Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Ear Protective Devices”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 145 records · Page 8Linked to original sources
PubMed1990

Noise pollution in the operating theatre.

Sound levels during a typical major operation were measured to identify the main sources of noise in the operating theatre. Although overall sound levels were within the recommended levels for a satisfactory working environment, loud intermittent noises of up to 108 dB were emitted from sources such as suckers, "intercoms", and alarms on anaesthetic monitoring devices. The noisiest time was usually during the preparation period of the operation; during surgery, noise levels were much higher than levels of normal speech between staff. Preferred speech interference levels were often exceeded which made communication difficult and sometimes impossible. Communication and concentration were also disrupted by unnecessary background conversation.

Anesthesiology↗
PubMed1998

Noise induced hearing loss among male airport workers in Korea.

The purposes of this study of airport workers were to a) determine the prevalence and symptoms of hearing loss, and b) identify compliance in using hearing protective devices (HPDs) and its relationship with hearing loss. This cross sectional epidemiological study was conducted with 255 noise exposed and 195 non-noise exposed, full time, male workers at a large metropolitan airport in Seoul, Korea. The three measures used were the self administered Occupational Hearing Questionnaire (OHQ), an audiological assessment, and a record review of baseline hearing and noise levels of locations in which the employee worked. The results showed a significant difference in prevalence of hearing loss (more than 25dB) between the noise and the non-noise exposed groups (p < .05). About 60.8% of noise exposed workers reported continuous use of the HPDs. The continuous HPD users had significantly lower rates of hearing loss than the occasional users or non-users. The major symptom for workers with low frequency hearing loss was trouble in communication, whereas tinnitus and fullness in the ear were the most common symptoms for the workers with high frequency hearing loss. The airport workers exposed to excessive noise had a great deal of high frequency hearing loss. The degree of hearing loss present reinforces the need for aggressive hearing conservation programs among airport workers exposed to noise.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Using the extended parallel process model to prevent noise-induced hearing loss among coal miners in Appalachia.

Occupational noise-induced hearing loss is the second most self-reported occupational illness or injury in the United States. Among coal miners, more than 90% of the population reports a hearing deficit by age 55. In this formative evaluation, focus groups were conducted with coal miners in Appalachia to ascertain whether miners perceive hearing loss as a major health risk and if so, what would motivate the consistent wearing of hearing protection devices (HPDs). The theoretical framework of the Extended Parallel Process Model was used to identify the miners' knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and current behaviors regarding hearing protection. Focus group participants had strong perceived severity and varying levels of perceived susceptibility to hearing loss. Various barriers significantly reduced the self-efficacy and the response efficacy of using hearing protection.

Adult↗
PubMed1982

Efficacy of enforcement in an industrial hearing conservation program.

Relative efficacy of various levels of enforcement in the use of personal hearing protective devices was investigated among employees of a large industrial plant. The main variable was that each of four groups of employees worked during a different period of enforcement policy on the use of personal hearing protection. Analysis of variance of mean hearing levels using three different audiometric grading schemes with different levels of sensitivity, namely, the 0.5, 1, 2 kHz Hearing Level Index, the 1, 2, 3 kHz Hearing Level Index, and the 4000 Hz single puretone test indicate that the enforcement policy did have a dramatic effect on the efficacy of the hearing conservation program and should give similar results in other industrial settings. When and where the use of personal hearing protection was left to the employee it was found that hearing loss among the noise-exposed was very much in excess of that among a non-noise-exposed group. Mandatory use of personal protective devices was found to be much more effective in conserving hearing that the voluntary approach. Mandatory use of earmuffs exclusively proved to be less effective than mandatory use of personal hearing protection when the employee was given a choice of earmuffs or earplugs. Enactment of the Occupational Safety and Health Act did not result in greater hearing conservation over the existing company mandatory hearing conservation program which is quite effective.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

Speech intelligibility and protective effectiveness of selected active noise reduction and conventional communications headsets.

An experiment was conducted to compare both speech intelligibility and noise attenuation of a conventional passive headset (David Clark H10-76) and an electronic Active Noise Reduction (ANR) headset (Bose Aviation) operated with and without its ANR feature. Modified Rhyme Tests were conducted in pink and tank noise, and with and without bilateral phase reversal between earphones. The Bose ANR unit required a significantly higher speech-to-noise (S/N) ratio in both noise environments than the two passive headset systems to maintain equal intelligibility, in part because of its stronger noise reduction and higher required signal level. Articulation Index calculations corroborated the empirical result that the David Clark afforded comparable intelligibility to the Bose ANR device. Bilateral phase reversal proved to be of no benefit, and pink noise proved to be the harsher environment for speech intelligibility. On a speech intelligibility basis alone, the results do not justify the additional cost of the ANR headset; however, when severe noise exposure is at issue, a properly functioning ANR unit may afford more protection than a similar passive headset without electronics, especially in low-frequency noise spectra.

Acoustics↗
PubMed1978

The typical noise: first step in the development of a short procedure for estimating performance of hearing protectors.

An exact measurement of the effectiveness of a hearing protector requires the determination of how well it works in the specific noise in which it is to be worn. As a practical matter, though, people do not generally remain in a single noise spectrum throughout a working career or even throughout a working day, so it does not matter so much that most measurers are not likely to be equipped to perform spectrum analyses. Other techniques for judging earplugs and earmuffs are obviously necessary. Previous research has tried to find the average attenuation given by a particular device in several (or many) noises, or it has tried to deal with the attenuation given in noises given with particular C-minus-A values. In this paper, a procedure is developed for compressing these multiple-spectra calculations into a single-spectrum computation that proves to be at least as accurate as the more complex methods.

Ear Protective Devices↗
PubMed1995

Most comfortable loudness shift as a measure of speech attenuation by hearing protectors.

The feasibility of using most comfortable loudness (MCL) as a real-world measure of speech attenuation introduced by hearing protection devices (HPDs) was studied. The authors compared three insert HPDs and an earmuff under three test conditions: (a) monaural earphone listening, (b) binaural earphone listening, and (c) sound field listening. The earmuff was used only in the sound-field condition. In addition, three sets of fitting instructions were utilized. Twelve normal hearing subjects participated. Results indicate that MCL shift can be used as a simple measure of speech attenuation provided by HPDs. The observed MCL shifts were affected by the fitting instruction but not by the listening condition. Findings support the notion that MCL-based tests of speech attenuation by HPDs can be conducted reliably both in sound field and under earphones and may be a simple and valid tool for assessing changes in speech audibility due to the wearing of HPDs.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Comparison of the original and revised structures of the Health Promotion Model in predicting construction workers' use of hearing protection.

Pender's health promotion model (HPM) has been revised, including substantial changes in its structure. The purpose of this study was to compare the fit and predictive usefulness of the original and revised structures of the HPM as applied to the use of hearing protection devices by 703 construction workers. Structural equation modeling was used to evaluate the two alternative forms of the model. Both forms of the model fit well, with the revised structure having a better fit and explaining more of the variance in use of hearing protection (28% vs. 18%). Results support the revised structure of the health promotion model (HPM) over the original form, and indicate it may be useful in understanding and predicting use of hearing protection.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Individual perception of noise exposure and hearing protection in industry.

Existing approaches that explain the behavior of workers in noisy environments rarely include quantitative variables related to central factors such as noise exposure levels and workers' hearing status. The aim of this study is to analyze the relationship among individual, contextual, and perceptual-cognitive factors and the use of hearing protection devices (HPDs). We studied 516 industrial workers exposed to noise levels greater than the Portuguese action level and developed a conceptual model for HPD use. The multivariate data analysis of the several variables considered revealed that individual risk perception and the outcome value for hearing preservation were the main direct predictors of the use of HPDs. Workers' opinions about the company's safety climate and their perception of noise exposure effects also play important roles as predictors. However, much of the effects of these factors are indirect (i.e., mediated by other variables). Furthermore, these results suggest that risk perception should be considered an essential issue in the design and implementation of any hearing conservation program, particularly in the development of training programs. Actual or potential applications of this research include the definition of more accurate strategies for promoting and motivating the use of HPDs.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Sound localization with hearing protectors.

A preliminary investigation was conducted of the ability of normal-hearing subjects to localize sound while wearing hearing protective devices. Performance with Bilsom 2392 level-dependent stereophonic muffs with limited amplification was compared with that of conventional level-independent E-A-R 3000 muffs and E-A-R plugs. Sound localization was assessed using an array of six speakers, positioned in the horizontal plane, 1 m from the subject at azimuth angles of 30 degrees, 90 degrees, 150 degrees, 210 degrees, 270 degrees and 330 degrees. The stimulus was an 80 dB SPL 300-ms one-third octave noise band centered at 500 Hz or 4000 Hz. The experiment was conducted in quiet and in a 65 dB SPL white noise background. The results indicated that at 500 Hz, the wearing of protectors resulted in a 20% decrease in the accuracy of speaker identification but the three types of device were indistinguishable. At 4000 Hz, performance was best in the unoccluded condition and relatively worst with the level-dependent muff. Error patterns depended on the interaction of stimulus frequency, speaker azimuth and protector. Front/back errors in localizing the high-frequency stimulus were greatest with the conventional muff, whereas right/left errors were greatest with the level-dependent muff. Protected listening was generally unaffected by the presence of a noise background for both of the frequencies tested.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Use of hearing protection and perceptions of noise exposure and hearing loss among construction workers.

The purpose of this study was to describe construction workers' use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) and determine their perceptions of noise exposure and hearing loss. Operating engineers, carpenters, and plumbers/pipe fitters in the Midwest (n = 400) completed a written questionnaire regarding their use of HPDs and their perceptions of noise exposure and hearing loss. Subjects were recruited through their trade union groups. Mean reported use of HPDs and mean perceived noise exposure were compared across trade groups. Bivariate and multivariate analysis techniques were used to assess relationships between use of HPDs and trade category, education, age, years of employment, noise exposure, and hearing loss. Bivariate analyses identified significant differences in mean use of HPDs by age, years of employment, and trade group. Multivariate logistic regression assessing the independent effects of these variables found significant differences only by trade group. Results indicate a need for significant improvement in all three trade groups' use of HPDs, and suggest a need to consider use and exposure levels, demographics, and trade group membership in designing hearing conservation programs.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

A hearing conservation program for Wisconsin youth working in agriculture.

Adolescents working in agricultural settings may be exposed to noise levels that result in hearing loss. The article describes the design, implementation, and results of a four-year, hearing conservation program (HCP) conducted at school. Thirty-four schools (753 students) were randomly assigned to either an intervention or control group. The intervention included multicomponent educational strategies and employed features of an industrial HCP. Final compliance surveys indicated 87.5% of intervention students reported using hearing protection devices (HPD) at least some of the time, compared to 45% of control students. The HCP components with the greatest reported influence were distribution of HPDs for use on the farm and yearly hearing tests. Eighty percent of intervention students reported intention to use HPDs in the future. It is feasible to conduct a hearing conservation program with junior high school and senior high school students, and it appears possible to persuade teen-agers to protect themselves from exposure to loud noise while working on a farm.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1999

Effectiveness of an intervention to increase construction workers' use of hearing protection.

In this project we tested the effectiveness of a theory-based intervention (video, pamphlets, and guided practice session) to increase the use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) among Midwestern construction workers and a national group of plumber/pipefitter trainers. Posttest measures were collected 10-12 months following this intervention. Pender's Health Promotion Model (1987) provided the conceptual basis for development of the training program. A total of 837 high-noise-exposed workers were included in the analysis: 652 regional Midwestern construction workers and 185 national plumber/pipefitter trainers. Effectiveness of the intervention was determined through the sequence of analyses recommended by Braver and Braver (1988) for the Solomon Four-Group Design. Analysis of variance and covariance of postintervention use and intention to use HPDs and a meta-analytic test were done. These analyses indicated that the intervention significantly increased use of HPDs but had no effect on intention to use HPDs in the future. Pretesting had no effect on use. Actual or potential applications of this research include guidance in the development of successful theory-based interventions to increase use of HPDs.

Adult↗
PubMed1987

Measurement of the attenuation characteristics of nonlinear hearing protective devices using the auditory brain stem response.

The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of using the auditory brain stem response (ABR) as a method of measuring the attenuation characteristics of nonlinear hearing protective devices. Sound field ABRs were recorded from seven normal hearing subjects with and without hearing protection. Three hearing protectors (two nonlinear and one linear) were evaluated. Test stimuli, consisting of 4000-Hz tone pips, were presented in a sound field. Linearity and the amount of attenuation for each hearing protector were derived by comparing the protected and unprotected latency-intensity functions for wave I of the ABR. Results indicate that the ABR may be used effectively to measure the attenuation characteristics of linear and nonlinear hearing protectors for high-frequency impulse-type stimuli.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

The impact of hearing protection on sound localization and orienting behavior.

The effect of hearing protection devices (HPDs) on sound localization was examined in the context of an auditory-cued visual search task. Participants were required to locate and identify a visual target in a field of 5, 20, or 50 visual distractors randomly distributed on the interior surface of a sphere. Four HPD conditions were examined: earplugs, earmuffs, both earplugs and earmuffs simultaneously (double hearing protection), and no hearing protection. In addition, there was a control condition in which no auditory cue was provided. A repeated measures analysis of variance revealed significant main effects of HPD for both search time and head motion data (p < .05), indicating that the degree to which localization is disrupted by HPDs varies with the type of device worn. When both earplugs and earmuffs are worn simultaneously, search times and head motion are more similar to those found when no auditory cue is provided than when either earplugs or earmuffs alone are worn, suggesting that sound localization cues are so severely disrupted by double hearing protection the listener can recover little or no information regarding the direction of sound source origin. Potential applications of this research include high-noise military, aerospace, and industrial settings in which HPDs are necessary but wearing double protection may compromise safety and/or performance.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1996

Technology advancements in hearing protection circa 1995: active noise reduction, frequency/amplitude-sensitivity, and uniform attenuation.

Conventional hearing protection devices represent a mature technology that has been widely used since the late 1950s. When worn consistently and correctly such devices can provide suitable hearing protection in many, if not most noise-hazardous or aurally annoying situations. However, such devices have often been implicated in compromised auditory perception, degraded signal detection, and reduced speech communication abilities. In some instances this can create hazards for the wearer, or at the very least, resistance to use by those in need of hearing protection. Recent technological developments have been used to augment hearing protectors in an attempt to alleviate these problems for the user while providing adequate attenuation. Operational characteristics, design alternatives, performance data, and applications for active noise reduction, active sound transmission, frequency selectively, adjustable attenuation, amplitude sensitivity, and uniform attenuation features in hearing protectors are discussed, and recommendations are provided.

Acoustics↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Beliefs and attitudes among Swedish workers regarding the risk of hearing loss.

The beliefs and attitudes regarding the risk of hearing loss and their impact on hearing protector use were investigated among Swedish workers. A questionnaire, developed by the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), was used. The study objective was to assess workers' attitudes towards using hearing protection devices (HPDs) and to enhance the ability of workers to protect themselves from occupational hearing loss. Ninety-five per cent of the respondents were aware that loud noise could damage their hearing, 90% considered that a hearing loss would be a serious problem, and 85% believed that HPDs could protect their hearing. However, lower percentages of workers always used the HPDs when they were noise-exposed. Fifty-five per cent of the workers indicated that they could not hear warning signals when using HPDs, and 45% of the workers indicated that they considered HPDs to be uncomfortable. These issues must be addressed to make HPD use more effective.

Ear Protective Devices↗
PubMed1998

Noise-induced hearing loss in young adults: the role of personal listening devices and other sources of leisure noise.

CONCEPT: No consensus exists regarding the magnitude of the risk of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) associated with leisure noise, in particular, personal listening devices in young adults. OBJECTIVE: Examine the magnitude of hearing loss associated with personal listening devices and other sources of leisure noise in causing NIHL in young adults. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective auditory testing of college student volunteers with retrospective history exposure to home stereos, personal listening devices, firearms, and other sources of recreational noise. METHODS: Subjects underwent audiologic examination consisting of estimation of pure-tone thresholds, speech reception thresholds, and word recognition at 45 dB HL. RESULTS: Fifty subjects aged 18 to 30 years were tested. All hearing thresholds of all subjects (save one-a unilateral 30 dB HL threshold at 6 kHz) were normal, (i.e., 25 dB HL or better). A 10 dB threshold elevation (notch) in either ear at 3 to 6 kHz as compared with neighboring frequencies was noted in 11 (22%) subjects and an unequivocal notch (15 dB or greater) in either ear was noted in 14 (28%) of subjects. The presence or absence of any notch (small or large) did not correlate with any single or cumulative source of noise exposure. No difference in pure-tone threshold, speech reception threshold, or speech discrimination was found among subjects when segregated by noise exposure level. CONCLUSION: The majority of young users of personal listening devices are at low risk for substantive NIHL. Interpretation of the significance of these findings in relation to noise exposure must be made with caution. NIHL is an additive process and even subtle deficits may contribute to unequivocal hearing loss with continued exposure. The low prevalence of measurable deficits in this study group may not exclude more substantive deficits in other populations with greater exposures. Continued education of young people about the risk to hearing from recreational noise exposure is warranted.

Adolescent↗