Justin Outrey1, Jean-Baptiste Pretalli1,2, Sophie Pujol2,3, Alice Brembilla2, Thibaut Desmettre1,3, Christophe Lambert1, Jean-Marc Labourey1, Frédéric Mauny2,3, Abdo Khoury4,5. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine and Critical Care, Besançon University Hospital, Boulevard Fleming, 25030, Besançon cedex, France. 2. INSERM CIC 1431, Besançon University Hospital, Besançon, France. 3. UMR Chrono-environnement 6249, CNRS/University of Bourgogne Franche-Comté, 25000, Besançon, France. 4. Department of Emergency Medicine and Critical Care, Besançon University Hospital, Boulevard Fleming, 25030, Besançon cedex, France. akhoury@chu-besancon.fr. 5. INSERM CIC 1431, Besançon University Hospital, Besançon, France. akhoury@chu-besancon.fr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Noise levels are monitored in call centres. A maximum of 52 to 55 dB(A) is recommended in order to prevent adverse events. We aimed at assessing the noise level and the impact of a visual noise indicator on the ambient noise level in a French Regional Emergency Medical Dispatch Centre (EMDC). METHODS: We conducted an observational study in the EMDC of the SAMU25 (University Hospital of Besancon). We measured the noise level using a SoundEarII® noise indicator (Dräger Medical SAS, France). The measurement took place in two phases on three consecutive days from 00:00 to 11:59 PM. At baseline, phase 1, the device recorded the average ambient noise for each minute without visual indication. Secondly, phase 2 included a sensor mounted with a light that would turn on green if noise was below 65 dB(A), orange if noise ever exceeded 65 and red if it exceeded 75 dB(A). RESULTS: In the presence of the visual noise indicator, the LAeq was significantly lower than in the absence of visual noise indicator (a mean difference of - 4.19 dB; P < 10-3). It was higher than 55 dB(A) in 84.9 and 43.9% of the time in phases 1 and 2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The noise levels were frequently higher than the standards, and sometimes close to recommended limits, requiring preventive measures. The noise indicator had a positive effect on the ambient noise level. This work will allow the implementation of effective prevention solutions and, based on future assessments, could improve operators' well-being and better care for patient.
BACKGROUND: Noise levels are monitored in call centres. A maximum of 52 to 55 dB(A) is recommended in order to prevent adverse events. We aimed at assessing the noise level and the impact of a visual noise indicator on the ambient noise level in a French Regional Emergency Medical Dispatch Centre (EMDC). METHODS: We conducted an observational study in the EMDC of the SAMU25 (University Hospital of Besancon). We measured the noise level using a SoundEarII® noise indicator (Dräger Medical SAS, France). The measurement took place in two phases on three consecutive days from 00:00 to 11:59 PM. At baseline, phase 1, the device recorded the average ambient noise for each minute without visual indication. Secondly, phase 2 included a sensor mounted with a light that would turn on green if noise was below 65 dB(A), orange if noise ever exceeded 65 and red if it exceeded 75 dB(A). RESULTS: In the presence of the visual noise indicator, the LAeq was significantly lower than in the absence of visual noise indicator (a mean difference of - 4.19 dB; P < 10-3). It was higher than 55 dB(A) in 84.9 and 43.9% of the time in phases 1 and 2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The noise levels were frequently higher than the standards, and sometimes close to recommended limits, requiring preventive measures. The noise indicator had a positive effect on the ambient noise level. This work will allow the implementation of effective prevention solutions and, based on future assessments, could improve operators' well-being and better care for patient.
Entities:
Keywords:
Medical call Centre; Noise; Noise exposure
Authors: Anne Chevalier; Michel Dessery; Marie-Françoise Boursier; Marie Catherine Grizon; Christian Jayet; Catherine Reymond; Michelle Thiebot; Monique Zeme-Ramirez; Thierry Calvez Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2010-11-17 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Mathias Basner; Wolfgang Babisch; Adrian Davis; Mark Brink; Charlotte Clark; Sabine Janssen; Stephen Stansfeld Journal: Lancet Date: 2013-10-30 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Barbara Charbotel; Sophie Croidieu; Michel Vohito; Anne-Céline Guerin; Liliane Renaud; Joelle Jaussaud; Christian Bourboul; Isabelle Imbard; Dominique Ardiet; Alain Bergeret Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 3.015