Noise exposures of rail workers at a North American chemical facility

BACKGROUND: Both continuous and impact noise exposures of rail yards and railways have been historically understudied. We summarize noise exposures to rail workers at a large chemical facility in North America. METHODS: Rail workers were surveyed over the course of three 12-hr shifts. Personal noise dosimeters were used to derive a 12-hr time-weighted average (L(AVG)), an 8-hr time-weighted average (L(TWA)), and a percent dose. Peak and maximum sound levels were also recorded during each sampling period. Six workers were sampled on three separate days for a total of 18 full-shift noise samples. RESULTS: Full-shift noise exposures were all below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) and action level for a 12-hr workday. Peak impact sound levels exceeded 140 dB in 17 of 18 samples (94%) with a mean peak sound level of 143.9 dB. Maximum continuous sound levels were greater than 115 dBA in 4 of 18 samples (22%) with a mean maximum sound level of 113.1 dBA. The source of peak impact sound levels was a daily exposure to a concussion caused by a sudden break in a freight airline. CONCLUSIONS: Rail workers at this facility are at risk of noise induced hearing loss from high impact noise exposures. Peak impact and maximum continuous sound levels can be attenuated through the use of hearing protection or by increasing distances from railroad noise sources.     

噪声所致工人听力损失与高血压的关系

目的研究某钢铁企业工人噪声暴露与高血压的关系。方法选择2014年1~7月底参加职业体检单纯接触噪声工人2061例,按照高频听力损失严重程度分组,即在4000 Hz或者6000 Hz,低听力损失组平均听力损失值(HLVs)15 d B(A)660例,噪声40 h等效声级为(74.69±11.97)d B(A);中听力损失组,15 d B(A)≤HLVs30 d B(A)741例,噪声40 h等效声级为(84.38±11.57)d B(A);高听力损失组,HLVs≥30 d B(A)660例,噪声40 h等效声级为(88.03±14.08)d B(A)。比较三组高血压患病率的差异。结果工人4000 Hz和6000 Hz时,左、右和两耳平均的HLVs值与平均噪声暴露水平显著相关(P0.05)。高血压患病率中听力损失组(29.5%)和高听力损失组(36.1%)明显高于低听力损失组(23.8%)(P0.05)。多因素Logistic回归分析显示,在调整了年龄、心率(HR)、甘油三酯(TG)、噪声40 h等效声级、糖尿病、吸烟、饮酒、体育锻炼等影响因素后,中听力损失组和高听力损失组患高血压的风险较高,其OR值分别为2.14(1.21~3.79)、2.58(1.44~4.62)。结论钢铁企业工人高频噪声引起的听力损失与患高血压的风险有关。     

接触不同噪声强度的听力损失及预测方法的探讨

本文报道了429例持续接触85、90、105dB(A)稳态噪声的工人听力损失的调查结果,发现85dB(A),工龄8年以上、13年以上和18～22年三组听力损失发生率分别为5.82%、16.66%和30.00%;高损发生率分别为35.29%、45.83%、60.00%。听力损失预测方法分析研究表明,应用回归方程y=15..9(-1)%的听力损失计算值与本次调查实测值及ISO公布有关听觉丧失危险性的资料均十分接近;接触85dB(A)工龄10、15、20和25年的听损发生率计算值分别为12.72%、19.08%、23.85%和28.62%。因此,建议对我国目前85dB(A)的噪声卫生标准予以适当的修订。     

Development and pilot test of hearing conservation training for construction workers

BACKGROUND: Hearing conservation efforts in construction frequently rely on use of hearing protection devices (HPDs): however, training on HPDs is often not provided, and usage rates remain low. In this study, a hearing conservation training program was developed and pilot tested. METHODS: A theoretical model was selected as the basis for the program, and program contents and delivery methods were selected to optimize the effectiveness and flexibility of the training. Two evaluation measures were selected to assess training-related changes in self-reported HPD use. The first was a validated method using concurrent work-shift noise dosimetry, and the second was a survey concerning workers beliefs and attitudes towards HPDs and HPD use. RESULTS: The training program was pilot tested on a single construction site. Complete assessment data were available for 23 workers. The percent of time when hearing protection was used during noise levels above 85 dBA nearly doubled post-training, and the change was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Pre- and post-training data from participating workers demonstrated that HPD use can be increased significantly with basic model-based training, even in industries with complex noise exposures such as construction.     

噪声作业工人听力损伤致残程度的鉴定分析

本文对３２５名噪声作业工人的听力损伤致残程度进行鉴定分析。鉴定以ＧＢ／Ｔ１６１８０１９９６《职业工伤与职业病致残程度鉴定》为准。结果表明：１０级、９级的检出例数最多；按不同的工龄段分析，工龄愈长，致残程度愈趋向于低级别（高致残），将所获结果与用ＧＢ１６１５２１９９６《职业性噪声聋诊断标准及处理原则》鉴定的结果作比较，两者的级别分布是一致的     

噪声作业所致工人职业性听力损失风险回顾性队列研究

目的 探讨噪声接触时间和噪声强度对噪声作业工人听力损失的风险程度。方法 采用回顾性队列研究分析广东省中山市1411名噪声作业工人连续3年纯音气导听阈和噪声监测数据。结果 1411名中山市噪声作业工人2012-2014年双耳高频听阈存在时间主效应和噪声强度主效应(P<0.05)。噪声作业工人2012、2013、2014年的双耳高频听阈分别为(30.88±7.21)、(30.57±6.91)、(30.37±7.21)dBHL,2013年与2012年相比,噪声作业工人双耳高频听阈升高(P<0.05),2014年与2013年相比,双耳高频听阈无差异(P>0.05);不同噪声强度双耳高频听阈不同(P<0.05),≥88 dB(A)噪声强度的工人双耳高频听阈最高,2012-2014年分别为(32.83±9.45)、(32.20±9.11)、(32.22±9.52)(dBHL)。结论 噪声接触时间和噪声强度与噪声接触工人双耳高频听阈损失存在剂量-反应关系。     

两种测量方法评价稳态噪声暴露与高频听力损伤的剂量-反应关系

目的 比较环境噪声水平、个体噪声暴露和累积噪声暴露量评价稳 态噪声所致听力损伤剂量－反应关系的优劣。方法 用个体计量仪采集8小时工作期间挡车工的噪声暴露数据,并将数据传输至微机存储和分析。选择细砂、布机车间使用不同类型机器的4组工人作为观察对象,每组选择3－5人,分别在早、中、晚班各测量1个班次的个体噪声暴露数据;用网格法和普通声级计测量每组工人工作环境的噪声水平,同时对该纺织厂接触稳态噪声的163名工人进行了问卷和听力检查。结果 经年龄、性别校正后的高频听力损伤患病率为64．4％;语频听力损伤患病率为2．5％,其中高频听力损伤患病率随噪声暴露的剂量增大而升高,呈现典型的剂量－反应关系。经趋势卡方检验和和Logistic回归模型拟合,累积噪声暴露量评价剂量－反应关系的效果优于噪声级,个体噪声暴露的效果优于环境噪声水平。结论 个体噪声暴露和累积噪声暴露量是评价稳态噪声暴露与高频听力损伤剂量－反应关系最好的暴露评价指标。     

Compensation claims for occupational noise induced hearing loss between 1998 and 2008: yearly incidence rates and trends in older workers

Objectives : To estimate yearly incidence rates for occupational noise induced hearing loss (ONIHL) claims and to describe occupational factors in relation to age for incident cases in Victoria, Australia, between 1998 and 2008. Methods : All compensation claims lodged for deafness between 1 July 1998 and 30 June 2008 in the working population covered by the Victorian compensation scheme were analysed. Denominators were provided from 1999–2000 and incidence rates were expressed per 100,000 workers for each financial year. Results : Overall, 81.2% of the 4,518 claims lodged were accepted. Successful claimants were predominantly males (96.5%) and claimants aged 56 to 65 years formed half the overall claims. The number of accepted claims was almost five times higher in 2007–08 than 1998–99. The highest rise was in claimants aged 56 years and above, particularly in those after retirement age. The number of claims and yearly incidence rates (IR) more than doubled over the period (240 claims and IR of 15.1 per 100,000 workers in 1999–2000 versus 669 claims and IR of 34.2 in 2007–08) with a sharp increase from 2004–05 to almost double within one single year and remained at high levels afterwards. Conclusion : The dramatic increase in eligible claims may reflect an increase in awareness of entitlements among workers eligible to make a successful claim. This awareness may be the result of increased opportunities for screening coinciding with changes in regulations. Older workers who worked in smaller workplaces may also be targeted by services providers as they combine occupational noise induced hearing loss (ONIHL) and presbycusis (hearing loss due to age), but this hypothesis needs further evaluation.     

个体噪声防护的职业接触人群听力损失的剂量-反应关系研究

目的准确评价工作场所中使用个体听力防护的噪声接触人群的听力损失。方法对50家企业的3 432名接触噪声工人进行纯音听力测试并对50家接触噪声企业进行职业卫生调查。结果50家噪声接触企业进行职业流行病调查显示噪声强度(92.1±4.9)dB,累积噪声暴露量(CNE)为(103.43±6.66)dB(A).年;在3 432名接触噪声作业人员的听阈检查中,高频损失1 272人(37.06%),语频损失133人(3.88%);高频和语频损失的发生率随累积噪声强度的增大而增大,其发生率与CNE存在剂量-反应关系(P<0.01)。结论高频和语频的发生率随累积噪声强度的增大而增大,呈剂量-反应关系。     

Prevalence of hearing loss among noise‐exposed workers within the agriculture,forestry, fishing,and hunting sector, 2003‐2012

Background

The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of hearing loss among noise‐exposed US workers within the Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting (AFFH) sector.

Methods

Audiograms for 1.4 million workers (17 299 within AFFH) from 2003 to 2012 were examined. Prevalence, and the adjusted risk for hearing loss as compared with the reference industry (Couriers and Messengers), were estimated.

Results

The overall AFFH sector prevalence was 15% compared to 19% for all industries combined, but many of the AFFH sub‐sectors exceeded the overall prevalence. Forestry sub‐sector prevalences were highest with Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products at 36% and Timber Tract Operations at 22%. The Aquaculture sub‐sector had the highest adjusted risk of all AFFH sub‐sectors (PR = 1.70; CI = 1.42‐2.04).

Conclusions

High risk industries within the AFFH sector need continued hearing conservation efforts. Barriers to hearing loss prevention and early detection of hearing loss need to be recognized and addressed.

     

Predictors of hearing loss in New York farmers.

BACKGROUND: Data from the telephone interview portion of the New York Farm Family Health and Hazard Surveillance were used to study self-reported hearing loss in New York farmers. METHODS: One thousand six hundred and twenty-two persons completed the hearing loss and noise exposure interview. Hearing loss was defined as at least some trouble hearing in one or both ears. Predictors of hearing loss were determined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Twenty-two percent of participants reported hearing loss. From the logistic regression, significant confounders are age (P = 0.0001), gender (P = 0.0001), being from a livestock farm (P = 0.012), and loss of consciousness due to head trauma (P = 0.04). Significant noise exposures are more hours of lifetime exposure to noisy farm equipment (P = 0.001) and having had a noisy non-farm job (with some hearing protection P = 0.002, without any hearing protection P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Farm noise exposure is a serious risk to the hearing of this population. Although use of hearing protection should be encouraged, replacing and modifying farm equipment to decrease noise at the source should be the first priority.     

Hearing loss among older construction workers: Updated analyses

Background

A prior study of this construction worker population found significant noise‐associated hearing loss. This follow‐up study included a much larger study population and consideration of additional risk factors.

Methods

Data included audiometry, clinical chemistry, personal history, and work history. Qualitative exposure metrics for noise and solvents were developed. Analyses compared construction workers to an internal reference group with lower exposures and an external worker population with low noise exposure.

Results

Among participants (n = 19 127) an overall prevalence of hearing loss of 58% was observed, with significantly increased prevalence across all construction trades. Construction workers had significantly increased risk of hearing loss compared to reference populations, with increasing risk by work duration. Noise exposure, solvent exposure, hypertension, and smoking were significant risk factors in multivariate models.

Conclusions

Results support a causal relationship between construction trades work and hearing loss. Prevention should focus on reducing exposure to noise, solvents, and cigarette smoke.

     

衢州市2016—2019年造纸行业噪声作业工人听力损失及其影响因素分析

目的 了解衢州市造纸行业噪声作业工人听力损伤现状, 为制定有效的预防控制策略提供科学依据。 方法 从“中国疾病预防控制信息系统”子系统“职业病与职业卫生信息监测系统”中提取衢州市2016—2019年造纸行业噪声作业工人职业健康检查个案卡,内容包括用人单位基本信息、工人基本信息及体检信息等。采用χ²检验和logistics回归模型对监测数据进行分析。 结果 2016—2019年衢州市造纸行业噪声作业工人共参与职业健康体检7 613人次,听力损失410人次(5.39%),疑似噪声聋1人(0.01%),职业禁忌症41人次(0.54%)。单因素分析发现,听力损失率随年龄上升呈现上升趋势。≥50岁年龄组听力损失率最高,为16.53%。工龄≥8年组听力损失率最高,为7.06%。男性工人听力损失率(6.34%)远高于女性(2.14%)。小型企业听力损失率最高,为7.27%,大型企业听力损失率最低,为3.68%,差异有统计学意义。多因素分析发现,性别、年龄和工龄是听力损伤的影响因素(P<0.05)。 结论 衢州市造纸行业应加强对小型造纸企业的职业卫生防护指导,男性、年龄大、工龄长的工人应作为重点人群加强健康监护和个体防护。     

职业噪声暴露与吸烟联合作用对听力影响的研究进展

职业噪声暴露所导致的职业性听力损伤是世界范围内的主要职业性疾病，但噪声并不是引起职业性听力损伤的惟一因素。研究发现吸烟也是听力损伤的重要危险因子之一，吸烟可能通过损伤内耳毛细胞及导致内耳组织缺氧加重噪声暴露所导致的听力损伤。