Costs and effectiveness of hearing conservation programs at 14 US metal manufacturing facilities. (26th January 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sayler, Stephanie K.; Rabinowitz, Peter M.; Cantley, Linda F.; Galusha, Deron; Neitzel, Richard L.
• Is Part Of: International journal of audiology. Volume 57(2018)Supplement 1
• Page Start: S3
• Page End: S11
• Publication Date: 2018-01-26
• Subjects: Noise -- hearing conservation/hearing loss prevention -- psychoacoustics/hearing science -- medical audiology; Audiology -- Periodicals; Hearing disorders -- Periodicals; Deafness -- Prevention -- Periodicals; Hearing Disorders -- Periodicals; Hearing -- Periodicals; 617.8
• DOI: 10.1080/14992027.2017.1410237
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1499-2027

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: This study characterised overall and specific costs associated with hearing conservation programmes (HCPs) at US metal manufacturing sites, and examined the association between these costs and several noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) outcomes. Design: We interviewed personnel and reviewed records at participating facilities. We also measured noise for comparison to the ten-year average of measurements made by each facility. NIHL outcomes assessed included rates of standard threshold shifts (STS) and high-frequency hearing loss, as well as prevalence of hearing impairment, for each participating facility. We used linear regression to identify per-person HCP costs that best predicted the NIHL outcomes. Study sample: We evaluated 14 US metal manufacturing facilities operated by a single company. Results: Annual HCP costs ranged from roughly $67, 000 to $397, 000 (average $308 ± 80 per worker). Our full-shift noise measurements (mean 83.1 dBA) showed good agreement with the facilities' measurements (mean 82.6 dBA). Hearing impairment prevalence was about 15% overall. Higher expenditures for training and hearing protector fit-testing were significantly associated with reduced STS prevalence. Higher training expenditures were also related to lower hearing impairment prevalence and high-frequency hearing loss rates. Conclusions: HCP costs were substantial and variable. Increased workplace spending on training and fit-testing may help minimise NIHL.