Factors Information Monitoring System from January 2020 to December 2020, and analyze the impact of basic information of employees, enterprise size, regional distribution, industry category, and economic type on the high-frequency average hearing loss of workers during work. Apply logistic regression to quantitatively analyze the influencing factors of abnormal high-frequency average hearing threshold of noise exposed workers. Results: The size, economic type, industry category, and regional distribution of enterprises, as well as the gender, age, length of service of workers, have an impact on the abnormal high-frequency average hearing threshold of noise exposed workers (χ(2)=733.56、3 497、27、1352.84、1197.62、2570.59、22.30、506.60, P<0.001) . Quantitative analysis using a logistic regression model showed that in the basic information of workers, noise exposed workers were male (OR=2.500, P<0.001) and aged 30-39, 40-49, and 50-59 years (OR=1.33, P<0.001; OR=1.68, P<0.001; OR=1.52, P< 0.001) , with a length of service of 4 to<10 years and≥10 years (OR=1.08, P<0.001; OR=1.615, P<0.001) being the influencing factors for high-frequency hearing loss in both ears of noise exposed workers; In terms of enterprise characteristics, medium-sized, small and micro enterprises (OR=1.12, P<0.001; OR=1.75, P<0.001; OR=2.09, P<0.001) , enterprises located in the fourth district around the city (OR=1.268, P<0.001) , and enterprises with economic types of collective economy, other economy, private economy, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan investment, shareholding system, and other industry economies (OR are all >1, P<0.001) are all factors affecting high-frequency hearing loss in noise exposed personnel. Conclusion: Noise is a common occupational hazard factor in Tianjin's enterprises, especially for workers in micro enterprises who face a high risk of hearing abnormalities. Therefore, enterprises need to strengthen the management and intervention of noise operations to prevent the occurrence of hearing loss in workers.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Noise, Occupational , Occupational Exposure , Humans , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Male , Female , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/epidemiology , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/etiology , China/epidemiology , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Adult , Logistic Models , Risk Factors , Middle Aged , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Occupational Diseases/etiology
6.
BMC Public Health ; 24(1): 1044, 2024 Apr 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38622576

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Noise, Occupational , Humans , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Latent Class Analysis , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Noise, Occupational/prevention & control , Ear Protective Devices , Hearing , Surveys and Questionnaires , China
7.
Obstet Gynecol Surv ; 79(4): 219-232, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38640128

ABSTRACT

Importance: Pregnant women are exposed to both occupational and environmental noise during their pregnancy. The association between noise and adverse health outcomes is well known. Less is known about the relationship between noise and its effects on the embryo/fetus and pregnancy. Objectives: The purpose of the study is to review what is known about the effect(s) of environment and occupational noise during pregnancy on maternal and perinatal outcomes. Evidence Acquisition: Electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase) were searched from 1995-2023 with the only limitation being that the articles were in English. Studies were selected that examined associations between environmental and occupational noise and pregnancy outcome, maternal outcome, or perinatal outcome. Results: There were 233 articles identified. After reviewing all abstracts and selected full texts, 25 publications were used as the basis of this review. Multiple studies have been undertaken evaluating the effects of noise on embryonal/fetal growth, fetal development, maternal hypertension, gestational diabetes, and maternal anxiety and depression. The overall effects of occupational and environmental exposure on both fetal and maternal outcomes remain uncertain. Conclusions: Further high-quality studies are needed to determine the association between noise and pregnancy outcomes. Relevance: Even though this review suggests a relationship between noise and maternal/fetal outcomes, confirmation will require well designed future studies.


Subject(s)
Diabetes, Gestational , Noise, Occupational , Pre-Eclampsia , Pregnancy Complications , Pregnancy , Female , Humans , Pregnancy Outcome , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Pregnancy Complications/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications/etiology
8.
PLoS One ; 19(4): e0301144, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38625962

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Noise exposure during pregnancy may affect a child's auditory system, which may disturb fetal learning and language development. We examined the impact of occupational noise exposure during pregnancy on children's language acquisition at the age of one. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted among women working in the food industry, as kindergarten teachers, musicians, dental nurses, or pharmacists who had a child aged <1 year. The analyses covered 408 mother-child pairs. Language acquisition was measured using the Infant-Toddler Checklist. An occupational hygienist assessed noise exposure individually as no (N = 180), low (70-78 dB; N = 108) or moderate/high exposure (>79 dB; N = 120). RESULTS: Among the boys, the adjusted mean differences in language acquisition scores were -0.4 (95% CI -2.5, 1.8) for low, and -0.7 (95% CI -2.9, 1.4) for moderate/high exposure compared to no exposure. Among the girls the respective scores were +0.1 (95% CI -2.2, 2.5) and -0.1 (95% CI -2.3, 2.2). Among the children of kindergarten teachers, who were mainly exposed to human noise, low or moderate exposure was associated with lower language acquisition scores. The adjusted mean differences were -3.8 (95% CI -7.2, -0.4) for low and -4.9 (95% CI -8.6, -1.2) for moderate exposure. CONCLUSIONS: In general, we did not detect an association between maternal noise exposure and children's language acquisition among one-year-old children. However, the children of kindergarten teachers exposed to human noise had lower language acquisition scores than the children of the non-exposed participants. These suggestive findings merit further investigation by level and type of exposure.


Subject(s)
Noise, Occupational , Occupational Exposure , Male , Pregnancy , Infant , Humans , Female , Cohort Studies , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Language Development , Maternal Exposure/adverse effects
9.
Environ Pollut ; 349: 123945, 2024 May 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38604306

ABSTRACT

Noise pollution has grown to be a major public health issue worldwide. We sought to profile serum metabolite expression changes related to occupational noise exposure by untargeted metabolomics, as well as to evaluate the potential roles of serum metabolites in occupational noise-associated arterial stiffness (AS). Our study involved 30 noise-exposed industrial personnel (Lipo group) and 30 noise-free controls (Blank group). The untargeted metabolomic analysis was performed by employing a UPLC-HRMS. The associations of occupational noise and significant differential metabolites (between Blank/Lipo groups) with AS were evaluated using multivariable-adjusted generalized linear models. We performed the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis to further screen for AS's risk metabolites. We explored 177 metabolites across 21 categories significantly differentially expressed between Blank/Lipo groups, and these metabolites were enriched in 20 metabolic pathways. Moreover, 15 metabolites in 4 classes (including food, glycerophosphocholine, sphingomyelin [SM] and triacylglycerols [TAG]) were adversely associated with AS (all P < 0.05). Meanwhile, five metabolites (homostachydrine, phosphatidylcholine (PC) (32:1e), PC (38:6p), SM (d41:2) and TAG (45:1) have been proven to be useful predictors of AS prevalence. However, none of these 15 metabolites were found to have a mediating influence on occupational noise-induced AS. Our study reveals specific metabolic changes caused by occupational noise exposure, and several metabolites may have protective effects on AS. However, the roles of serum metabolites in noise-AS association remain to be validated in future studies.


Subject(s)
Metabolome , Occupational Exposure , Vascular Stiffness , Humans , Adult , Male , Middle Aged , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Metabolomics
10.
Article in Chinese | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38563181

ABSTRACT

Noise-induced hearing loss(NIHL) is an acquired sensorineural hearing loss induced by long-term noise exposure. The susceptibility of exposed people may vary even in the same noise environment. With the development of sequencing techniques, genes related to oxidative stress, immunoinflammatory, ion homeostasis, energy metabolism, DNA damage repair and other mechanisms in NIHL have been reported continuously. And some genes may interact with noise exposure indexes. In this article, population studies on NIHL-related gene polymorphisms and gene-environment interactions in the past 20 years are reviewed, aimed to providing evidence for the construction of NIHL-related risk prediction models and the formulation of individualized interventions.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Noise, Occupational , Humans , Case-Control Studies , China/epidemiology , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Genotype , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/genetics , Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide
11.
Pediatr Dent ; 46(2): 108-114, 2024 Mar 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38664909

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To evaluate the noise levels recorded in a hospital-based pediatric dental clinic and evaluate the occupational exposure personnel have to potentially hazardous levels of noise. Methods: A SoundAdvisor™ Sound Level Meter Model 831C was used to gather 19 days of background sound data (equivalent continuous sound levels, measured as LAeq) in the open bay, quiet room, sedation suite, and operating room settings. A Spartan™ Wireless Noise Dosimeter Model 730 (Larson Davis) was utilized to capture data about personal noise exposure of pediatric dental residents over 81 clinic sessions. Personal noise exposure was compared to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) stand- ard. Results: Background A-weighted sound pressure level was significantly less for the open bay than in the operating room, quiet room, and oral sedation setting (P<0.05), while the operating room was significantly less than the oral sedation setting (P=0.038). Personal LAeq was significantly less for the open bay than the quiet room (P=0.007) and oral sedation settings (P=0.007). There was a significantly larger percentage of time above 80 dBA captured in the oral sedation suite compared to the open bay (P=0.010) or operating room (P=0.023). Conclusions: Daily occupational noise exposure did not exceed the thresholds set forth by OSHA. Sedation and quiet room treatment settings were noted to be the loudest pediatric dental clinical environments.


Subject(s)
Noise, Occupational , Occupational Exposure , Pediatric Dentistry , Humans , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Dental Clinics , United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration , United States , Child , Operating Rooms , Internship and Residency
12.
Article in Chinese | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38677990

ABSTRACT

Objective: Three occupational health risk assessment methods were used to assess the occupational health risk of noise exposed posts in an automobile manufacturing enterprise. According to the results, the selection of risk assessment methods and risk management of such occupational noise enterprises were provided. Methods: Form April to November 2021, The occupational health field survey was carried out in an automobile manufacturing industry in Tianjin. The occupational health MES risk assessment method, occupational health risk index risk assessment method and Australian occupational hazard risk assessment method were used to evaluate the occupational health risk of noise-exposed posts in this enterprise, and the evaluation results of different methods were analyzed and compared. Results: The average value of L(Aeq, 8 h) in the four workshops of automobile manufacturing industry was 82.95 dB (A) , and the noise detection exceeding rate was 22.41% (26/116) . The LAeq, 8h and exceeding rate noise of welding workshop were higher than those of other workshops (χ(2)=23.56, 32.94, P<0.01) . The three occupational health risk assessment methods have the same risk assessment results for the four major workshops. The assembly and painting workshops are level 4 risk (possible risk) , and the stamping and welding workshops are level 3 risk (significant risk) . Conclusion: Occupational noise has certain potential hazards to workers in automobile manufacturing enterprises. Therefore, in the future work, corresponding organizational management measures should be taken to improve the working environment and reduce the actual exposure level of workers in order to protect the health of occupational workers.


Subject(s)
Automobiles , Noise, Occupational , Occupational Exposure , Occupational Health , Humans , Risk Assessment/methods , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Manufacturing Industry
13.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg ; 144(5): 2413-2420, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38578310

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate noise exposure to the operating room staff consisting of the surgeon, assistant, anaesthetist and Mako Product Specialist (MPS) during Mako robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA). We aimed to determine whether employees were exposed to noise at or above a lower exposure action value (LEAV) set out by the Noise at Work Regulations 2005, Health and Safety Executive (HSE), UK. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively recorded intra-operative noise levels in Mako robotic-arm assisted TKA and THA over a period of two months using the MicW i436 connected to an iOS device (Apple), using the Sound Level Meter App (iOS) by the National Institute for Occupation Safety and Health (NIOSH). Data obtained was then used to calculate "worst case" daily exposure value to assess if sound levels were compliant with UK guidelines. Comparison between operating room staff groups was performed with ANOVA testing. RESULTS: A total of 19 TKA and 11 THA operations were recorded. During TKA, for the primary surgeon and the assistant, the equivalent continuous sound pressure level (LAeq) was over 80 dB, exceeding the LEAV set out by the Noise at Work Regulations by HSE. During THA, the average LAeq and peak sound pressure levels did not exceed the LEAV. The calculated daily exposure for the primary surgeon in TKA was 82 dB. A Tukey post hoc test revealed that LAeq was statistically significantly lower in the anaesthetist and MPS (p < .001) compared to the primary surgeon and assistant in both TKA and THA. CONCLUSIONS: Operating room staff, particularly the primary surgeon and assistant are exposed to significant levels of noise during Mako robotic-arm assisted TKA and THA. Formal assessments should be performed to further assess the risk of noise induced hearing loss in robotic-arm assisted arthroplasty.


Subject(s)
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee , Noise, Occupational , Occupational Exposure , Operating Rooms , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip/methods , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee/methods
14.
Radiography (Lond) ; 30(3): 889-895, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38603992

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Acoustic noise from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can cause hearing loss and needs to be mitigated to ensure the safety of patients and personnel. Capturing MR personnel's insights is crucial for guiding the development and future applications of noise-reduction technology. This study aimed to explore how MR radiographers manage acoustic noise in clinical MR settings. METHODS: Using a qualitative design, we conducted semi-structured individual interviews with fifteen MR radiographers from fifteen hospitals around Sweden. We focused on the clinical implications of participants' noise management, using an interpretive description approach. We also identified sociotechnical interactions between People, Environment, Tools, and Tasks (PETT) by adopting a Human Factors/Ergonomics framework. Interview data were analyzed inductively with thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke). RESULTS: The analysis generated three main themes regarding MR radiographers' noise management: (I) Navigating Occupational Noise: Risk Management and Adaptation; (II) Protecting the Patient and Serving the Exam, and (III) Establishing a Safe Healthcare Environment with Organizational Support. CONCLUSION: This study offers insights into radiographers' experiences of managing acoustic noise within MRI, and the associated challenges. Radiographers have adopted multiple strategies to protect patients and themselves from adverse noise-related effects. However, they require tools and support to manage this effectively, suggesting a need for organizations to adopt more proactive, holistic approaches to safety initiatives. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The radiographers stressed the importance of a soundproofed work environment to minimize occupational adverse health effects and preserve work performance. They acknowledge noise as a common contributor to patient distress and discomfort. Providing options like earplugs, headphones, mold putty, software-optimized "quiet" sequences, and patient information were important tools. Fostering a safety culture requires proactive safety efforts and support from colleagues and management.


Subject(s)
Interviews as Topic , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Noise, Occupational , Qualitative Research , Humans , Sweden , Female , Male , Adult , Middle Aged , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/prevention & control , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Risk Management
15.
Trends Hear ; 28: 23312165241240353, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38545653

ABSTRACT

Exposure to intense low-frequency sounds, for example inside tanks and armoured vehicles, can lead to noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) with a variable audiometric pattern, including low- and mid-frequency hearing loss. It is not known how well existing methods for diagnosing NIHL apply in such cases. Here, the audiograms of 68 military personnel (mostly veterans) who had been exposed to intense low-frequency noise (together with other types of noise) and who had low-frequency hearing loss (defined as a pure-tone average loss at 0.25, 0.5 and 1 kHz ≥20 dB) were used to assess the sensitivity of three diagnostic methods: the method of Coles, Lutman and Buffin, denoted CLB, which depends on the identification of a notch or bulge in the audiogram near 4 kHz, and two methods specifically intended for diagnosing NIHL sustained during military service, the rM-NIHL method, which depends on the identification of a notch or bulge in the audiogram near 4 kHz and/or a hearing loss at high frequencies greater than expected from age alone, and the MLP(18) method based on a multi-layer perceptron. The proportion of individuals receiving a positive diagnosis for either or both ears, which provides an approximate measure of sensitivity, was 0.40 for the CLB method, 0.79 for the rM-NIHL method and 1.0 for the MLP(18) method. It is concluded that the MLP(18) method is suitable for diagnosing NIHL sustained during military service whether or not the exposure includes intense low-frequency sounds.


Subject(s)
Deafness , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Noise, Occupational , Humans , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/diagnosis , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/epidemiology , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/etiology , Audiometry/methods , Hearing Tests
16.
Sci Rep ; 14(1): 7058, 2024 03 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38528033

ABSTRACT

In the present study, an attempt has been made to assess the impact of vehicular noise upon the 3-wheeler tempo drivers and to know whether there is any relationship between hearing loss and cumulative noise exposure. For this purpose, 3-wheeler tempo drivers (Exposed group) and non-commercial light motor vehicle car drivers (Unexposed group) were chosen as study subjects. Three traffic routes were selected to assess the noise level during waiting and running time in the exposed and unexposed groups. Among all three routes, the highest mean noise level (Leq) was observed on the Chowk to Dubagga route for waiting and en-route noise measurement. It was measured as 84.13 dB(A) and 86.36 dB(A) for waiting and en-route periods of 7.68 ± 3.46 and 31.05 ± 6.6 min, respectively. Cumulative noise exposure was found to be significantly different (p < 0.001) in all age groups of exposed and unexposed drivers. Audiometric tests have been performed over both exposed and unexposed groups. The regression analysis has been done keeping hearing loss among tempo drivers as the dependent variable and age (years) and Energy (Pa2 Hrs) as the independent variable using three different criteria of hearing loss definitions, i.e., World Health Organization, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Occupational Safety and Health Administration criteria. Among these three criteria, the NIOSH criterion of hearing loss best explained the independent variables. It could explain the total variation in dependent variable by independent variable quite well, i.e., 68.1%. The finding showed a linear relationship between cumulative noise exposures (Pa2 Hrs) and the exposed group's hearing loss (dB), i.e., hearing loss increases with increasing noise dose. Based on the findings, two model equations were developed to identify the safe and unsafe noise levels with exposure time.


Subject(s)
Deafness , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Noise, Occupational , Occupational Diseases , Occupational Exposure , Humans , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/diagnosis , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/epidemiology , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/etiology , Cities , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Occupational Exposure/analysis , Regression Analysis , India/epidemiology
17.
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ; 31(16): 24129-24138, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38436861

ABSTRACT

The study aimed to evaluate the impact of occupational noise on hearing loss among healthcare workers using audiometry. A longitudinal study was conducted with a six-month follow-up period in a hospital with 21 participants, divided into high-noise-exposure (HNE) and low-noise-exposure (LNE) groups. Mean noise levels were higher in the HNE group (70.4 ± 4.5 dBA), and hearing loss was measured using pure-tone audiometry at baseline and follow-up. The HNE group had significantly higher mean threshold levels at frequencies of 0.25 kHz, 0.5 kHz, 4.0 kHz, and an average of 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz (all p-values < 0.05) after the follow-up period. After adjusting for confounding factors, the HNE group had significantly higher hearing loss levels at 0.25 kHz, 0.5 kHz, and average frequencies of 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz compared to the LNE group at the second measurement. Occupational noise levels above 65 dBA over six months were found to cause significant threshold changes at frequencies of 0.25 kHz, 0.5 kHz, and an average of 0.5-4.0 kHz. This study highlights the risk of noise-induced hearing loss among healthcare workers and emphasizes the importance of implementing effective hearing conservation programs in the workplace. Regular monitoring and assessment of noise levels and hearing ability, along with proper use of personal protective equipment, are crucial steps in mitigating the impact of occupational noise exposure on the hearing health of healthcare workers.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Noise, Occupational , Occupational Diseases , Occupational Exposure , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/epidemiology , Personnel, Hospital , Hearing
18.
Int Tinnitus J ; 27(2): 119-125, 2024 Mar 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38507624

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Deafness , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Noise, Occupational , Students, Medical , Tinnitus , Humans , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/epidemiology , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/etiology , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/prevention & control , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology , Tinnitus/etiology , Hearing , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Noise, Occupational/prevention & control
19.
J Occup Environ Hyg ; 21(5): 342-352, 2024 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38489754

ABSTRACT

Traffic enforcers are exposed to various occupational health and safety hazards, including noise pollution, which may lead to occupational hearing loss. This cross-sectional study aimed to estimate the prevalence of hearing loss and to assess the relationship between occupational noise exposure level (ONEL) and abnormalities in air conduction thresholds among Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) employees along Epifanio delos Santos Avenue, Philippines. Eight-hour ONELs were measured among 108 participants working with greater than 5 years of service. Participants had hearing evaluations using pure tone audiometry (PTA) to calculate the prevalence of hearing loss. Generalized linear models with a Poisson distribution were fitted to estimate the association between ONEL and audiologic abnormalities, controlling for confounding factors. Approximately 16% of employees had hearing loss. The prevalence of hearing loss was higher with ONEL exposures greater than 85 A-weighted decibels (dBA), with traffic enforcers exposed to higher ONELs than office workers. ONELs greater than 85 dBA were related to audiologic abnormalities at different frequencies in PTA. The prevalence of audiologic abnormalities at 4000 Hz and 6000 Hz was 48% higher (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR], 1.48; 95% CI, 1.12-1.96) and 25% higher (aPR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.00-1.55), respectively, among participants with ONELs greater than 85 dBA than with ONELs less than or equal to 85 dBA. Participants exposed to ONELs greater than 85 dBA, more likely traffic enforcers, may have increased risk of audiologic abnormalities. Regular ONEL monitoring is warranted for occupational risk assessment of traffic enforcers. A hearing conservation program may need to be considered for this population. Additional studies are needed to determine trends in hearing deterioration among traffic enforcers.


Subject(s)
Audiometry, Pure-Tone , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Noise, Occupational , Occupational Exposure , Humans , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Cross-Sectional Studies , Adult , Male , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/epidemiology , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/etiology , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Female , Middle Aged , Philippines/epidemiology , Prevalence , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Occupational Diseases/etiology , Young Adult
20.
Int Arch Occup Environ Health ; 97(4): 365-375, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38421415

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: High-frequency hearing loss (HFHL) stands as a prevalent occupational morbidity globally, with numerous associated risk factors, some of which are modifiable. In the context of a comprehensive hearing conservation program, the initial steps involve early screening and identification of workers with these modifiable risk factors, aiming to reduce the prevalence of hearing loss. Our objective was to estimate the prevalence of HFHL and determine its predictors among mine workers. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study among 226 mine workers in ten open-cast mines in Gujarat state, the western part of India, in November 2020. We collected data on socio-demography, addiction, occupation history and comorbidities, along with anthropometric, blood pressure, and blood sugar measurements. Audiometric evaluations using a portable diagnostic audiometer were employed to assess HFHL, defined as a hearing threshold exceeding 25 decibels (dB) at high frequencies (3000, 4000, 6000, and 8000 Hz). A generalized linear model (GLM) with a binomial family was performed to determine the predictors significantly predicting HFHL after adjusting for confounding variables. RESULTS: The prevalence of HFHL was 35% (95% CI: 29-42%) in our study setting. Office workers demonstrated a prevalence of 19%, whereas other job categories displayed a higher prevalence of 42%, resulting in a significant prevalence difference of 23% and a prevalence ratio of 2.2. The GLM analysis revealed that variables, such as noise exposure during work [adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) 2.3 (95% CI: 1.2-4.7, p = 0.018)] and noise exposure duration [aPR 1.1 (95% CI: 1.0-1.1, p = 0.042)], were significant predictors of HFHL. CONCLUSIONS: In our study setting, mine workers exhibited a high prevalence of HFHL, with exposure to workplace noise and duration being modifiable predictors. Because HFHL advances slowly and is generally undetected by the individual, we recommend periodic testing using audiometry to identify it among mine workers and, if possible, shifting them from mining activities to office. Furthermore, we advocate for the implementation of a comprehensive hearing conservation program to the extent possible.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced , Miners , Noise, Occupational , Occupational Diseases , Occupational Exposure , Humans , Hearing Loss, High-Frequency/complications , Hearing Loss, High-Frequency/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Prevalence , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/diagnosis , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/epidemiology , Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced/etiology , India/epidemiology , Occupational Diseases/etiology , Hearing , Noise, Occupational/adverse effects , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...