Occupational Noise
Abstract
Occupational noise exposure is among the main leading cause of noise-based hearing loss. OSHA does not have adequate guidelines for hearing-loss prevention for occupations such as construction, law enforcement, and firefighting. Intricacies within these professions restrict the effectiveness of hearing conservation regulations that are outlined in the manufacturing industry. Statistics indicate that hearing loss can heighten the risk of dementia, hypertension, and depression. Some of the obstacles to noise reduction for public safety professionals include equipment confines and procedural changes. Initiatives such as hearing protection devices are a good intervention but less effective in the military and firefighting due to the risk of compromising personnel safety.
Occupational Noise
It is estimated that 22 million American workers are exposed to potentially high noise levels at work each year. OSHA expects employers to adopt a hearing conservation initiative when the noise exposure level exceeds 85 decibels for more than eight working hours (Gilbertson & Voseburgh, 2020). Hearing conservation programs aim to avoid initial occupational hearing loss, safeguard the remaining hearing ability, and provide employees with the necessary knowledge and hearing protection devices. According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the recommended exposure limit for occupational noise is 85 decibels. Occupational noise exposure is among the main leading cause of noise-based hearing loss. By causing secondary health issues and inhibiting people’s ability to work, occupational noise is a serious threat that affects occupations such as the military, construction, and public safety professions.
Available regulations are not always effective at safeguarding the hearing of employees. OSHA does not have adequate guidelines for hearing-loss prevention for occupations such as construction, law enforcement, and fire fighting, among others. Most people in these occupations have reported noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) for less than the 8-hour rate (Gilbertson & Voseburgh, 2020). Intricacies within these professions restrict the effectiveness of hearing conservation regulations that are outlined in the manufacturing industry. For instance, in law enforcement professions, noise tends to be irregular, transient, and differs acoustically from once incident to the next. Vehicle noises, radio communications, as well as sirens are encountered at varying levels when public safety personnel is on duty. Still, public safety personnel work in volatile soundscapes, and communication is vital for safety; hence, it is essential to tackle their hearing health needs in order to sustain employability, avert injuries and minimize employee compensation claims. The US has more than 1 million active firefighters. It is estimated that about 40,000 firefighters are forced to retire from the profession due to hearing-related injuries (Gilbertson & Voseburgh, 2020). The majority of the firefighters suffer hearing loss earlier in their careers, thereby being subjected to health issues that last a lifetime. In 2010 alone, there were more than 18600 documented cases of occupational hearing loss in the US (Gilbertson & Voseburgh, 2020). Other reports suggest that, on average, the claim amount towards loss of hearing is more than 14,000 for each case.
Hearing loss affects communication and personnel job functions as well as heightening the individual’s risk of developing other health issues. Statistics indicate that hearing loss can heighten the risk of dementia, hypertension, and depression. It is essential to overcome the specific occupational environment challenges related to noise reduction in various professions. While there are efforts to ensure that hearing among public safety employees is protected, specific factors cause a challenge. Some of the obstacles to noise reduction for public safety professionals include equipment confines and procedural changes (Taxini & Guida, 2013). For instance, hearing conservation programs for firefighters are faced by multiple challenges, including high temperature, smoke, and water that can damage the hearing protection equipment (Gilbertson & Voseburgh, 2020). Furthermore, firefighters have a reduced ability to use hearing protection during a live response operate due to the significance of paying attention to the environmental sounds and communication for safety.
One of the measures for tackling the complex work environments and their effect on hearing wellbeing is to gather noise exposure measurements when the various professionals are engaged in their tasks. Experts have started to classify the noise levels generated by various types of occupational duties in occupations such as firefighting and the military. NIHL tends to have a stealth onset, and it may take long before reasonable disability can be observed. Pure-tone audiometric testing is applied to detect and measure the scope of NIHL (Taxini & Guida, 2013). The testing offers an objective measure for hearing challenges among people exposed to occupational noise. Self-report hearing challenges, as well as physical examination, are also used in the detection of NIHL at workplaces. Still, long-term exposure to noise may result in vestibular symptoms prior to the detection of clinical hearing loss. However, the symptoms are indirect and often neglected and do not interfere with the functional capability of workers. As such, audiometric testing is a crucial tool for conducting an early diagnosis of occupational hearing loss in workplaces that are prone to high noise levels such as construction sites. A study by Pelegrin et al. (2015) focused on assessing predictive factors for occupational NIHL among Spanish workers. In the study, the analysis of audiometric tests showed a high proportion of pathological audiograms among employees exposed to occupation noise compared to workers that were not exposed to high noise levels. The connection between auditory symptoms such as vertigo and the experience of occupational noise was assessed. The number of workers exposed to noise and reporting tinnitus was 10.7 percent Pelegrin et al. (2015). The percentage was higher compared to those that were unexposed at 2.7 percent. Those that reported vertigo accounted for 12.7 percent of the workers exposed to noise in relation to 7.3 percent that was unexposed Pelegrin et al. (2015). The researchers also established that employees with pathological audiograms have reasonably longer noise exposure duration of more than 16 years in relation to those with normal audiograms who had about 10 years of exposure to noise. At the same time, the study findings indicate that the use of hearing protection measures is effective at minimizing hearing loss. In the study, 94.1 of the participants who had never used hearing protection measures reported more audiometric abnormalities Pelegrin et al. (2015).
According to Singhal et al. (2012), as increases, the probability of hearing loss also increases. Presbyacusis is an outcome of overall aging in humans. Sounds start causing damage to the ear at a frequency of about 4 kHz (Singhal et al., 2012). The situation is escalated by the acoustic resonance features of the external ear. The hard-walled tube works by amplifying the acoustic energy in the upper frequencies by approximately 10 decibels. Moreover, the individual difference in the acoustic transfer features of the tube is a major factor in the large inconsistency in people’s susceptibility to noise (Neitzel, 2014). Transduction of sound vibration to nerve impulses takes place in the cochlea. When the sound frequency is high, the hair cells in the cochlea may be damaged directly or indirectly by high degrees of sustained noise that results in vasoconstriction of the vessels in the cochlea blood supply. The situation leaves the hair cells moderately anoxic and hence suffering secondary damage. The scope and type if direct hair cell damage relies on the strength of the sound. Above specific minimum frequency and intensity, the outer hair cells start to depict signs of metabolic exhaustion characterized by drooping of stereocilia (Singhal et al., 2012). High sound degrees cause further damage to the outer hair cell stereocilia, and the recovery time is often long. Hair cells inside the basal coil of the cochlea are more sensitive to noise damage. Damage to the inside hair cells accounts for the highest proportion of hearing loss reported in noise-damaged ears.
The issue of occupational noise exposure also affects the military. In 2002, Congress mandated the Veterans Administration to work with the Institute of Medicine National Academies to carry out a review of noise exposure in the military based on reported starting from the Second World War. The report confirmed the concerns by highlighting the exposure to harmful noise levels in the military is problematic (Saunders & Griest, 2009). Unlike in other occupations, the military understands the scope of the problem are is tackling the issue through hearing conservation programs as well as the new hearing protection technology (Hughes & Hunting, 2013). One of the topics that receive less attention is the impact of noise exposure during military service on the hearing of veterans after resuming civilian life. Noise exposure in the military is linked with combat and taking on tasks in industrial-types of settings such as aircraft maintenance. Noise levels during combat are particularly harmful and difficult to control since the sources are not always predictable. Also, the military personnel have concerns that hearing protection devices can compromise their safety by altering localization cues and by tempering vital cues from other sources. For example, in the cockpit of the Black Hawk helicopters, the sound levels reach 106 decibels. Fighter jet launch noise level reaches 152 decibels. Inside the Abrams tank and in armored carriers, the average noise is 117 decibels when traveling at 40 miles per hour (Saunders & Griest, 2009). The examples cover some of the sources of hazardous noise in the military.
Overall, occupational noise is a serious issue that causes secondary health issues and inhibiting people’s ability to work in various professions. Although OSHA has regulations regarding the recommended noise limit at workplaces, these rules are less effective in some occupations such as the military, construction, and public safety. Initiatives such as hearing protection devices are a good intervention but less effective in the military and firefighting due to the risk of compromising personnel safety. The best approach to prevent hearing loss and damage is to initiate a hearing conservation program early.
References
Gilbertson, L. R., & Voseburgh, D. H. (2020, May 1). Task, Role, and Fire Engine Noise Levels During a Live Fire Training. Journal of Environmental Health, Vol. 82 (9).Retrieved from https://libproxy.eku.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=a9h&AN=142752920&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Hughes, H., & Hunting, K. L. (2013, November 1). Evaluation of the effects of exposure to organic solvents and hazardous noise among US Air Force Reserve personnel. Noise & Health Vol. 15(67): 379-387Retrieved June 01, 2020, from https://web-b-ebscohost-com.libproxy.eku.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=40
Neitzel, R. (2014, October 1). A Comparison of Occupational and Non-Occupational Noise Exposures in Sweden. Noise & Health, 16(72), 270. Retrieved June 01, 2020, from https://web-b-ebscohost-com.libproxy.eku.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=29
Pelegrin, A. C., Canuet, L., Rodriguez, A. A., & Morales, M. A. (2015, September 1). Predictive factors of occupational noise-induced hearing loss in Spanish workers: A prospective study. Noise and Health, 17(78): 343–349. Retrieved from doi: 10.4103/1463-1741.165064
Saunders, G. H., & Griest, S. E. (2009, January 1). Hearing loss in veterans and the need for hearing loss prevention programs. Noise &Health, vol. 11 (42)14-21Retrieved June 01, 2020, from https://web-b-ebscohost-com.libproxy.eku.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=20
Singhal, S., Hashmi, B., & Muzammil, M. (2012, July 1). Study of occupational exposure of noise on hearing of lock factory workers. Biomedical Research, Vol. 23 (3). Retrieved June 01, 2020, from https://web-b-ebscohost-com.libproxy.eku.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=18
Taxini, C. L., & Guida, H. L. (2013, January 1). Firefighters’ noise exposure: A literature review. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol vol.17 (01): 80-84. Retrieved June 01, 2020, from https://web-b-ebscohost-com.libproxy.eku.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=43