Longitudinal assessment of noise exposure in a cohort of construction workers

Physical and Psychoacoustic Characteristics of Typical Noise on Construction Site: "How Does Noise Impact Construction Workers' Experience?"

Construction noise is an integral part of urban social noise. Construction workers are more directly and significantly affected by construction noise. Therefore, the construction noise situation within construction sites, the acoustic environment experience of construction workers, and the impact of noise on them are highly worthy of attention. This research conducted a 7-month noise level (L_Aeq) measurement on a construction site of a reinforced concrete structure high-rise residential building in northern China. The noise conditions within the site in different spatial areas and temporal stages was analyzed. Binaural recording of 10 typical construction noises, including earthwork machinery, concrete machinery, and hand-held machinery, were performed. The physical acoustics and psychoacoustic characteristics were analyzed with the aid of a sound quality analysis software. A total of 133 construction workers performing 12 types of tasks were asked about their subjective evaluation of the typical noises and given a survey on their noise experience on the construction site. This was done to explore the acoustic environment on the construction site, the environmental experience of construction workers, the impact of noise on hearing and on-site communications, and the corresponding influencing factors. This research showed that the noise situation on construction sites is not optimistic, and the construction workers have been affected to varying degrees in terms of psychological experience, hearing ability, and on-site communications. Partial correlation analysis showed that the construction workers’ perception of noise, their hearing, and their on-site communications were affected by the noise environment, which were correlated to varying degrees with the individual’s post-specific noise, demand for on-site communications, and age, respectively. Correlation analysis and cluster analysis both showed that the annoyance caused by typical construction noise was correlated to its physical and psychoacoustic characteristics. To maintain the physical and mental health of construction workers, there is a need to improve on the fronts of site management, noise reduction, equipment and facility optimization, and occupational protection.

Hearing Difficulties and Tinnitus in Construction, Agricultural, Music, and Finance Industries: Contributions of Demographic, Health, and Lifestyle Factors

High levels of occupational noise exposure increase the risk of hearing difficulties and tinnitus. However, differences in demographic, health, and lifestyle factors could also contribute to high levels of hearing difficulties and tinnitus in some industries. Data from a subsample (n = 22,936) of the U.K. Biobank were analyzed to determine to what extent differences in levels of hearing difficulties and tinnitus in high-risk industries (construction, agricultural, and music) compared with low-risk industries (finance) could be attributable to demographic, health, and lifestyle factors, rather than occupational noise exposure. Hearing difficulties were identified using a digits-in-noise speech recognition test. Tinnitus was identified based on self-report. Logistic regression analyses showed that occupational noise exposure partially accounted for higher levels of hearing difficulties in the agricultural industry compared with finance, and occupational noise exposure, older age, low socioeconomic status, and non-White ethnic background partially accounted for higher levels of hearing difficulties in the construction industry. However, the factors assessed in the model did not fully account for the increased likelihood of hearing difficulties in high-risk industries, suggesting that there are additional unknown factors which impact on hearing or that there was insufficient measurement of factors included in the model. The levels of tinnitus were greatest for music and construction industries compared with finance, and these differences were accounted for by occupational and music noise exposure, as well as older age. These findings emphasize the need to promote hearing conservation in occupational and music settings, with a particular focus on high-risk demographic subgroups.

Risk of noise-induced hearing loss due to recreational sound: Review and recommendations

This review was conducted to address three questions related to recreational sound exposure: (1) what criteria are used to determine noise exposure limits, (2) are there differences in the risk of hearing loss from occupational noise versus recreational sound, and (3) what is an appropriate exposure limit for recreational sound? For the first question, most standards specify an 8-h occupational noise exposure limit (L_EX) of 85 dBA. This limit assumes that some workers exposed at the limit will develop hearing loss. To eliminate the risk of hearing loss, a 24-h equivalent continuous level (L_EQ24h) limit of 70 dBA is appropriate. For the second question, there is some evidence that the effects of occupational noise on hearing may be worse than energetically equivalent recreational sound. Limits developed for noise are nevertheless applicable to recreational sound, and use of existing statistical models to predict hearing loss from recreational sound is appropriate, with the caveat that these models are limited to durations ≤40 years. For the third question, a recreational sound limit of 80 dBA L_EX, equivalent to a 75 dBA L_EQ24h, will virtually eliminate the risk of recreationally induced hearing loss in adults. Lower limits may be warranted for vulnerable or susceptible individuals.

Patterns and trends in OSHA occupational noise exposure measurements from 1979 to 2013

OBJECTIVES

Noise is one of the most common exposures, and occupational noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is highly prevalent. In addition to NIHL, noise is linked to numerous non-auditory health effects. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) maintains the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) database of compliance-related measurements performed in various industries across the USA. The goal of the current study was to describe and analyse personal noise measurements available through the OSHA IMIS, identifying industries with elevated personal noise levels or increasing trends in worker exposure over time.

METHODS

Through a Freedom of Information Act request, we obtained OSHA's noise measurements collected and stored in IMIS between 1979 and 2013 and analysed permissible exposure limit (PEL) and action level (AL) criteria measurements by two-digit industry code.

RESULTS

The manufacturing industry represented 87.8% of the 93 920 PEL measurements and 84.6% of the 58 073 AL measurements. The highest mean noise levels were found among the agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting industry for PEL (93.1 dBA) and the mining, quarrying and oil and gas extraction group for AL (93.3 dBA). Overall, measurements generally showed a decreasing trend in noise levels and exceedances of AL and PEL by year, although this was not true for all industries.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that, despite reductions in noise over time, further noise control interventions are warranted both inside and outside of the manufacturing industry. Further reductions in occupational noise exposures across many industries are necessary to continue to reduce the risk of occupational NIHL.

Imputation of missing values in a large job exposure matrix using hierarchical information

Job exposure matrices (JEMs) represent a useful and efficient approach for estimating occupational exposures. This study uses a large dataset of full-shift measurements and employs imputation strategies to develop noise exposure estimates for almost all broad level standard occupational classification (SOC) groups in the US. The JEM was constructed using 753,702 measurements from the government, private industry, and the published literature. Parametric Bayes imputation was used to take advantage of the hierarchical structure of the SOCs and the mean occupational noise exposures were estimated for all broad level SOCs, except those in major group 23-0000, for which no data were available. The estimated posterior mean for all broad SOCs was found to be 82.1 dBA with within- and between-major SOC variabilities of 22.1 and 13.8, respectively. Of the 443 broad SOCs, 85 were found to have an estimated mean exposure >85 dBA while 10 were >90 dBA. By taking advantage of the size and structure of the dataset, we were able to employ imputation techniques to estimate mean levels of noise exposure for nearly all SOCs in the US. Possible sources of errors in the estimates include misclassification of job titles due to limited data, temporal variations that were not accounted for, and variation in exposures within the same SOC. Our efforts have resulted in an almost completely populated noise JEM that provides a valuable tool for the assessment of occupational exposures to noise. Imputation techniques can lead to maximal use of available information that may be incomplete.

Questionnaire-based algorithm for assessing occupational noise exposure of construction workers

Objectives

Occupational noise exposure is a major cause of hearing loss worldwide. In order to inform preventative strategies, we need to further understand at a population level which workers are most at risk.

Methods

We have developed a new questionnaire-based algorithm that evaluates an individual worker’s noise exposure. The questionnaire and supporting algorithms are embedded into the existing software platform, OccIDEAS. Based on the tasks performed by a worker during their most recent working shift and using a library of task-based noise exposure levels, OccIDEAS estimates whether a worker has exceeded the full-shift workplace noise exposure limit (LAeq,8h≥85 dBA). We evaluated the validity of the system in a sample of 100 construction workers. Each worker wore a dosimeter for a full working shift and was then interviewed using the OccIDEAS software.

Results

The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.81 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.90) indicating that the ability of OccIDEAS to identify construction workers with an LAeq,8h≥85 dBA was excellent.

Conclusion

This validated noise questionnaire may be useful in epidemiological studies and for workplace health and safety applications.

Interventions to prevent occupational noise-induced hearing loss

BACKGROUND

This is the second update of a Cochrane Review originally published in 2009. Millions of workers worldwide are exposed to noise levels that increase their risk of hearing disorders. There is uncertainty about the effectiveness of hearing loss prevention interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions for preventing occupational noise exposure or occupational hearing loss compared to no intervention or alternative interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL; PubMed; Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; and OSH UPDATE to 3 October 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCT), controlled before-after studies (CBA) and interrupted time-series (ITS) of non-clinical interventions under field conditions among workers to prevent or reduce noise exposure and hearing loss. We also collected uncontrolled case studies of engineering controls about the effect on noise exposure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. We categorised interventions as engineering controls, administrative controls, personal hearing protection devices, and hearing surveillance.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 studies. One study evaluated legislation to reduce noise exposure in a 12-year time-series analysis but there were no controlled studies on engineering controls for noise exposure. Eleven studies with 3725 participants evaluated effects of personal hearing protection devices and 17 studies with 84,028 participants evaluated effects of hearing loss prevention programmes (HLPPs). Effects on noise exposure Engineering interventions following legislationOne ITS study found that new legislation in the mining industry reduced the median personal noise exposure dose in underground coal mining by 27.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval (CI) -36.1 to -19.3 percentage points) immediately after the implementation of stricter legislation. This roughly translates to a 4.5 dB(A) decrease in noise level. The intervention was associated with a favourable but statistically non-significant downward trend in time of the noise dose of -2.1 percentage points per year (95% CI -4.9 to 0.7, 4 year follow-up, very low-quality evidence). Engineering intervention case studiesWe found 12 studies that described 107 uncontrolled case studies of immediate reductions in noise levels of machinery ranging from 11.1 to 19.7 dB(A) as a result of purchasing new equipment, segregating noise sources or installing panels or curtains around sources. However, the studies lacked long-term follow-up and dose measurements of workers, and we did not use these studies for our conclusions. Hearing protection devicesIn general hearing protection devices reduced noise exposure on average by about 20 dB(A) in one RCT and three CBAs (57 participants, low-quality evidence). Two RCTs showed that, with instructions for insertion, the attenuation of noise by earplugs was 8.59 dB better (95% CI 6.92 dB to 10.25 dB) compared to no instruction (2 RCTs, 140 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Administrative controls: information and noise exposure feedbackOn-site training sessions did not have an effect on personal noise-exposure levels compared to information only in one cluster-RCT after four months' follow-up (mean difference (MD) 0.14 dB; 95% CI -2.66 to 2.38). Another arm of the same study found that personal noise exposure information had no effect on noise levels (MD 0.30 dB(A), 95% CI -2.31 to 2.91) compared to no such information (176 participants, low-quality evidence). Effects on hearing loss Hearing protection devicesIn two studies the authors compared the effect of different devices on temporary threshold shifts at short-term follow-up but reported insufficient data for analysis. In two CBA studies the authors found no difference in hearing loss from noise exposure above 89 dB(A) between muffs and earplugs at long-term follow-up (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03 ), very low-quality evidence). Authors of another CBA study found that wearing hearing protection more often resulted in less hearing loss at very long-term follow-up (very low-quality evidence). Combination of interventions: hearing loss prevention programmesOne cluster-RCT found no difference in hearing loss at three- or 16-year follow-up between an intensive HLPP for agricultural students and audiometry only. One CBA study found no reduction of the rate of hearing loss (MD -0.82 dB per year (95% CI -1.86 to 0.22) for a HLPP that provided regular personal noise exposure information compared to a programme without this information.There was very-low-quality evidence in four very long-term studies, that better use of hearing protection devices as part of a HLPP decreased the risk of hearing loss compared to less well used hearing protection in HLPPs (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.69). Other aspects of the HLPP such as training and education of workers or engineering controls did not show a similar effect.In three long-term CBA studies, workers in a HLPP had a statistically non-significant 1.8 dB (95% CI -0.6 to 4.2) greater hearing loss at 4 kHz than non-exposed workers and the confidence interval includes the 4.2 dB which is the level of hearing loss resulting from 5 years of exposure to 85 dB(A). In addition, of three other CBA studies that could not be included in the meta-analysis, two showed an increased risk of hearing loss in spite of the protection of a HLPP compared to non-exposed workers and one CBA did not.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very low-quality evidence that implementation of stricter legislation can reduce noise levels in workplaces. Controlled studies of other engineering control interventions in the field have not been conducted. There is moderate-quality evidence that training of proper insertion of earplugs significantly reduces noise exposure at short-term follow-up but long-term follow-up is still needed.There is very low-quality evidence that the better use of hearing protection devices as part of HLPPs reduces the risk of hearing loss, whereas for other programme components of HLPPs we did not find such an effect. The absence of conclusive evidence should not be interpreted as evidence of lack of effectiveness. Rather, it means that further research is very likely to have an important impact.

Comparison of Multiple Measures of Noise Exposure in Paper Mills

BACKGROUND

Noise exposures are associated with a host of adverse health effects, yet these exposures remain inadequately characterized in many industrial operations, including paper mills. We assessed noise at four paper mills using three measures: (i) personal noise dosimetry, (ii) area noise measurements, and (iii) questionnaire items addressing several different aspects of perceived noise exposure.

METHODS

We assessed exposures to noise characterized using the three measures and compared the relationships between them. We also estimated the validity of each of the three measures using a novel application of the Method of Triads, which does not appear to have been used previously in the occupational health literature.

RESULTS

We collected 209 valid dosimetry measurements and collected perceived noise exposure survey items from 170 workers, along with 100 area measurements. We identified exposures in excess of 85 dBA at all mills. The dosimetry and area noise measurements assigned to individual subjects generally showed good agreement, but for some operations within mill, large differences between the two measures were observed, and a substantial fraction of paired measures differed by >5 dB. Perceived noise exposures varied greatly between the mills, particularly for an item related to difficulty speaking in noise. One perceived noise exposure item related to difficulty hearing due to noise showed strong and significant correlations with both dosimetry and area measurements. The Method of Triads analysis showed that dosimetry measures had the highest estimated validity coefficient (0.70), and that the best performing perceived exposure measure had validity that exceeded that of area measurements (0.48 versus 0.40, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Workers in Swedish pulp mills have the potential for exposures to high levels of noise. Our results suggest that, while dosimetry remains the preferred approach to exposure assessment, perceived noise exposures can be used to evaluate potential exposures to noise in epidemiological studies.

Double Jeopardy

The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and characteristics of tinnitus and assess the relationship between tinnitus and hearing loss among firefighters and operating engineers, who are exposed to noise on-the-job. The study analyzed existing data from two different populations (154 firefighters and 769 operating engineers) who completed a survey and audiometric tests as part of a hearing loss prevention intervention study. Approximately 40% of both groups reported tinnitus; 34% of firefighters and 59% of operating engineers showed hearing loss at noise-sensitive frequencies (4 kHz and 6 kHz). Firefighters with high frequency hearing loss (odds ratio [OR] = 2.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.05, 5.11]) and those with perceived impaired hearing status (OR = 3.53; 95% CI = [1.27, 9.80]) were significantly more likely to report tinnitus. Similarly, operating engineers who had hearing loss at both low (OR = 2.10; 95% CI = [1.40, 3.15]) and high frequencies (OR = 2.00; 95% CI = [1.37, 2.90]), and perceived impaired hearing status (OR = 2.17; 95% CI = [1.55, 3.05]) were twice as likely to report tinnitus. This study demonstrated that tinnitus is a considerable problem for noise-exposed workers. Workers with hearing loss demonstrated significantly higher rates of tinnitus. Comprehensive workplace hearing conservation programs should include tinnitus management for noise-exposed workers, along with other key elements such as noise control and hearing protection.

ICBEN review of research on the biological effects of noise 2011-2014

The mandate of the International Commission on Biological Effects of Noise (ICBEN) is to promote a high level of scientific research concerning all aspects of noise-induced effects on human beings and animals. In this review, ICBEN team chairs and co-chairs summarize relevant findings, publications, developments, and policies related to the biological effects of noise, with a focus on the period 2011-2014 and for the following topics: Noise-induced hearing loss; nonauditory effects of noise; effects of noise on performance and behavior; effects of noise on sleep; community response to noise; and interactions with other agents and contextual factors. Occupational settings and transport have been identified as the most prominent sources of noise that affect health. These reviews demonstrate that noise is a prevalent and often underestimated threat for both auditory and nonauditory health and that strategies for the prevention of noise and its associated negative health consequences are needed to promote public health.

Pilot study of methods and equipment for in-home noise level measurements

Knowledge of the auditory and non-auditory effects of noise has increased dramatically over the past decade, but indoor noise exposure measurement methods have not advanced appreciably, despite the introduction of applicable new technologies. This study evaluated various conventional and smart devices for exposure assessment in the National Children's Study. Three devices were tested: a sound level meter (SLM), a dosimeter, and a smart device with a noise measurement application installed. Instrument performance was evaluated in a series of semi-controlled tests in office environments over 96-hour periods, followed by measurements made continuously in two rooms (a child's bedroom and a most used room) in nine participating homes over a 7-day period with subsequent computation of a range of noise metrics. The SLMs and dosimeters yielded similar A-weighted average noise levels. Levels measured by the smart devices often differed substantially (showing both positive and negative bias, depending on the metric) from those measured via SLM and dosimeter, and demonstrated attenuation in some frequency bands in spectral analysis compared to SLM results. Virtually all measurements exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency's 45 dBA day-night limit for indoor residential exposures. The measurement protocol developed here can be employed in homes, demonstrates the possibility of measuring long-term noise exposures in homes with technologies beyond traditional SLMs, and highlights potential pitfalls associated with measurements made by smart devices.

Risks of a lifetime in construction. Part II: Chronic occupational diseases

BACKGROUND

We developed working-life estimates of risk for dust-related occupational lung disease, COPD, and hearing loss based on the experience of the Building Trades National Medical Screening Program in order to (1) demonstrate the value of estimates of lifetime risk, and (2) make lifetime risk estimates for common conditions among construction workers.

METHODS

Estimates of lifetime risk were performed based on 12,742 radiographic evaluations, 12,679 spirometry tests, and 11,793 audiograms.

RESULTS

Over a 45-year working life, 16% of construction workers developed COPD, 11% developed parenchymal radiological abnormality, and 73.8% developed hearing loss. The risk for occupationally related disease over a lifetime in a construction trade was 2-6 times greater than the risk in non-construction workers.

CONCLUSIONS

When compared with estimates from annualized cross-sectional data, lifetime risk estimates are highly useful for risk expression, and should help to inform stakeholders in the construction industry as well as policy-makers about magnitudes of risk.

Risks of a lifetime in construction part I: traumatic injuries

BACKGROUND

Estimates of occupational risk are typically computed on an annual basis. In contrast, this article provides estimates of lifetime risks for fatal and nonfatal injuries among construction workers. A companion paper presents lifetime risks for occupational illnesses.

METHODS

Using 2003-2007 data from three large data sources, lifetime risk was computed based on the number of fatal and nonfatal injuries per 100 FTEs for a working lifespan of 45 years.

RESULTS

For a working life in construction, the risk of fatal injuries were approximately one death per 200 FTE, and the leading causes were falls and transportation incidents. For nonfatal injuries resulting in days away from work, the adjusted lifetime risk was approximately 78 per 100 FTEs, and the leading causes were contact with objects/equipment, overexertion, and falls to a lower level.

CONCLUSIONS

Lifetime risk estimates help inform both workers and policymakers. Despite improvements over the past decades, risks in construction remain high.

Longitudinal changes in hearing threshold levels of noise-exposed construction workers

PURPOSE

Longitudinal analysis of audiometric data of a large population of noise-exposed workers provides insight into the development of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) as a function of noise exposure and age, particularly during the first decade of noise exposure.

METHODS

Data of pure-tone audiometry of 17,930 construction workers who underwent periodic occupational hearing screening at least twice during a 4-year period were available for analysis. These concerned all follow-up measurements of the baseline cohort described by Leensen et al. (Int Arch Occup Environ Health 84:577-590, 2011). Linear mixed models explored the relationship between the annual rate of change in hearing and noise exposure level, exposure duration, and age. Data of 3,111 workers who were tested on three occasions were used to investigate the pattern of hearing loss development.

RESULTS

The mean annual deterioration in hearing in this study population was 0.54 dB/yr, and this became larger with increasing noise exposure level and increasing age. Remarkably, during the first decade of noise exposure, an improvement in hearing threshold levels (HTLs) was observed. The change in hearing over three measurements showed a concave development of hearing loss as a function of time, which corresponds to NIHL development.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, hearing deteriorated over the measurement period. Because HTLs at follow-up were better than those obtained at baseline, no statement can be made about the NIHL development during the first decade of noise exposure. This improvement in HTLs rather resembles the result of measurement variation in occupational screening audiometry than an actual improvement in hearing ability.

Methods for evaluating temporal trends in noise exposure

OBJECTIVE

Hearing conservation programs have been mandatory in many US industries since 1983. Since then, three program elements (audiometric testing, hearing protection, and training) have been the focus of much research. By comparison, little has been done on noise exposure evaluation.

DESIGN

Temporal trends in time weighted average (TWA) exposures and the fraction of measurements exceeding 85 dBA were evaluated by facility, by exposure group within facility, and by individual worker within facility.

STUDY SAMPLE

A large dataset (> 10 000 measurements over 20 years) from eight facilities operated by a multinational aluminum manufacturing company was studied.

RESULTS

Overall, exposures declined across locations over the study period. Several facilities demonstrated substantial reductions in exposure, and the results of mean noise levels and exceedance fractions generally showed good agreement. The results of analyses at the individual level diverged with analyses by facility and exposure group within facility, suggesting that individual-level analyses, while challenging, may provide important information not available from coarser levels of analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Validated metrics are needed to allow for assessment of temporal trends in noise exposure. Such metrics will improve our ability to characterize, in a standardized manner, efforts to reduce noise-induced hearing loss.

Effect of workplace noise on hearing ability in tile and ceramic industry workers in Iran: a 2-year follow-up study

INTRODUCTION

Noise as a common physical hazard may lead to noise-induced hearing loss, an irreversible but preventable disorder. Annual audiometric evaluations help detect changes in hearing status before clinically significant hearing loss develops. This study was designed to track hearing threshold changes during 2-year follow-up among tile and ceramic workers.

METHODS

This follow-up study was conducted on 555 workers (totally 1110 ears). Subjects were divided into four groups according to the level of noise exposure. Hearing threshold in conventional audiometric frequencies was measured and standard threshold shift was calculated for each ear.

RESULTS

Hearing threshold was increased during 2 years of follow-up. Increased hearing threshold was most frequently observed at 4000, 6000, and 3000 Hz. Standard threshold shift was observed in 13 (2.34%), 49 (8.83%), 22 (3.96%), and 63 (11.35%) subjects in the first and second years of follow-up in the right and left ears, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has documented a high incidence of noise-induced hearing loss in tile and ceramic workers that would put stress on the importance of using hearing protection devices.

Noise exposure reconstruction and evaluation of exposure trends in two large automotive plants

This study used a task-based approach to reconstruct employee noise exposures at two large automotive manufacturing plants for the period 1970-1989, utilizing historic noise measurement data, work history records, documented changes in plant operations, focus group discussions, structured interviews with long-tenure employees, and task-based job profiles. Task-based job noise exposure profiles were developed in the 1990s when the plants conducted task-based noise monitoring. Under the assumption that tasks and time-at-task profile within jobs did not change over time, these profiles were applied to historic jobs. By linking historic noise exposure measurements to job tasks, this approach allowed task-based reconstructed noise exposure profiles to capture variability of daily noise exposures. Reconstructed noise exposures, along with task-based noise exposure measurements collected at each plant during the 1990s, were analyzed to examine time trends in workplace noise levels and worker noise exposure. Our analysis of noise exposure trends revealed that noise levels for many jobs declined by ≥3 dBA from 1970 to 1998 as operational and equipment changes occurred in the plants and some noise control measures were implemented, but for some jobs, noise levels increased in the mid- to late 1990s, most likely because of an increase in production at that time. Overall, the percentage of workers exposed to noise levels >90 dBA decreased from 95% in 1970 to 54% in 1998 at one of the plants and decreased from 36% in 1970 to ~5% in 1999 at the other plant. These reductions indicate a degree of success for the hearing conservation program. However, the actual number of employees with noise exposure >90 dBA increased because of a substantial increase in the number of production employees, particularly in jobs with high noise levels, which shows a hearing conservation program challenge that companies face during periods of increased production. Future analysis of hearing levels in these plant populations will help determine whether noise level reduction translates into decreased hearing loss at these plants.

10-Year prospective study of noise exposure and hearing damage among construction workers

OBJECTIVES

To characterise the effects of noise exposure, including intermittent and peaky exposure, on hearing damage as assessed by standard pure-tone thresholds and otoacoustic emissions, a longitudinal study was conducted on newly hired construction apprentices and controls over a 10-year period.

METHODS

Among the 456 subjects recruited at baseline, 316 had at least two (mean 4.6) examinations and were included in this analysis. Annual examinations included hearing threshold levels (HTLs) for air conducted pure tones and distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) amplitudes. Task-based occupational noise exposure levels and recreational exposures were estimated. Linear mixed models were fit for HTLs and DPOAEs at 3, 4 and 6 kHz in relation to time since baseline and average noise level since baseline, while controlling for hearing level at baseline and other risk factors.

RESULTS

Estimated L(EQ) noise exposures were 87±3.6 dBA among the construction workers. Linear mixed modelling demonstrated significant exposure-related elevations in HTL of about 2-3 dB over a projected 10-year period at 3, 4 or 6 kHz for a 10 dB increase in exposure. The DPOAE models (using L1=40) predicted about 1 dB decrease in emission amplitude over 10 years for a 10 dB increase in exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

The study provides evidence of noise-induced damage at an average exposure level around the 85 dBA level. The predicted change in HTLs was somewhat higher than would be predicted by standard hearing loss models, after accounting for hearing loss at baseline. Limited evidence for an enhanced effect of high peak component noise was observed, and DPOAEs, although similarly affected, showed no advantage over standard hearing threshold evaluation in detecting effects of noise on the ear and hearing.