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. Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
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. Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: John Mac Crawford; Jane A Hoppin; Michael C R Alavanja; Aaron Blair; Dale P Sandler; Freya Kamel Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: Konstantinos Demos; Eleni Sazakli; Eleni Jelastopulu; Nikolaos Charokopos; John Ellul; Michalis Leotsinidis Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Arve Lie; Marit Skogstad; Håkon A Johannessen; Tore Tynes; Ingrid Sivesind Mehlum; Karl-Christian Nordby; Bo Engdahl; Kristian Tambs Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 3.015