Literature DB >> 9035391

A re-examination of risk estimates from the NIOSH Occupational Noise and Hearing Survey (ONHS)

M M Prince1, L T Stayner, R J Smith, S J Gilbert.   

Abstract

This paper describes a new analysis of data from the 1968-72 National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH) Occupational Noise and Hearing Survey (ONHS). The population consisted of 1172 (792 noise-exposed and 380 "controls") predominately white male workers from a cross section of industries within the United States. The analysis focused on how risk estimates vary according to various model assumptions, including shape of the dose-response curve and the amount of noise exposure among low-noise exposed workers (or controls). Logistic regression models were used to describe the risk of hearing handicap in relation to age, occupational noise exposure, and duration exposed. Excess risk estimates were generated for several definitions of hearing handicap. Hearing handicap is usually denoted as an average hearing threshold level (HTL) of greater than 25 dB for both ears at selected frequencies. The frequencies included in the biaural averages were (1) the articulation-weighted average over 1-4 kHz, (2) the unweighted average over 0.5, 1, and 2 kHz, and (3) the unweighted average over 1, 2, and 3 kHz. The results show that excess risk estimates for time-weighted average sound levels below 85 dB were sensitive to statistical model form and assumptions regarding the sound level to which the "control" group was exposed. The choice of frequencies used in the hearing handicap definition affected the magnitude of excess risk estimates, which depended on age and duration of exposure. Although data were limited below 85 dB, an age-stratified analysis provided evidence of excess risks at levels ranging from 80 to 84 dB, 85-89 dB, and 90-102 dB. Due to uncertainty in quantifying risks below 85 dB, new data collection efforts should focus on better characterization of dose-response and longitudinal hearing surveys that include workers exposed to 8-hour time-weighted noise levels below 85 dB. Results are compared to excess risk estimates generated using methods given by ANSI S3.44-1996.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9035391     DOI: 10.1121/1.418053

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


  11 in total

1.  Surveillance of noise exposure in the Danish workplace: a baseline survey.

Authors:  S Kock; T Andersen; H A Kolstad; B Kofoed-Nielsen; F Wiesler; J P Bonde
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.402

2.  Do ambient noise exposure levels predict hearing loss in a modern industrial cohort?

Authors:  P M Rabinowitz; D Galusha; C Dixon-Ernst; M D Slade; M R Cullen
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2006-09-14       Impact factor: 4.402

3.  Auditory risk estimates for youth target shooting.

Authors:  Deanna K Meinke; William J Murphy; Donald S Finan; James E Lankford; Gregory A Flamme; Michael Stewart; Jacob Soendergaard; Trevor W Jerome
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 2.117

Review 4.  Interventions to prevent occupational noise-induced hearing loss: a Cochrane systematic review.

Authors:  Jos H Verbeek; Erik Kateman; Thais C Morata; Wouter A Dreschler; Christina Mischke
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 2.117

5.  Letter to the Editor: Scientific Rigor Required for a Re-Examination of Exchange Rate for Occupational Noise Measurements Re: Dobie, R.A., & Clark, W.W. (2014) Exchange Rates for Intermittent and Fluctuating Occupational Noise: A Systematic Review of Studies of Human Permanent Threshold Shift, Ear Hear, 35, 86-96.

Authors:  Thais C Morata; Christa L Themann; David C Byrne; Rickie R Davis; William J Murphy; Mark R Stephenson
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Kurtosis corrected sound pressure level as a noise metric for risk assessment of occupational noises.

Authors:  G Steven Goley; Won Joon Song; Jay H Kim
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  The dose-response relationship between in-ear occupational noise exposure and hearing loss.

Authors:  Peter M Rabinowitz; Deron Galusha; Christine Dixon-Ernst; Jane E Clougherty; Richard L Neitzel
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 4.402

8.  Association between ambient noise exposure, hearing acuity, and risk of acute occupational injury.

Authors:  Linda F Cantley; Deron Galusha; Mark R Cullen; Christine Dixon-Ernst; Peter M Rabinowitz; Richard L Neitzel
Journal:  Scand J Work Environ Health       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 5.024

Review 9.  Interventions to prevent occupational noise-induced hearing loss.

Authors:  Christina Tikka; Jos H Verbeek; Erik Kateman; Thais C Morata; Wouter A Dreschler; Silvia Ferrite
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-07-07

10.  Sensorineural hearing loss associated with occupational noise exposure: effects of age-corrections.

Authors:  Sridhar Krishnamurti
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2009-02-26       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.