The study presents evaluating the effectiveness of the hearing aid fitting process in the short-term use (7 days). The evaluation method consists of a survey based on the APHAB (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit) questionnaire. Additional criteria such as a degree of hearing loss, number of hours and days of hearing aid use as well as the user’s experience were also taken into consideration. The outcomes of the benefit obtained from the hearing aid use in various listening environments for 109 hearing aid users are presented, including a degree of their hearing loss. The research study results show that it is possible to obtain relevant and reliable information helpful in assessing the effectiveness of the shortterm (7 days) hearing aid use. The overall percentage of subjects gaining a benefit when communicating in noise is the highest of all the analyzed and the lowest in the environment with reverberation. The statistical analysis performed confirms that in the listening environments in which conversation is held, a subjective indicator determined by averaging benefits for listening situations individually is statistically significant with respect to the degree of hearing loss. Statistically significant differences depending on the degree of hearing loss are also found separately for noisy as well as reverberant environments. However, it should be remembered that this study is limited to three types of hearing loss, i.e. mild, moderate and severe. The acceptance of unpleasant sounds gets the lowest rating. It has also been observed that in the initial period of hearing aid use, the perception of unpleasant sounds has a big influence on the evaluation of hearing improvement.
If we want to provide the efficient training intervention to increase the duration of using hearing protection devices (HPDs) by workers, we need a tool that can estimate the person’s hearing threshold taking into account noise exposure level, age, and work history, and compare them with audiometry to find out the percent reduction of workers hearing loss.
First, the workers noise exposure level was determined according to ISO 9612, then 4000 Hz audiometry was done to find age and work history. On basis of ISO 1999 the hearing threshold was estimated and if the hearing protection device was not used continuously and correctly, the hearing protection device’s actual performance was reduced adjusted with person’s audiometry. After training intervention, the estimate was done again and was compared with the adjusted audiometry.
According to ISO 1999 standard estimation results, the percent reduction of the workers hearing loss level was 6.48 dB in intervention group. This level remained unchanged in control group. The mean score of hearing threshold estimation (standard ISO 1999) was statistically more significant than mean score of hearing threshold (p-value ¡ 0.001). The results show not significant change in control group due to lack of changing of noise exposure level.
In regards to the results of hearing threshold estimation based on ISO 1999 and comparing with workers audiometry, it can be seen that BASNEF training intervention increases the duration of using the HPDs and it could be effective in reducing hearing threshold related to noise.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the hearing status of call centre operators in relation to their noise exposure. Conventional pure-tone audiometry and extended high-frequency audiometry were performed in 49 workers, aged 22–47 years (mean ± SD: 32.0 ± 6.0 years), working in call centre from 1.0 to 16.5 years (mean ± SD: 4.7 ± 2.9 years).
Questionnaire inquiry aimed at collecting personal data, the information on ommunication headset usage habits, self-assessment of hearing ability and identification of risk factors for noise-induced hearing loss were also carried out. Sound pressure levels generated by the communication headset were determined using the artificial ear technique specified in CSA Z107.56-13 (2013) standard. The background noise prevailing in offices was also measured according to PN-N-01307 (1994) and PN-EN ISO 9612 (2011).
Personal daily noise exposure levels in call centre operators varied from 66 to 86 dB (10–90th percentile). About half of the study subjects had normal hearing in the standard frequencies (from 250 to 8000 Hz) in both ears, while only 27.1% in the extended high-frequencies (9–16 kHz). Moreover, both high-frequency and speech-frequency hearing losses were observed in less than 10% of audiograms, while the extended high-frequency threshold shift was noted in 37.1% of analysed ears. The hearing threshold
levels of call centre operators in the frequency of 0.25–11.2 kHz were higher (worse) than the expected median values for equivalent (due to age and gender) highly screened population specified in ISO 7029 (2017). Furthermore, they were also higher than predicted for 500–4000 Hz according to ISO 1999 (2013) based on the results of noise exposure evaluation.
The performance of binaural processing may be disturbed in the presence of hearing loss, especially of sensorineural type. To assess the impact of hearing loss on speech perception in noise regarding binaural processing, series of speech recognition measurements in controlled laboratory conditions were carried out. The spatial conditions were simulated using dummy head recordings played back on headphones. The Intelligibility Level Difference (ILD) was determined by measuring the change in the speech reception thresholds (SRT) between two configurations of a masking signal source (N) and a speech source (S), namely the S0N90 condition (where numbers stand for angles in horizontal plane) and the co-located condition (S0N0). To disentangle the head shadow effect (better ear effect) from binaural processing in the brain, the difference between binaural and monaural S0N90 condition (so-called Binaural Intelligibility Level Difference, BILD) value was calculated.
Measurements were performed with a control group of normal-hearing listeners and a group of sensorineural hearing-impaired subjects. In all conditions performance of the hearing-impaired listeners was significantly lower than normal-hearing ones, resulting in higher SRT values (3 dB difference in the S0N0 configuration, 7.6 dB in S0N90 and 5 dB in monaural S0N90). The SRT improvement due to the spatial separation of target and masking signal (ILD) was also higher in the control group (8.1 dB) than in hearing-impaired listeners (3.5 dB). Moreover, a significant deterioration of the binaural processing described by BILD was found in people with sensorineural deficits. This parameter for normal-hearing listeners reached a value of 3 to 6 dB (4.6 dB on average) and decreased more than two times in the hearing-impaired group to 1.9 dB on average (with a deviation of 1.4 dB). These findings could not be explained by individual average hearing threshold (standard in audiological diagnostics) only. The outcomes indicate that there is a contribution of suprathershold deficits and it may be useful to consider binaural SRT measurements in noise in addition to the pure tone audiometry resulting in better diagnostics and hearing aid fitting.
The aim of the study was to evaluate the combined effect of noise exposure and additional risk factors on permanent hearing threshold shift. Three additional risk factors were: exposure to organic solvents, smoking and elevated blood pressure.
The data on exposure and health status of employees were collected in 24 factories. The study group comprised of 3741 noise male exposed workers of: mean age 39±8 years, mean tenure 16±7 years and LEX,8h = 86 ± 5 dB. For each subject, hearing level was measured with pure tone audiometry, blood pressure and noise exposure were assessed from the records of local occupational health care and obligatory noise measurements performed by employers. Smoking and solvent exposure were assessed with questionnaire. The study group was divided into subgroups with respect to the considered risk factors. In the analysis, the distribution of hearing level of each subgroup was compared to the predicted one which the standard calculation method described in ISO 1999:1990. For each of the considered risk factors, the difference between measured and calculated hearing level distribution was used to establish, by the least square method, a noise dose related correction square function for the standard method. The considered risk factors: solvent exposure, smoking and elevated blood pressure combined with noise exposure, may increase degree of hearing loss.
The aim of the study was to examine the relationship between tinnitus pitch and maximum hearing loss, frequency range of hearing loss, and the edge frequency of the audiogram, as well as, to analyze tinnitus loudness at tinnitus frequency and normal hearing frequency.
The study included 212 patients, aged between 21 to 75 years (mean age of 54.4 ± 13.5 years) with chronic subjective tinnitus and sensorineural hearing loss. For the statistical data analysis we used Chisquare test and Fisher’s exact test with level of significance p < 0:05.
Tinnitus pitch corresponding to the frequency range of hearing loss, maximum hearing loss and the edge frequency was found in 70.8%, 37.3%, and 16.5% of the patients, respectively. The majority of patients had tinnitus pitch from 3000 to 8000 Hz corresponding to the range of hearing loss (p < 0:001). The mean tinnitus pitch was 3545 Hz ± 2482. The majority (66%) of patients had tinnitus loudness 4–7 dB SL. The mean sensation level at tinnitus frequency was 4.9 dB SL ± 1.9, and 13 dB SL ± 2.9 at normal hearing frequency.
Tinnitus pitch corresponded to the frequency range of hearing loss in majority of patients. There was no relationship between tinnitus pitch and the edge frequency of the audiogram. Loudness matching outside the tinnitus frequency showed higher sensation level than loudness matching at tinnitus frequency.
Complaints and awareness about environmental low-frequency (LF) noise and infrasound (IS) have increased in recent years, but knowledge about perceptual mechanisms is limited. To evaluate the use of the brain’s frequency-following response (FFR) as an objective correlate of individual sensitivity to IS and LF, we recorded the FFR to monaurally presented IS (11 Hz) and LF (38 Hz) tones over a 30-phon range for 11 subjects. It was found that 11-Hz FFRs were often significant already at ~0 phon, steeply grew to 20 phon, and saturated above. In contrast, the 38-Hz FFR growth was relatively shallow and continued to 60 phon. Furthermore, at the same loudness level (30 phon), the 11-Hz FFR strength was significantly larger (4.5 dB) than for 38 Hz, possibly reflecting a higher phase synchronization across the auditory pathway. Overall, unexpected inter-individual variability as well as qualitative differences between the measured FFR growth functions and typical loudness growth make interpretation of the FFR as objective correlate of IS and LF sensitivity difficult.
The aim of the study study was to model, with the use of a neural network algorithm, the significance of a variety of factors influencing the development of hearing loss among industry workers. The workers were categorized into three groups, according to the A-weighted equivalent sound pressure level of noise exposure: Group 1 (LAeq < 70 dB), Group 2 (LAeq 70–80 dB), and Group 3 (LAeq > 85 dB). The results obtained for Group 1 indicate that the hearing thresholds at the frequencies of 8 kHz and 1 kHz had the maximum effect on the development of hearing loss. In Group 2, the factors with maximum weight were the hearing threshold at 4 kHz and the worker’s age. In Group 3, maximum weight was found for the factors of hearing threshold at a frequency of 4 kHz and duration of work experience. The article also reports the results of hearing loss modeling on combined data from the three groups. The study shows that neural data mining classification algorithms can be an effective tool for the identification of hearing hazards and greatly help in designing and conducting hearing conservation programs in the industry.
A questionnaire survey was conducted in the residential quarters of Guangzhou, for which 582 elderly people over 60 years old were randomly recruited. The hearing impairment of the participants was evaluated using the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE), The participants’ subjective responses to the acoustical environment of their living place and the impact of the living acoustical environment (LAE) on the participants were investigated. The results show that the participants with a low HHIE score and no hearing impairment evaluated their LAE more favourably, and they considered that the effect of the LAE on their daily life was weak. However, those with a high HHIE score and severe hearing impairment evaluated their LAE poorly, and considered its effect on their daily lives to be significant. For the elderly, the worse the hearing is, the higher their demand for a better LAE. Traffic, construction, residential quarters, and noise from next door or upstairs neighbours were the main noise sources in the elderly’s living places, and traffic noise, construction noise, and noise from next door and upstairs were the most influential sources. 28.9% of the respondents had trouble hearing what their family said in their living place. The elderly without hearing impairment considered that continuous noise was the main reason that they could not hear what their family said in their living place, while those with hearing impairment believed that their own hearing problem was a contributing factor.
The impulse noise is agent harmful to health not only in the case of shots from firearms and the explosions of explosive materials. This kind of noise is also present in many workplaces in the industry. The paper presents the results of noise parameters measurements in workplaces where four different die forging hammers were used. The measured values of the C-weighted peak sound pressure level, the A-weighted maximum sound pressure level and A-weighted noise exposure level normalized to an 8 h working day (daily noise exposure level) exceeded the exposure limit values. For example, the highest measured value of the C-weighted peak sound pressure level was 148.9 dB. In this study possibility of the protection of hearing with the use of earplugs or earmuffs was assessed. The measurement method for the measurements of noise parameters under hearing protection devices using an acoustical test fixture instead of testing with the participation of subjects was used. The results of these measurements allows for assessment which of two tested earplugs and two tested earmuffs sufficiently protect hearing of workers in workplaces where forging hammers are used.
Noise exposure is one of the most important physical agents in the workplace which can induce job stress in several ways. The aim of this study was to model the interactions between independent and mediating variables and job stress using structural equation modeling. In this study, Weinstein’s noise sensitivity scale, noise annoyance questionnaire, Health and Safety Executive (HSE) job stress questionnaire and job satisfaction scale were used. To assess worker’s noise exposure, the 8-hours equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level (LAeq;8 h), was measured based on ISO 9612 (2009). To achieve the aims of study, the structural equation model was run using R software 3.4.1 and Cytoscape software 3.6.0. Based on the results, while there was a direct positive correlation of noise exposure on total job stress, there were also indirect positive effects through job satisfaction and noise sensitivity as mediator variables. Using hearing protective devices negatively affected total job stress through a direct pathway and an indirect pathway when job satisfaction was a mediator variable. Regarding the total effect of noise exposure and using hearing protection devices on job stress subscales, it can be concluded that noise exposure and using hearing protection devices had greatest effect on colleagues support and demand, respectively. It can be concluded that noise exposure and lack of hearing protective devices have a significant positive effect on job stress among workers of a textile industry. In addition to the direct effect, this factor can induce job stress through noise sensitivity, job satisfaction and noise annoyance. Therefore, measures which can decrease any of the mentioned factors, also can alleviate job stress.