Identifying Barriers To The Use Of Personal Protection Measures: Evidence From The Perceptions Of Bite-prevention Measures And Hearing Protection Devices In Military Members

Exposure to industrial noise and the resulting effect of occupational hearing loss is a common problem in nearly all industries. This chapter describes industrial noise exposure, its assessment, and hearing disorders that result from overexposure to noise. Beginning with the properties of sound, noise-induced hearing loss and other effects of noise exposure are discussed. The impact of hearing disorders and the influence of other factors on hearing loss are described. Typically, noise-induced hearing loss develops slowly, and usually goes unnoticed until a significant impairment has occurred. Fortunately, occupational hearing loss is nearly always preventable. Therefore, this chapter gives particular attention to recommendations for measures to prevent occupational hearing loss such as engineering noise controls and hearing protection devices.

Download Full-text

Use of Respiratory Protection Devices by Medical Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ◽

10.3390/ijerph18115834 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (11) ◽

pp. 5834

Author(s):

Ekaterina A. Shashina ◽

Valentina V. Makarova ◽

Denis V. Shcherbakov ◽

Tatiana S. Isiutina-Fedotkova ◽

Nadezhda N. Zabroda ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Medical Students ◽

Face Mask ◽

Protective Measure ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Respiratory Protection ◽

Prevention Measures ◽

Protection Devices ◽

Individual Use

The use of face masks has assumed a leading spot among nonspecific prevention measures during the coronavirus pandemic. The effectiveness of this protective measure depends on the specifics of individual use. The purpose of our study was to analyze the use of respiratory protective equipment (RPE) by medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic. The evaluation of face mask use was based on the results of a survey of medical students at Sechenov University. There were 988 participants in the study: 97.5% used RPE during the pandemic, 89.1% used disposable medical and hygienic face masks, 27.4% used reusable cloth face masks, and 13.2% used respirators. The majority of respondents (75.2%) were found to wear face masks correctly. However, 17.0% of the respondents were found to cover only their mouths with a face mask, while 7.8% reported often shifting their face mask under the chin due to perceived discomfort. Only 25.1% of respondents changed their disposable face mask after 2-3 h of wearing, while 13.0% decontaminated and used it several times. Most cloth face mask users (93.7%) decontaminated their marks, but only 55.7% of respondents did so daily. Face masks were most often worn in medical organizations (91.5%), and 1.4% of respondents did not use respiratory protection anywhere. In conclusion, we consider it necessary to introduce a special module on nonspecific prevention in the discipline of hygiene.

Download Full-text

Study of performance of acoustic fixture for using in noise reduction rate tests of hearing protection devices

Journal of Occupational Hygiene Engineering ◽

10.21859/johe-03018 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 3 (1) ◽

pp. 60-66 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Azam Biabani ◽

Mohsen Aliabadi ◽

Rostam Golmohamadi

Keyword(s):

Noise Reduction ◽

Reduction Rate ◽

Hearing Protection ◽

Protection Devices

Download Full-text

The Effectiveness of Hearing Protection Devices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ◽

10.3390/ijerph182111693 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (21) ◽

pp. 11693

Author(s):

Chanbeom Kwak ◽

Woojae Han

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Speech Perception ◽

Sound Localization ◽

Noise Exposure ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Random Effect ◽

Random Effect Model ◽

Sound Attenuation ◽

Hearing Protection ◽

Protection Devices

To prevent intensive noise exposure in advance and be safely controlled during such exposure, hearing protection devices (HPDs) have been widely used by workers. The present study evaluates the effectiveness of these HPDs, partitioned into three different outcomes, such as sound attenuation, sound localization, and speech perception. Seven electronic journal databases were used to search for published articles from 2000 to 2021. Based on inclusion criteria, 20 articles were chosen and then analyzed. For a systematic review and meta-analysis, standardized mean differences (SMDs) and effect size were calculated using a random-effect model. The funnel plot and Egger’s regression analysis were conducted to assess the risk of bias. From the overall results of the included 20 articles, we found that the HPD function performed significantly well for their users (SMDs: 0.457, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.034–0.881, p < 0.05). Specifically, a subgroup analysis showed a meaningful difference in sound attenuation (SMDs: 1.080, 95% CI: 0.167–1.993, p < 0.05) when to wear and not to wear HPDs, but indicated no significance between the groups for sound localization (SMDs: 0.177, 95% CI: 0.540–0.894, p = 0.628) and speech perception (SMDs: 0.366, 95% CI: −0.100–1.086, p = 0.103). The HPDs work well for their originally designated purposes without interfering to find the location of the sound sources and for talking between the workers. Taking into account various factors, such as the characteristics of the users, selection of appropriate types, and fitting methods for wearing in different circumstances, seems to be necessary for a reliable systematic analysis in terms of offering the most useful information to the workers.

Download Full-text

Comparative study of attenuation measurement of hearing protection devices by real ear attenuation at threshold method

Indian Journal of Otology ◽

10.4103/0971-7749.117477 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 19 (3) ◽

pp. 127 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Noorain Alam ◽

Vikas Sinha ◽

Rajiv Jalvi ◽

Deepanshu Gurnani ◽

DilavarA Barot ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Comparative Study ◽

Hearing Protection ◽

Threshold Method ◽

Attenuation Measurement ◽

Protection Devices

Download Full-text

Noise Exposure and Use of Hearing Protection Among Adolescents in Rural Areas

American Journal of Audiology ◽

10.1044/2021_aja-20-00196 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-13

Author(s):

Leigh Ann Reel ◽

Candace Bourland Hicks ◽

Courtney Arnold

Keyword(s):

Rural Areas ◽

Noise Exposure ◽

Rural Adolescents ◽

Rural Children ◽

Hearing Protection ◽

Noise Sources ◽

Heavy Machinery ◽

12Th Grade ◽

Protection Devices ◽

Power Tools

Purpose: Noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) has been found in rural children, potentially due to occupational and recreational noise exposure without consistent use of hearing protection devices (HPDs). However, questions remain regarding the specifics of rural adolescents' noise exposure and use of hearing protection around different types of noise. As such, the purpose of the current study was to provide preliminary results on rural adolescents' noise exposure and use of hearing protection for gunfire, heavy machinery, power tools, all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), and music. Method: A questionnaire was administered to 197 students (seventh to 12th grade) from rural schools in West Texas. Questions were related to noise exposure and use of HPDs for specific categories of noise. Testing was performed at the schools, with an investigator recording each student's responses. Results: Approximately 18%–44% of adolescents reported exposure 12 or more times a year to gunfire, heavy machinery, power tools, and ATVs. Only 1%–18% of the adolescents reported never being exposed to such noise sources. Almost half of rural adolescents never used hearing protection around gunfire, and 77%–91% reported never wearing hearing protection when exposed to heavy machinery, power tools, and ATVs. Conclusions: The current study revealed that rural adolescents are exposed to noise sources that could damage their hearing. However, the majority of rural adolescents do not consistently wear hearing protection. Additional research is now needed to extend these findings by assessing rural adolescents' duration of exposure to different noise sources, in addition to investigating prevention of NIHL in this population. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.17139335

Download Full-text

Ship Collision with Bridges

10.2749/sed004 ◽

1993 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Ole Damgaard Larsen

Keyword(s):

Prevention Measures ◽

Collision Risk ◽

Protection Measures ◽

Planning And Design ◽

Federal Highway ◽

The Usa ◽

Ship Collision ◽

Average Size ◽

Existing Bridges ◽

Vessel Impact

<p>Any struoture in navigable waters constitutes a hazard to shipping and is itself vulnerable to damage or destruction in the event of vessel collision. Worldwide vessel traffic and the average size of vessels continue to lncrease. At the same time, ever more bridges crossing navigable waterways are being planned and constructed, sometimes with inadequate navigation clearance and/or lnadequate protection. <p> The objective of this publication is to provide information and guidelinesfor engineers charged with the planning and design of new bridges, navlgation channels, and prevention and protection measures. Lt offers advice on upgrading and retrofrtting existing bridges and navigation channels. And lt provides the means to evaluate the safety of bridges, vessels, persons and the environment. <p>After reviewing some basics o! navigatlon and vessel traffic, and considering risk acceptance and collision risk, the publication examines vessel impact forces on bridges and proposes appropriate bridge design criteria. Prevention measures, such as regulations and management systems. And protectlon measures and systems are also described. Major international research projects have provided the analytical basis for the publication, including the development of vessel collision guide specific-atrons for the Federal Highway Administration in the USA and the vessel colllsion design crrteria developed for the Great Bell Crossing in Oenmark. <p>Prepared by Ole Damgaard LARSEN, Chairman of the IABSE Working Group "Ship Collision with Bridges'', lhis 132 page publlcation is a must for any engineer dealing with structures in navigable waters.

Download Full-text