Hearing protection device

Last updated
Various earmuff hearing protectors. Peltor earmuffs.jpg
Various earmuff hearing protectors.
Sound levels of some daily activities Loudness of common sounds.jpg
Sound levels of some daily activities

A hearing protection device, also known as a HPD, is an ear protection device worn in or over the ears while exposed to hazardous noise and provide hearing protection to help prevent noise-induced hearing loss. HPDs reduce the level of the noise entering the ear. HPDs can also protect against other effects of noise exposure such as tinnitus and hyperacusis. There are many different types of HPDs available for use, including earmuffs, earplugs, electronic hearing protection devices, and semi-insert devices. [1]

Contents

The use of the HPD without individual selection, training and fit testing [2] does not significantly reduce the risk of hearing loss. [3] [4] For example, one study covered more than 19 thousand workers, some of whom usually used hearing protective devices, and some did not use them at all. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of noise-induced hearing loss. [5]

Exposure limits

In the context of work, adequate hearing protection is that which reduces noise exposure to below 85 dBA over the course of an average work shift of eight hours. [6]

When sounds exceed 80 dBA, it becomes dangerous to the ears. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has standards that show how long a person can be in different loudness levels before the person reaches their maximum daily dose and becomes damaging to their hearing. These standards can give individuals an idea of when hearing protection should be considered. The maximum daily dose with the corresponding decibel level is shown below. [7]

These numerical values do not fully reflect the real situation. For example, the OSHA standard [8] sets the Action Level 85 dBA, and the PEL 90 dBA. But in practice, the Compliance Safety and Health Officer must record the excess of these values with a margin, in order to take into account the potential measurement error. And, in fact, instead of PEL 90 dBA, it turns out 92 dBA, and instead of AL 85 dBA – 87 dBA. [16]

Different types of hearing protection may be used to maximize hearing protection. OSHA regulations dictate whether hearing protection is required and if the company must participate in a hearing conservation program. But many employers are not implementing these programs effectively, and the risk of hearing loss is not reduced. [3]

Hunting and firearms

The shooting of guns for recreational use can lead to hearing loss in the high frequencies. [17] The shooting of firearms can cause damage to a variety of cochlear structures due to the high peak sound pressure levels that they generate. This can range from 140 to 175 dB. [18]

Along with the passive noise reduction options usually used vocationally (such as earmuffs and earplugs) there are also active noise reduction devices available. Active noise reduction technology is used to provide noise protection like passive options, but also use circuitry to give audibility to sounds that are below a dangerous level (about 85 db) and try to limit the average output level to about 82 to 85 dB to keep the exposure at a safe level. [19] [18]

Strategies to help protect your hearing from firearms also include using muzzle brakes and suppressors, shooting fewer rounds, and avoiding using a firearm with a short barrel. It is recommended to shoot outdoors or in a sound-treated environment, rather than a reverberant environment (an enclosed area with sound-reflecting surfaces). If there are multiple people shooting, make sure there is a large distance between the shooters and that they are not firing at the same time. [18]

Types

Earmuff hearing protection device. Serre tete.jpg
Earmuff hearing protection device.

Types of ear protection include:

In some occasions, multiple types of ear protection can be used together to increase the NRR. For example, foam earplugs can be worn in-conjunction with earmuffs.

Each type of ear protection has what is called a noise reduction rating (NRR). This gives the consumer an estimate of how much noise is being reduced before reaching the individual's ear. It is important for the consumer to know that this is only a single number estimate derived from a laboratory experiment, and the NRR will vary per individual wearing the hearing protection. NIOSH and OSHA have derating values to help give the person an idea of how much sound is being attenuated while wearing the hearing protection. OSHA uses a half derating, while NIOSH uses 70% for pre-formed earplugs, 50% for formable earplugs, and 25% for earmuffs. [20]

But all such derating [21] are not consistent with each other, and do not take into account the individual characteristics of the worker.

Therefore, no derating allows the specialist to predict the noise attenuation of a particular model for a particular worker. That is, the use of laboratory test results (NRR, SNR, HML, ets.) does not predict the effectiveness of the protection of a particular worker, [22] at all. [21] The range of actual values may be, for example, from 0 to 35 decibels. [23]

Earmuffs

Different styles of earplugs are pictured. Left, pre-molded earplugs. Center, formable earplugs. Right, roll-down foam earplugs. Types of Earplugs.jpg
Different styles of earplugs are pictured. Left, pre-molded earplugs. Center, formable earplugs. Right, roll-down foam earplugs.

Earmuff style hearing protection devices are designed to fit over the outer ear, or pinna. Earmuff HPDs typically consist of two ear cups and a head band. Ear cups are usually lined with a sound-absorbing material, such as foam. The cups should be fit so that the center of the ear canal aligns with the ear canal opening. [1] The soft cushions seal around the pinna of the ears. The head band, centered at the top of the head, applies force/pressure to seal the ear cups over the ears. [1]

Earplugs

Earplug style hearing protection devices are designed to fit in the ear canal. Earplugs come in a variety of different subtypes. [1] The attenuation offered by these devices can be measured through hearing protection fit testing.

Electronic hearing protection devices

Some HPDs reduce the sound reaching the eardrum through a combination of electronic and structural components. Electronic HPDs are available in both earmuff and custom earplug styles. Electronic microphones, circuitry, and receivers perform active noise reduction, also known as noise-cancelling, in which a signal that is 180-degrees out-of-phase of the noise is presented, which in theory cancels the noise. [1]

A U.S. Soldier wearing a hearing protection and communications headset. A U.S. Special Operations Marine provides security for Afghan National Army special forces soldiers and Afghan Local Police members building a checkpoint in Helmand province, Afghanistan, April 3, 2013 130403-M-BO337-045.jpg
A U.S. Soldier wearing a hearing protection and communications headset.

Some electronic HPDs, known as Hearing Enhancement Protection Systems, [1] provide hearing protection from high-level sounds while allowing transmission of other sounds like speech. Some also have the ability to amplify low-level sounds. This type may be beneficial for users who are in noisy environments, but still need access to lower level sounds. For example, soldiers who need to protect their hearing but also need to be able to identify enemy forces and communicate in noise, hunters who rely on detecting and localizing soft sounds of wildlife but still wish to protect their hearing from recreational firearm blasts, as well as users with pre-existing hearing loss who are in noisy environments may all benefit from In Ear Electronic Hearing Enhancement Protection Systems. [24] [1]

Electronic HPDs require the use of batteries and are typically more expensive than non-electronic types.

Semi-insert devices (canal caps)

Custom earplug hearing protection devices. Bouchon ER25 - Elacin.jpg
Custom earplug hearing protection devices.

Canal caps are similar to earplugs in that they consists of soft tip that is inserted into the opening of the ear canal. Some styles are inserted slightly into the ear canal while others sit in place at the opening of the ear canal. In this case, the tips or caps are connected by a lightweight band which also serves to hold them in position. [1]

Dual hearing protection

Dual hearing protection refers to the use of earplugs under ear muffs. This type of hearing protection is particularly recommended for workers in the mining industry because they are exposed to extremely high noise levels, such as an 105 dBA TWA. [25] [26] } Fortunately, there is an option of adding electronic features to dual hearing protectors. These features help with communication by making speech more clear, especially for those workers who already have hearing loss. [1]

The sound attenuation of a dual hearing protector is generally lower than the algebra sum of the attenuation of each single hearing protector. [27] [28] [29] This phenomenon can be caused by the mechanical coupling between the earplug and earmuff through the human tissues, the vibration of the ear canal wall, or the bone conducted sound travelling from the head and body directly to the middle and inner ears. [29] [30] As a rule of thumb, the noise reduction rating of a dual hearing protector can be estimated by adding a 5 dB correction factor to the higher noise reduction rating of the two single hearing protectors. [31]

Hygiene and care

In order to prevent irritation or infection of the ear, reusable HPDs should be cleaned on a regular basis. Before using any HPD, it should be inspected for damage or dirt to ensure that it is safe to use. Single-use, disposable earplugs are available in addition to reusable options. [32] Earplugs intended for single-use should not be washed for reuse as this degrades the material and reduces effectiveness. [33]

Most reusable earplugs can be cleaned using mild soap and warm water between uses and should be replaced every 2–4 weeks. [32] Earmuff cups and cushions should be cleaned regularly with soap and water, and be replaced if they become cracked or otherwise compromised. Ear cushions can last from 3–8 months depending on use. [32] Use of a clean, protective case to store HPDs when not in use is recommended to prevent damage or contamination. [1]

Any damage to a HPD can compromise its integrity, thus reducing its effectiveness. Damaged HPDs should not be used.

Requirements of the law and recommendations of specialists

Many countries require several interventions to control risks from exposures to loud noise in the workplace. For example, US Occupational Safety and Health Administration requires hearing conservation programs which include the provision of hearing protection devices. This does not mean that OSHA considers HPDs to be effective. In fact, the document [34] directly indicates their unreliability.

It is also recommended by the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, audiologists and other hearing healthcare professionals when one works exposed to noise levels that exceed 85 dB. [1] NIOSH base their recommendations for use of hearing protection by a calculation called time-weighted average (TWA). A time-weighted average is the average noise level a worker is exposed to over a period of time. NIOSH recommends that OSHA use an 85 dBA time-weighted average during an 8-hour period as their exposure limit. [1] An 85 dBA time-weighted average means that HPD use is recommended if an employee is exposed to an average noise level of 85 dBA or more during an 8-hour work day. NIOSH also uses a 3 dB exchange rate for time-weighted averages. [1] A 3 dB exchange rate means that for every 3 dB increase in the average level of noise the recommended time being exposed to that level of noise is cut in half. For example, for a worker who is exposed to 88 dBA, it's recommended he/she only be exposed to that level of noise for 4 hours. These levels of noise may be encountered in both occupational and recreational settings. HPDs are recommended for use in settings where it is difficult to control the noise level, and the person exposed to the noise cannot be removed from the environment.

Noise reduction, earplugs EP100 (Willson). Top: measurements in the laboratory, and performance ratings. Bottom: real-world data HML+SNR+NRR hearing protection attenuation.jpg
Noise reduction, earplugs EP100 (Willson). Top: measurements in the laboratory, and performance ratings. Bottom: real-world data

The amount of protection from noise can vary based on the physical fit of the device and the skill of the worker. [21] Hearing protection devices with accurate placement (an airtight seal) and/or accurate insertion (deep into the ear canal) will provide the most attenuation of noise. [1] There are many challenges to achieving the needed protection from the device, from barriers to adequate use, to issues related to comfort, convenience, lack of training, to beliefs and attitudes towards its use. [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41]

HPD noise reduction: on label (NRR, SNR, HML, SLC80), and real noise attenuation (at workplaces)

HPD fit testing Sistema proizvodstvennogo kontrolia effektivnosti SIZ organa slukha.jpg
HPD fit testing

Hearing protection device manufacturers in the United States are required by the EPA to label HPDs with a noise reduction rating, or NRR. The NRR estimates how much noise is reduced by a hearing protection device, measured in decibels. [1]

The NRR is measured by manufacturers using American National Standards Institute (ANSI) specified procedures in a laboratory environment. [1] But noise attenuation when workers use HPD was much more variable, and much weaker than when they were tested in laboratories. This was shown both by the first two studies (NIOSH) [42] [43] and many subsequent works in the different countries [44] (example [23] ).

An example of a NIOSH mobile laboratory for measuring sound thresholds, and the real attenuation of workers earplugs NIOSH shum mobil'nyi izmeritel' SIZOS 2.jpg
An example of a NIOSH mobile laboratory for measuring sound thresholds, and the real attenuation of workers earplugs

There were no technical means to take into account the variability of the HPD noise attenuation in different workers for a long time. For this reason, specialists (NIOSH [20] [46] and others) have tried to take at least palliative measures. They recommended that employers estimate the average noise attenuation of workers based on the average noise attenuation of testers in the lab – with correction (de-rating [4] ). However, in fact, the result of such manipulations did not provide any information about the noise attenuation of a particular worker.

The advent of new technologies has solved the problem, and individual measurement of noise attenuation is considered the most promising trend in personal noise protection [47] [21] Hearing protection fit-testing has been developed in order to determine the actual attenuation of the device as it is worn for an individual. These tests for checking attenuation values summarize the real-world attenuation in a personal attenuation rating (PAR). [1] The PAR is unique to the HPD tested and the individual wearing the protection, and personal fit testing US OSHA and the National Hearing Conservation Association (NHCA) Alliance recommend that employers conduct individual worker noise attenuation measurements (HPD fit-testing) as a best practice and valuable tool for improving employee training. [48] [49] In order to achieve significant attenuation, fit-testing and extensive personalized (one-on-one) training was found to be essential, whereas simple instructions did not lead to significant attenuation ove giving no instructions at all. [50]

Unfortunately, such equipment is expensive, and this holds back widespread use of new technology. NIOSH has tried to alleviate the problem by developing a freely available program (online) for evaluating noise attenuation with liners. It can identify workers who do not know how to insert earplugs, or when workers are given such models that do not fit their ear canals. [51] [52] [45]

Researchers at NIOSH tried to develop methods for predicting noise attenuation in workers in the early 1970s. [53] This attempt was made just before the first measurements of noise attenuation in factories, among workers. The work was carried out under the following conditions

  1. Low frequency noise is attenuated worse than mid- and high-frequency noise.
  2. Most employers did not have the means to measure the noise spectrum.
  3. It was assumed that the average noise attenuation in workplaces is about the same as in laboratory conditions.
  4. It was believed that the differences in noise attenuation among different workers are small.

The results have been used to develop NRR (SNR). When developing method No. 2, the authors used the available information about the characteristic noise in industry, in the US in the early 1950s, [54] and the difference in the noise levels (dBC and dBA) to take into account its spectrum – as in the HML method later.

NIOSH fully took into account the significant difference between the real and laboratory effectiveness of personal protective equipment, [55] but other organizations began to recommend similar methods, and they were fixed in state and international standards. [56]

Regulations and standards

United States

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Noise</span> Unwanted sound

Noise is sound, chiefly unwanted, unintentional, or harmful sound considered unpleasant, loud, or disruptive to mental or hearing faculties. From a physics standpoint, there is no distinction between noise and desired sound, as both are vibrations through a medium, such as air or water. The difference arises when the brain receives and perceives a sound. Acoustic noise is any sound in the acoustic domain, either deliberate or unintended. In contrast, noise in electronics may not be audible to the human ear and may require instruments for detection.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Personal protective equipment</span> Equipment designed to help protect an individual from hazards

Personal protective equipment (PPE) is protective clothing, helmets, goggles, or other garments or equipment designed to protect the wearer's body from injury or infection. The hazards addressed by protective equipment include physical, electrical, heat, chemical, biohazards, and airborne particulate matter. Protective equipment may be worn for job-related occupational safety and health purposes, as well as for sports and other recreational activities. Protective clothing is applied to traditional categories of clothing, and protective gear applies to items such as pads, guards, shields, or masks, and others. PPE suits can be similar in appearance to a cleanroom suit.

Occupational noise is the amount of acoustic energy received by an employee's auditory system when they are working in the industry. Occupational noise, or industrial noise, is often a term used in occupational safety and health, as sustained exposure can cause permanent hearing damage. Occupational noise is considered an occupational hazard traditionally linked to loud industries such as ship-building, mining, railroad work, welding, and construction, but can be present in any workplace where hazardous noise is present.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Occupational hygiene</span> Management of workplace health hazards

Occupational hygiene or industrial hygiene (IH) is the anticipation, recognition, evaluation, control, and confirmation (ARECC) of protection from risks associated with exposures to hazards in, or arising from, the workplace that may result in injury, illness, impairment, or affect the well-being of workers and members of the community. These hazards or stressors are typically divided into the categories biological, chemical, physical, ergonomic and psychosocial. The risk of a health effect from a given stressor is a function of the hazard multiplied by the exposure to the individual or group. For chemicals, the hazard can be understood by the dose response profile most often based on toxicological studies or models. Occupational hygienists work closely with toxicologists (see Toxicology) for understanding chemical hazards, physicists (see Physics) for physical hazards, and physicians and microbiologists for biological hazards (see Microbiology, Tropical medicine, Infection). Environmental and occupational hygienists are considered experts in exposure science and exposure risk management. Depending on an individual's type of job, a hygienist will apply their exposure science expertise for the protection of workers, consumers and/or communities.

The permissible exposure limit is a legal limit in the United States for exposure of an employee to a chemical substance or physical agent such as high level noise. Permissible exposure limits were established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Most of OSHA's PELs were issued shortly after adoption of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act in 1970.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Earplug</span> Device to protect ears from loud noises

An earplug is a device that is inserted in the ear canal to protect the user's ears from loud noises, intrusion of water, foreign bodies, dust or excessive wind. Earplugs may be used as well to improve sleep quality or focus in noisy environments. Since they reduce the sound volume, earplugs may prevent hearing loss and tinnitus, in some cases.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Earmuffs</span> Ear-protecting headgear worn over ears to protect from cold or loud noise

Earmuffs refer to two different items. Both items consist of a thermoplastic or metal head-band that fits over the top or back of the head, and a cushion or cup at each end to usually cover both ears. The cups can either be clothing accessories designed to cover a person's ears for warmth or personal protective equipment designed to cover a person's ears for hearing protection.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Noise control</span> Strategies to reduce noise pollution or its impact

Noise control or noise mitigation is a set of strategies to reduce noise pollution or to reduce the impact of that noise, whether outdoors or indoors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sound level meter</span> Device for acoustic measurements

A sound level meter is used for acoustic measurements. It is commonly a hand-held instrument with a microphone. The best type of microphone for sound level meters is the condenser microphone, which combines precision with stability and reliability. The diaphragm of the microphone responds to changes in air pressure caused by sound waves. That is why the instrument is sometimes referred to as a sound pressure level meter (SPL). This movement of the diaphragm, i.e. the sound pressure, is converted into an electrical signal. While describing sound in terms of sound pressure, a logarithmic conversion is usually applied and the sound pressure level is stated instead, in decibels (dB), with 0 dB SPL equal to 20 micropascals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Health effects from noise</span> Health consequences of exposure to elevated sound levels

Noise health effects are the physical and psychological health consequences of regular exposure to consistent elevated sound levels. Noise from traffic, in particular, is considered by the World Health Organization to be one of the worst environmental stressors for humans, second only to air pollution. Elevated workplace or environmental noise can cause hearing impairment, tinnitus, hypertension, ischemic heart disease, annoyance, and sleep disturbance. Changes in the immune system and birth defects have been also attributed to noise exposure.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Occupational hazard</span> Hazard experienced in the workplace

An occupational hazard is a hazard experienced in the workplace. This encompasses many types of hazards, including chemical hazards, biological hazards (biohazards), psychosocial hazards, and physical hazards. In the United States, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) conduct workplace investigations and research addressing workplace health and safety hazards resulting in guidelines. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) establishes enforceable standards to prevent workplace injuries and illnesses. In the EU, a similar role is taken by EU-OSHA.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Noise-induced hearing loss</span> Medical condition

Noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is a hearing impairment resulting from exposure to loud sound. People may have a loss of perception of a narrow range of frequencies or impaired perception of sound including sensitivity to sound or ringing in the ears. When exposure to hazards such as noise occur at work and is associated with hearing loss, it is referred to as occupational hearing loss.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hearing conservation program</span>

Hearing conservation programs are programs that should reduce the risk of hearing loss due to hazardous noise exposure, if implemented correctly and with high quality. Hearing conservation programs require knowledge about risk factors such as noise and ototoxicity, hearing, hearing loss, protective measures to prevent hearing loss at home, in school, at work, in the military and, and at social/recreational events, and legislative requirements. Regarding occupational exposures to noise, a hearing conservation program is required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) "whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level (TWA) of 85 decibels (dB) measured on the A scale or, equivalently, a dose of fifty percent." This 8-hour time-weighted average is known as an exposure action value. While the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) also requires a hearing conservation program, MSHA does not require a written hearing conservation program. MSHA's hearing conservation program requirement can be found in 30 CFR § 62.150, and is very similar to the OSHA hearing conservation program requirements. Therefore, only the OSHA standard 29 CFR 1910.95 will be discussed in detail.

An Exposure Action Value (EAV) or Action Value (AV) is a limit set on occupational exposure to noise where, when those values are exceeded, employers must take steps to monitor the exposure levels. These levels are measured in decibels. The American Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) set the EAV to 85 dB(A). When the eight-hour time-weighted average (TWA) reaches 85 dB(A), employers are required to administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program. The program consists of monitoring, employee notification, observation, an audiometric testing program, hearing protectors, training programs, and record-keeping requirements.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Safe-in-Sound Award</span>

The Safe-in-Sound Excellence in Hearing Loss Prevention Award is an occupational health and safety award that was established in 2007 through a partnership between the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the National Hearing Conservation Association (NHCA). In 2018, the partnership was extended to include the Council for Accreditation in Occupational Hearing Conservation (CAOHC).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Occupational hearing loss</span> Form of hearing loss

Occupational hearing loss (OHL) is hearing loss that occurs as a result of occupational hazards, such as excessive noise and ototoxic chemicals. Noise is a common workplace hazard, and recognized as the risk factor for noise-induced hearing loss and tinnitus but it is not the only risk factor that can result in a work-related hearing loss. Also, noise-induced hearing loss can result from exposures that are not restricted to the occupational setting.

Engineering controls are strategies designed to protect workers from hazardous conditions by placing a barrier between the worker and the hazard or by removing a hazardous substance through air ventilation. Engineering controls involve a physical change to the workplace itself, rather than relying on workers' behavior or requiring workers to wear protective clothing.

The Auditory Hazard Assessment Algorithm for Humans (AHAAH) is a mathematical model of the human auditory system that calculates the risk to human hearing caused by exposure to impulse sounds, such as gunfire and airbag deployment. It was developed by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) to assess the effectiveness of hearing protection devices and aid the design of machinery and weapons to make them safer for the user.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hearing protection fit-testing</span> Test for determining the effectiveness hearing protection devices

Hearing protector fit-testing is a method that measures the degree of noise reduction obtained from an individual wearing a particular hearing protection device (HPD) - for example, a noise canceling earplug or earmuff. Fit testing is necessary due to the fact that noise attenuation varies across individuals. It is important to note that attenuation can sometimes score as zero due to anatomical differences and inadequate training, as to the proper wear and use. Labeled HPD attenuation values are average values that cannot predict noise attenuation for an individual; in addition, they are based on laboratory measurements which may overestimate the noise reduction obtained in the real world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Safe listening</span> Avoiding hearing damage from intentionally heard sounds

Safe listening is a framework for health promotion actions to ensure that sound-related recreational activities do not pose a risk to hearing.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Rawool, Vishakha Waman (2011). "Chapter 6: Hearing Protection and Enhancement Devices". Hearing Conservation: In Occupational, Recreational, Educational, and Home Settings. Thieme. pp. 136–173. ISBN   978-1604062571.
  2. ↑ Technical Committee CEN/TC 159 “Hearing protectors” (17 November 2021). EN 17479-2021. Hearing protectors – Guidance on selection of individual fit testing methods. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization. p. 46. ISBN   978-0-539-04746-2.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) link
  3. 1 2 3 Suter, Alice (2012). "Engineering Controls for Occupational Noise Exposure – The Best Way to Save Hearing" (PDF). Sound & Vibration. 48 (1). Henderson, Nevada: Tech Science Press: 24–31. ISSN   1541-0161 . Retrieved 7 June 2023.
  4. 1 2 Berger, Elliott H.; Voix, Jérémie (2018). "Chapter 11: Hearing Protection Devices". In D.K. Meinke; E.H. Berger; R. Neitzel; D.P. Driscoll; K. Bright (eds.). The Noise Manual (6th ed.). Falls Church, Virginia: American Industrial Hygiene Association. pp. 255–308. ISBN   978-1-950286-07-2 . Retrieved 10 August 2022.
  5. ↑ Groenewold M.R.; Masterson E.A.; Themann C.L.; Davis R.R. (2014). "Do hearing protectors protect hearing?". American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 57 (9). Wiley Periodicals: 1001–1010. doi:10.1002/ajim.22323. ISSN   1097-0274. PMC   4671486 . PMID   24700499 . Retrieved 15 October 2022.
  6. ↑ "Noise And Hearing Loss Prevention: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)". NIOSH Workplace Safety and Health Topic. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, United States Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved 2017-01-30.
  7. ↑ Kardous C, Themann CL, Morata TC, Lotz WG (8 February 2016). "Understanding Noise Exposure Limits: Occupational vs. General Environmental Noise". NIOSH Science Blog. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
  8. 1 2 3 US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (1983). "29 CFR 1910.95 Occupational noise exposure". www.osha.gov. Washington, DC: OSHA. Retrieved 18 July 2023.
  9. ↑ Technical Committee ISO/TC 43 Acoustics (2013). ISO 1999:2013 Acoustics — Estimation of noise-induced hearing loss (3 ed.). Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization. p. 23. Retrieved 14 July 2023.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  10. ↑ Suter, Alice H. (2011-05-24). "Noise. Standards and Regulations". Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health & Safety (Part VI. General Hazards) (4 ed.). International Labour Organization. Retrieved 14 July 2023.
  11. ↑ "Occupational Health and Safety Code". www.alberta.ca. Edmonton: Government of Alberta. 2023. Retrieved 14 July 2023.
  12. ↑ For mental work
  13. ↑ "§ 34". State hygienic requirements 1.2.3685-21 "Hygienic requirements for the safety of environmental factors for humans" [СанПиН 1.2.3685-21 "Гигиенические нормативы и требования к обеспечению безопасности и (или) безвредности для человека факторов среды обитания"] (in Russian). Moscow: Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing. 2021. p. 337. Retrieved 14 July 2023.
  14. ↑ Occupational Safety and Health Administration (2010-10-19). "Interpretation of OSHA's Provisions for Feasible Administrative or Engineering Controls of Occupational Noise". Federal Register. Proposed Rule. 44 (201). Washington, DC: Office of the Federal Register: 64216–64221. ISSN   0097-6326 . Retrieved 29 July 2023. p. 64218: ... the majority's adoption of a cost-benefit test amounted to an unauthorized amendment of the standard. Commissioner Cleary’s view
  15. ↑ Appendix H. Economic Feasiblity Analysis of Noise Engineering Controls OSHA (July 6, 2022). "OSHA Technical Manual (OTM) Section III: Chapter 5. Noise". www.osha.gov. US Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Retrieved 18 January 2023.
  16. ↑ B.9 Extended Workshifts OSHA (July 6, 2022). "OSHA Technical Manual (OTM) Section III: Chapter 5. Noise". www.osha.gov. US Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Retrieved 18 January 2023. Instrument accuracy must be taken into account ... . Type-2 dosimeters are considered to have an error of ±2 dBA, and the Action Level must be corrected, accordingly. For example, for an 8-hour shift, the corrected Action Level would be 87 dBA ...
  17. ↑ Nondahl DM, Cruickshanks KJ, Dalton DS, Klein BE, Klein R, Tweed TS, Wiley TL (2006). "The use of hearing protection devices by older adults during recreational noise exposure". Noise & Health. 8 (33): 147–53. doi: 10.4103/1463-1741.34702 . PMID   17851219.
  18. 1 2 3 Meinke DK, Finan DS, Flamme GA, Murphy WJ, Stewart M, Lankford JE, Tasko S (November 2017). "Prevention of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss from Recreational Firearms". Seminars in Hearing. 38 (4): 267–281. doi:10.1055/s-0037-1606323. PMC   5634813 . PMID   29026261.
  19. ↑ McKinley R, Bjorn V (2005). Passive Hearing Protection Systems and Their Performance. Air Force Research Lab Wright-Patterson AFB. OCLC   1050612884.
  20. 1 2 Rosenstock, Linda (June 1998). "Chapter 6. Hearing Protectors". Criteria for a Recommended Standard. Occupational Noise Exposure (2nd ed.). Cincinnati, Ohio: DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No 98-126. pp. 61–69. doi:10.26616/NIOSHPUB98126 . Retrieved 6 January 2023.
  21. 1 2 3 4 Voix, Jérémie; Smith, Pegeen; Berger, Elliott H. (2018). "Chapter 12: Field Fit-Testing and Attenuation-Estimation Procedures". In D.K. Meinke; E.H. Berger; R. Neitzel; D.P. Driscoll; K. Bright (eds.). The Noise Manual (6th ed.). Falls Church, Virginia: American Industrial Hygiene Association. pp. 309–329. ISBN   978-1-950286-07-2 . Retrieved 10 August 2022.
  22. ↑ Technical Committee CEN/TC 159 – Hearing protectors (2016-03-31). BS EN 458:2016 Hearing protectors. Recommendations for selection, use, care and maintenance. Guidance document (3 ed.). British Standards Institution. p. 54. ISBN   978-0-580-82040-3 . Retrieved 18 July 2023.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  23. 1 2 3 Kah Heng Lee; Geza Benke; Dean Mckenzie (2022). "The efficacy of earplugs at a major hazard facility". Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine. 45 (1). Springler: 107–114. doi:10.1007/s13246-021-01087-y. ISSN   2662-4729. PMID   35023076. S2CID   221812245 . Retrieved 2022-08-10.
  24. ↑ "The 5 Best In-Ear Electronic Hearing Protection for Shooting [2021]". Patriotic Hunter. 2021-02-27. Retrieved 2021-03-08.
  25. ↑ Behar, Alberto; E.H. Berger, I.B. Bhunnoo (2014). "9.7 Double protection". Z94.2–14. Hearing protection devices — Performance, selection, care and use (7th ed.). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Standards Association (CSA Group). pp. 27–28. ISBN   978-1-77139-417-8 . Retrieved 25 October 2023.
  26. ↑ Bauer, E.R.; Babich, D.R.; Vipperman, J.R. (December 2006). IC 9492 Information CircularEquipment Noise and Worker Exposure in the Coal Mining Industry. DHHS-CDC-NIOSH. pp. 1–85. Retrieved 1 February 2025.
  27. ↑ Berger, E. H. (1983). "Laboratory attenuation of earmuffs and earplugs both singly and in combination". American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 44 (5): 321–329. doi: 10.1080/15298668391404905
  28. ↑ Abel, S. M.; Armstrong, N. M. (1992). "The combined sound attenuation of earplugs and earmuffs". Applied Acoustics. 36 (1): 19–30. doi: 10.1016/0003-682X(92)90071-Y
  29. 1 2 Berger, E. H.; Kieper, R. W.; Gauger, D. (2003). "Hearing protection: surpassing the limits to attenuation imposed by the bone-conduction pathways". The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 114 (4): 1955–1967. doi: 10.1121/1.1605415. PMID 14587596
  30. ↑ Luan, Y.; Doutres, O.; Nélisse, H.; Sgard, F. (2021). "Experimental study of earplug noise reduction of a double hearing protector on an acoustic test fixture". Applied Acoustics. 176: 107856. doi: 10.1016/j.apacoust.2020.107856
  31. ↑ CSA Z94.2–14. (2014). Hearing protection devices: performance, selection, care and use. Standard. CSA Group
  32. 1 2 3 "Care/Maintenance of Earplugs and Earmuffs" (PDF). Howard Leight. 2013. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-09-02.
  33. ↑ "The Do's and Don'ts of Earplug Use | PeopleHearingBetter". phb.secondsensehearing.com. Archived from the original on 2019-05-18. Retrieved 2018-12-03.
  34. ↑ US OSHA (1980). "How OSHA can help employers and employees - Legal limits on noise". Noise Control. A guide for workers and employers. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. p. 112. Retrieved 6 February 2024. Personal protective devices are generally not a good permanent solution for a number of reasons. ... They may not work effectively because of the difficulty in getting acceptable fit for each individual. In some cases-particularly when noise is intermittent and below 85 dB(A) - they may make communication more difficult, which can contribute to accidents and make jobs more difficult to perform.
  35. ↑ Edwards R.G.; Hauser W.P.; Moiseev N.A.; Broderson A.B.; Green W.W. (1978). "Effectiveness of Earplugs as Worn in the Workplace". Sound and Vibration. 12 (1). Henderson, USA: Tech Science Press: 12–22. ISSN   1541-0161.
  36. ↑ Tantranont, Kunlayanee; Codchanak, Nuntanat (2017-08-08). "Predictors of Hearing Protection Use Among Industrial Workers". Workplace Health & Safety. 65 (8): 365–371. doi: 10.1177/2165079917693019 . ISSN   2165-0799. PMID   28422611.
  37. ↑ Smith, Pegeen S.; Monaco, Barbara A.; Lusk, Sally L. (2014-12-12). "Attitudes toward use of hearing protection devices and effects of an intervention on fit-testing results". Workplace Health & Safety. 62 (12): 491–499. doi:10.3928/21650799-20140902-01. ISSN   2165-0969. PMID   25207586. S2CID   45642267.
  38. ↑ John, G. W.; Grynevych, A.; Welch, D.; McBride, D.; Thorne, P. R. (2014). "Noise exposure of workers and the use of hearing protection equipment in New Zealand". Archives of Environmental & Occupational Health. 69 (2): 69–80. doi:10.1080/19338244.2012.732122. ISSN   1933-8244. PMID   24205958. S2CID   205941553.
  39. ↑ Morata, Thais C.; Fiorini, Anna Claudia; Fischer, Frida Marina; Krieg, Edward F.; Gozzoli, Luciane; Colacioppo, Sergio (2001). "Factors affecting the use of hearing protectors in a population of printing workers". Noise & Health. 4 (13): 25–32. ISSN   1463-1741. PMID   12678933.
  40. ↑ Svensson, Eva B.; Morata, Thais C.; Nylén, Per; Krieg, Edward F.; Johnson, Ann-Christin (2004-11-10). "Beliefs and attitudes among Swedish workers regarding the risk of hearing loss". International Journal of Audiology. 43 (10): 585–593. doi:10.1080/14992020400050075. ISSN   1499-2027. PMID   15724523. S2CID   1071009.
  41. ↑ Ntlhakana L, Kanji A and, Khoza-Shangase (2015). "The use of hearing protection devices in South Africa: exploring the current status in gold and ferrous mine". Occupational Health Southern Africa. 21 (2): 10–15.
  42. ↑ Edwards R.G.; Hauser W.P.; Moiseev N.A.; Broderson A.B.; Green W.W.; Lempert B.L (1979). A field investigation of noise reduction afforded by insert-type hearing protectors. Springfield, Virginia: National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety. p. 54. Retrieved 6 January 2023.
  43. ↑ Lempert, Barry L.; Edwards, Richard G. (1983). "Field Investigations of Noise Reduction Afforded by Insert-Type Hearing Protectors". American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 44 (12). Akron, Ohio: Taylor & Francis: 894–902. doi:10.1080/15298668391405913. ISSN   1529-8663. PMID   6660189.
  44. ↑ Berger, Elliott H.; Franks, John R.; Lindgren, Frederik (1996). "Chapter 29. International review of field studies of hearing protector attenuation". In Axelsson, A.; Borchgrevink, H.; Hamernik, R.P.; Hellstrom, P.; Henderson, D.; Salvi, R.J. (eds.). Scientific basis of noise-induced hearing loss (PDF). Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on the Effects of Noise on Hearing, held in Gothenburg, Sweden, May 12–14, 1994. New York, NY, USA: Thieme Medical Publishers. pp. 361–377. ISBN   978-3131026811 . Retrieved 11 August 2023.
  45. 1 2 Kwitowski, August J.; Carilli, Angela M.; Randolph, Robert F. (September 2010). "MultiFit4: An Improved System for Insert-Type". Spectrum. 27 (2). National Hearing Conservation Association: 17–25. Retrieved 6 January 2023.
  46. ↑ National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (February 6, 2019). "Noise and Hearing Loss Prevention Programs". cdc.gov.
  47. ↑ "NIOSH HPD Well-Fit™: The Future is Fit-Testing | | Blogs | CDC". 31 May 2013. Retrieved 2019-02-27.
  48. ↑ "OSHA Technical Manual (OTM) Section III: Chapter 5. Noise". US Occupational Safety and Health Administration. July 6, 2022. Retrieved 18 January 2023. ... has recommended HPD fit-testing as a best practice and valuable training tool that can help in training the worker to achieve an optimal fit
  49. ↑ Murphy, William (Winter 2013). "Comparing Personal Attenuation Ratings for Hearing Protector Fit-test systems" (PDF). CAOHC Update. 25: 6–8.
  50. ↑ Morata, Thais C.; Gong, Wei; Tikka, Christina; Samelli, Alessandra G.; Verbeek, Jos H. (2024-05-17). "Hearing protection field attenuation estimation systems and associated training for reducing workers' exposure to noise". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 5 (5): CD015066. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD015066.pub2. ISSN   1469-493X. PMC   11099959 . PMID   38757544.
  51. ↑ "How Can I Test My Hearing Protection?". www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/. NIOSH. December 3, 2012. Retrieved 6 January 2023.
  52. ↑ Randolph, Robert F. (December 2008). QuickFit Earplug Test Device (Technology News 534). Pittsburgh: DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2009–112. p. 2. Retrieved 6 January 2023. + online test tool
  53. ↑ Kroes, Patricia; Fleming, Roy; Lempert, Barry (September 1975). "Appendix: Determination of Noise Reduction for Hearing Protectors". List of Personal Hearing Protectors and Attenuation Data. DHEW (NIOSH) Publication No. 76-120. Cincinnati, Ohio: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. pp. 21–31. Retrieved 11 August 2023.
  54. ↑ Karplus, Henry B.; Bonvallet, George L. (December 1953). "A Noise Survey of Manufacturing Industries". American Industrial Hygiene Association Quarterly. 14 (4). Akron, Ohio: Taylor & Francis: 235–263. doi:10.1080/00968205309343944. ISSN   1542-8117. PMID   13114194 . Retrieved 11 August 2023.
  55. ↑ Franks, John R.; Themann, Christa L.; Sheris, Cari (October 1996). "Rating Systems". The NIOSH Compendium of Hearing Protective Devices. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 94-130. Springfield, VA: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. pp. 2–4. Retrieved 11 August 2023.
  56. ↑ Committee EH/1/1 (1995-03-15). BS EN ISO 4869-2:1995. Acoustics. Hearing protectors – Estimation of effective A-weighted sound pressure levels when hearing protectors are worn (1st ed.). British Standards Institution. p. 26. doi:10.3403/00683894. ISBN   978-0-580-59311-6 . Retrieved 11 August 2023.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  57. ↑ "PART 62—OCCUPATIONAL NOISE EXPOSURE". Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. Retrieved February 20, 2018.
  58. ↑ "INSTRUCTION NUMBER 6055.12" (PDF). Department of Defense. Retrieved February 20, 2018.
  59. ↑ "Navy and Marine Corps Public Health Center Technical Manual NMCPHC – TM 6260.51.99-2 (September 2008)" (PDF). Navy and Marine Corps Public Health Center. Retrieved February 20, 2018.
  60. ↑ "Directive 2003/10/EC – noise". European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. Retrieved February 20, 2018.
  61. ↑ "ANSI/ASSE A10.46–2013 Hearing Loss Prevention for Construction & Demolition Workers". The American Society of Safety Engineers. Retrieved February 20, 2018.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.