The impact of hearing conservation programs on incidence of noise-induced hearing loss in Canadian workers

American Journal of Industrial Medicine

Volumn 51, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 923-931

  Davies, Hugh ^a,b   Marion, Steve ^a   Teschke, Kay ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b 366C 2206 East Mall ^*  (Canada)

Author keywords

Audiometry; Ear protective devices; Hearing loss; Noise induced; Program evaluation

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUDIOGRAPHY; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CANADA; HEARING; HEARING TEST; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NOISE; OCCUPATIONAL DEAFNESS; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; RISK REDUCTION;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; AUDIOMETRY; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; BRITISH COLUMBIA; COHORT STUDIES; EAR PROTECTIVE DEVICES; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; FORESTRY; HEARING LOSS, NOISE-INDUCED; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NOISE, OCCUPATIONAL; OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH; PRIMARY PREVENTION; PROBABILITY; PROGRAM EVALUATION; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEX FACTORS; WORKERS' COMPENSATION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 57149113762     PISSN: 02713586     EISSN: 10970274     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ajim.20634     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Adera T, Donahue AM, Malit BD, Gaydos JC. 1993. Assessment of the proposed Draft American National Standard method for evaluating the effectiveness of hearing conservation programs. J Occup Med 35:568-573.
2. Adera T, Donahue AM, Malit BD, Gaydos JC. 1993. An epidemiologic method for assessing the effectiveness of hearing conservation programs using audiometric data. Mil Med 158:698-701.
3. Adera T, Gullickson GM, Helfer T, Wang L, Gardner JW. 1995. Should the audiometric database analysis method (draft ANSI S12.13-1991) for evaluating the effectiveness of hearing conservation programs be accepted as a US national standard? J Am Acad Audiol 6:302-310.
4. Adera T, Amir C, Anderson L. 2000. Use of comparison populations for evaluating the effectiveness of hearing loss prevention programs. AIHAJ 61:11-15.
5. Adera T, Amir C, Anderson L. 2000. Time trends analysis of hearing loss: An alternative approach to evaluating hearing loss prevention programs. AIHAJ 61:161-165.
6. ANSI. 1991. Draft American National Standard: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Hearing Conservation Programs. New York: American National Standards Institution.
7. Arslan E, Orzan E. 1998. Audiological management of noise induced hearing loss. Scand Audiol 48:131-145.
8. Checkoway H, Pearce N, Kriebel D. 2004. Research methods in occupational epidemiology, 2nd edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
9. Daniell WE, Fulton-Kehoe D, Smith-Weller T, Franklin GM. 1998. Occupational hearing loss in Washington state, 1984-1991: II. Morbidity and associated costs. Am J Ind Med 33:529-536.
10. Daniell WE, Swan SS, McDaniel MM, Stebbins JG, Seixas NS, Morgan MS. 2002. Noise exposure and hearing conservation practices in an industry with high incidence of workers' compensation claims for hearing loss. Am J Ind Med 42:309-317.
11. Erdriech J, Erdriech L. 1982. Epidemiologic strategies to understanding noise-induced hearing loss. In: Hamernik R, Henderson D, Salvi R, editors. New perspectives on noise-induced hearing loss. New York: Raven Press. p 439-460.
12. Franks J, Stephenson M, Merry C. 1996. Preventing occupational hearing loss - A practical guide. Cincinnati, OH: NIOSH. p 1-3.
13. Hosmer D, Lemeshow S. 1999. Applied survival analysis. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
14. Melnick W. 1984. Evaluation of industrial hearing conservation programs: A review. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 45:459-467.
15. NIOSH, editor. 1998. Chapter 5: Hearing loss prevention programs (HLPP's). In: Occupational noise exposure: Revised criteria 1998. Cincinnati, Ohio: US Department of Health and Human Services. p 36-60.
16. Reilly MJ, Rosenman KD, Kalinowski DJ. 1998. Occupational noise-induced hearing loss surveillance in Michigan. J Occup Environ Med 40:667-674.
17. Simpson T, Stewart M, Kaltenbach J. 1993. Effects of audiometric threshold step size on proposed ANSI S12.13 outcomes for characterizing hearing conservation program effectiveness. J Am Acad Audiol 4:258-263.
18. Simpson T, Amos N, Rintelmann W. 1998. Effects of pre-existing hearing loss on proposed ANSI S12.13 outcomes for characterizing hearing conservation program effectiveness: Follow up investigations. J Am Acad Audiol 9:112-120.
19. Suter A. 1994. Comments on: r. Hétu, "The hearing conservation paradigm and the experienced effects of occupational noise exposure". Can Acoustics 22:16-20.
20. WCB. 1998. Occupational Health and Safety Regulation Victoria: Workers' Compensation of British Columbia.
21. WCB. 2003. Noise Survey Project Report: Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia.