BACKGROUND: The coal mining industry relies heavily on a hearing protector (HP) for noise protection. Researchers suggested that individual HP fit tests be conducted to estimate the noise attenuation.
OBJECTIVE: This study examined whether individual fit tests accurately predicted workers’ ear plug noise protection while working and whether the real-time noise reduction (NR) remained constant in mining work while an ear plug was worn.
METHODS: A total of 11 subjects from 3 coal mines each was fit tested using the microphone-in-real-ear (MIRE) technique on their E-A-Rtrademark earplugs in a typical mine office. The same fit tested miners each wore the same type of earplugs in his usual manner doing his normal work. The minute-by-minute real-time NRwork values were determined continuously during full shifts of work.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Results showed there was a modest prediction relationship (R2 = 0.53) between NRfit and NRwork. NRwork values of each miner’s earplug fluctuated over 20 dBA while the earplug was worn. However, each was still able to achieve an average NRwork of more than 10 dBA, indicating the earplug was somewhat effective in reducing noise, if worn. Refitting was an important cause of the low NRwork values. Low-frequency noise sources might be also important causes.
FranksJR. Analysis of audiograms for a large cohort of noise-exposed miners. Internal Report, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Cincinnati, OH; 1996.
2.
JenningsMB, ShawL. Impact of hearing loss in the workplace: Raising questions about partnerships with professionals. Work2008;30:289–95.
3.
KooserC. Hearing loss and employment in the United States. Work2013;46(2):181–86.
4.
NeitzelR, SomersS, SeixasN. Variability of real-world hearing protector attenuation measurements. Annals of Occupational Hygiene2006;2(6):1–13.
5.
BergerEH. Preferred methods for measuring hearing protector attenuation. Presented at the Proceedings of Inter-Noise 05, Noise Control Foundation, Poughkeepsie, NY; 2005.
CasaliJG, MauneyDW, BurksJA. Physical versus psychophysical measurement of hearing protector attenuation - a.k.a. MIRE vs. REAT. Sound and Vibration1995;29(7):20–7.
8.
BurksJA, MichaelKL. A new best practice for hearing conservation The Exposure Smart Protector (ESP). Presented at Proceedings of Noise-Con 2003. Washington, DC; 2003.
9.
WuM. Variability in earplug fit test and the fraction of noise exposure due to failure to wear earplugs. International Journal of Occupational Hygiene2013;5:123–31.
BergerEH, FranksJR, LindgrenF. International review of field studies of hearing protector attenuation. In: AxelssonA, BorchgrevinkH, HamernikR. editors. Scientific basis of noise-induced hearing loss. New York: Thieme Medical Pub., Inc.; 1996. pp. 361–377.
12.
WuM. Comparison of noise reduction results for fit testing and continuous observations during coal mining for selected earplug. Doctoral dissertation. West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV; 2010.
13.
SzaryML, ChughYP. Noise variability in underground room and pillar coal mines. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics2011;17(3):301–8.
14.
SmithaAK, PetersonbJS, KovalchikcPG. Continuous mining machine conveyor system sound power levels. (2008). Available from: http://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/9689/
