Literature DB >> 3522700

Methods of measuring the attenuation of hearing protection devices.

E H Berger.   

Abstract

The published literature describing three real-ear-attenuation-at-threshold (REAT), nine above-threshold, and four objective methods of measuring hearing protector attenuation is reviewed and analyzed with regard to the accuracy, practicality, and applicability of the various techniques. The analysis indicates that the REAT method is one of the most accurate available techniques since it assesses all of the sound paths to the occluded ear and, depending upon the experimenter's intention, can reflect actual in-use attenuation as well. An artifact in the REAT paradigm is that masking in the occluded ear due to physiological noise can spuriously increase low-frequency (less than or equal to 500 Hz) attenuation, although the error never exceeds approximately 5 dB, regardless of the device, except below 125 Hz. Since the preponderance of available data indicates that attenuation is independent of sound level for intentionally linear protectors, the use of above-threshold procedures to evaluate attenuation is not a necessity. An exception exists in the case of impulsive noises, for which the existing data are not unequivocal with regard to hearing protector response characteristics. Two of the objective methods (acoustical test fixture and microphone in real ear) are considerable time savers. All objective procedures are lacking in their ability to accurately determine the importance of the flanking bone-conduction paths, although some authors have incorporated this feature as a post-measurement correction. The microphone in real-ear approach is suggested to be one of the most promising for future standardization efforts and research purposes, and the acoustical test fixture technique is recommended (with certain reservations) for quality control and buyer acceptance testing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3522700     DOI: 10.1121/1.393228

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  10 in total

1.  Isolating the auditory system from acoustic noise during functional magnetic resonance imaging: examination of noise conduction through the ear canal, head, and body.

Authors:  M E Ravicz; J R Melcher
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Efficiency of ear protectors in laboratory and real life tests.

Authors:  K Pawlas; J Grzesik
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 3.015

3.  Intracochlear pressure measurements during acoustic shock wave exposure.

Authors:  Nathaniel T Greene; Mohamed A Alhussaini; James R Easter; Theodore F Argo; Tim Walilko; Daniel J Tollin
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-05-19       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Double-Containment Coil With Enhanced Winding Mounting for Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation With Reduced Acoustic Noise.

Authors:  Lari M Koponen; Stefan M Goetz; Angel V Peterchev
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 4.538

5.  Inter-laboratory comparison of three earplug fit-test systems.

Authors:  David C Byrne; William J Murphy; Edward F Krieg; Robert M Ghent; Kevin L Michael; Earl W Stefanson; William A Ahroon
Journal:  J Occup Environ Hyg       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 2.155

6.  Hearing loss as a predictor for hearing protection attenuation among miners.

Authors:  Elon D Ullman; Lauren M Smith; Marjorie C McCullagh; Richard L Neitzel
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 4.948

7.  Using Auditory Steady-State Responses for Measuring Hearing Protector Attenuation.

Authors:  Olivier Valentin; Sasha M John; Frédéric Laville
Journal:  Noise Health       Date:  2017 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 0.867

8.  The study of attenuation levels and the comfort of earplugs.

Authors:  Alessandra G Samelli; Raquel F Gomes; Tiago V Chammas; Bárbara G Silva; Renata R Moreira; Ana C Fiorini
Journal:  Noise Health       Date:  2018 May-Jun       Impact factor: 0.867

9.  Selection of Earmuffs and Other Personal Protective Equipment Used in Combination.

Authors:  Emil Kozlowski; Rafal Mlynski
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-04-26       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  The effect of hearing protection devices on speech intelligibility of Persian employees.

Authors:  Mina Karami; Mohsen Aliabadi; Rostam Golmohammadi; Morteza Hamidi Nahrani
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2020-11-11
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.