Effectiveness of an Intervention to Increase Construction Workers' Use of Hearing Protection

Abstract

In this project we tested the effectiveness of a theory-based intervention (video, pamphlets, and guided practice session) to increase the use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) among Midwestern construction workers and a national group of plumber/pipefitter trainers. Posttest measures were collected 10--12 months following this intervention. Pender's Health Promotion Model (1987) provided the conceptual basis for development of the training program. A total of 837 highnoise- exposed workers were included in the analysis: 652 regional Midwestern construction workers and 185 national plumber/pipefitter trainers. Effectiveness of the intervention was determined through the sequence of analyses recommended by Braver and Braver (1988) for the Solomon Four-Group Design. Analysis of variance and covariance of postintervention use and intention to use HPDs and a meta-analytic test were done. These analyses indicated that the intervention significantly increased use of HPDs but had no effect on intention to use HPDs in the future. Pretesting had no effect on use. Actual or potential applications of this research include guidance in the development of successful theorybased interventions to increase use of HPDs.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abel, S. M. , Alberti, P. W. , Haythornwaite, C. , & Riko, K. (1982). Speech intelligibility in noise: Effects of fluency and hearing protector type. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 71, 708–715.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory Mahwah, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Becker, B. J. (1987). Applying tests of combined significance in meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 164–171.

Berger, E. H. (1980). The effects of hearing protectors on auditory communications. Occupational Health Nursing, 28 (1), 6–7.

Braver, M. C. W. , & Braver, S. L. (1988). Statistical treatment of the Solomon Four-Group Design: A meta-analytic approach. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 150–154.

Campbell, D. , & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and quasiexperimental designs for research Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Center to Protect Workers' Rights. (1998). The construction chart book: Noise-induced hearing loss in construction Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Dear, T. A. (1998). Updating damage risk criteria to include performance under workplace noise regulations. Journal of Occupational Hearing Loss, 1(1), 61–66.

Else, D. (1973). A note on the protection afforded by hearing protectors - Implications of the energy principle. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 16(1), 81–83.

10.

Fishbein, M. , Bandura, A. , Triandis, H. , Kanfer, F. , Becker, M. , & Middlestadt, S. (1991, October). Factors influencing behavior and behavior change (Final Report). Washington, DC: Theorist's Workshop.

11.

Franks, J. R. (1990). Noise in the construction industry and its effect on hearing. Hearing Instruments, 41: 18–21.

12.

Hager, L. D. (1998). Sound exposure profiling: A noise monitoring alternative. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 59, 414–418.

13.

Lusk, S. , Kerr, M. , & Kauffman, S. (1998). Use of hearing protection and perceptions of noise exposure among construction workers. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 59, 466–470.

14.

Lusk, S. , Kerr, M. , Ronis, D. , & Eakin, B. (1999). Applying the Health Promotion Model to development of a work site intervention. American Journal of Health Promotion, 13 (4), 219–227.

15.

Lusk, S. , Ronis, D. , & Baer, L. (1995). A comparison of multiple indicators: Observations, supervisor report, and self-report as measures of workers' hearing protection use. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 18, 51–63.

16.

Lusk, S. , Ronis, D. , & Hogan, M. (1997). Test of the Health Promotion Model as a causal model of construction workers' use of hearing protection. Research in Nursing & Health, 20, 183–194.

17.

Lusk, S. , Ronis, D. , Kerr, M. , & Atwood, J. (1994). Test of the health promotion model as a causal model of workers' use of hearing protection. Nursing Research, 43(3), 151–157.

18.

McAfee, R. , & Winn, A. (1989). The use of incentives/feedback to enhance workplace safety: A critique of the literature. Journal of Safety Research, 20, 7–19.

19.

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (1996a). National occupational research agenda. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

20.

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, (NIOSH). (1996b). An evaluation of the national program for occupational safety and health in construction Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

21.

Pender, N. (1987). Health promotion in nursing practice (2nd ed.). Norwalk, CT: Appleton & Lange.

22.

Pender, N. , Walker, S. , Sechrist, K. , & Frank-Stromborg, M. (1990). Predicting health-promoting lifestyles in the workplace. Nursing Research, 39(6), 326–332.

23.

Prochaska, J. O. , & DiClemente, C. C. (1992). Stages of change in the modification of problem behaviors. Progress in Behavioral Modification, 28, 183–218.

24.

Sataloff, R. , & Sataloff, R. T. (1986). Documenting hearing conservation test equipment's effectiveness. Occupational Health and Safety, 55(2), 28, 29, 32–33, 35–36.

25.

Savell, J. , & Toothman, E. (1987). Group mean hearing threshold changes in a noise-exposed industrial population using personal hearing protectors. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 48, 23–27.

26.

Schneider, S. S. , & Susie, P. (1993). Final Report: An investigation of health hazards on a new construction project Washington, DC: Center to Protect Workers' Rights.

27.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1995). Statistical abstract of the United States (115th ed.). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

28.

U.S. Department of Labor. (1983, March 8). Occupational noise exposure: Hearing conservation amendment: Final rule. Federal Register, 48(46).

29.

U.S. Department of Labor , Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (1995). Construction Industry Digest. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.