What do we know about hearing protector comfort?

Noise and Health

Volumn 10, Issue 40, 2008, Pages 83-89

  Davis, Rickie ^a,b  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Comfort; Hearing protectors; Personal protective equipment

Indexed keywords

ACCIDENT PREVENTION; ARTICLE; EAR CANAL CAP; EAR PROTECTION; EARMUFF; EARPLUG; ERGONOMICS; HUMAN; NOISE REDUCTION; OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PROTECTIVE CLOTHING; PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT; QUESTIONNAIRE; TEXTILE INDUSTRY; WORK ENVIRONMENT;

CONSUMER SATISFACTION; EAR PROTECTIVE DEVICES; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEARING LOSS, NOISE-INDUCED; HUMANS; NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH (U.S.); OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH; UNITED STATES;

EID: 57649120814     PISSN: 14631741     EISSN: 19984030     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4103/1463-1741.44346     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Nilsson R, Lindgren F. The effect of long term use of hearing protectors in industrial noise. Scand Audio Suppl 1980;12:204-11.
2. Murphy WJ, Davis RR, Byrne DC, Shaw P. Hearing protector effectiveness in a highly experienced user cohort. [In press].
3. Perl ER. Ideas about pain: A historical view. Nat Rev Neurosci 2007;8:71-80.
4. Markee NL, Pedersen EL. The conceptualization of comfort with regard to clothing. In: Kaiser SB, Damhorst ML, editors. Critical linkages in textiles and clothing subject matter: Theory, method and practice. Monument, CA: International Textile and Apparel Association, Inc.; 1991. p. 81-93.
5. Branson DH, Sweeney M. Clothing comfort conceptualization and measurement: Toward a metatheory. In: Kaiser S, Damhorst ML, editors. Critical linkages in textiles and clothing: Theory, method and practice. ACPTC. Cited in Sweeney and Branson: 1990-1991.
6. Yoo S, Barker RL. Comfort properties of heat-resistant protective workwear in varying conditions of physical activity and environment, Part I: Thermophysical and sensorial properties of fabrics. Textile Res Jr 2005;75:523-30.
7. Sweeney MM, Branson DH. Sensorial comfort, Part I: A psychophysical method for assessing moisture sensation in clothing. Textile Res J 1990;60:371-7.
8. Holmér I. Recent trends in clothing physiology. Scand J Work Environ Health 1989;15:58-65.
9. Ivergård TB, Nicholl AG. User tests of ear defenders. Am Indust Hyg Assn J 1976;37:139-42.
10. Schulz G, Rublack K, Meister A, Dybowski S, Dubrau KH, Gretzschel D. Comparative studies of insulating effect and the wearing properties of hearing protector means at the place of employment. Z Gesamte Hyg Ihre Grenzgeb 1983;29:93-8.
11. Berger EH, Mitchell I. Measurement of the pressure exerted by earmuffs and it relationship to perceived comfort. Appl Acoust 1989;27:79-88.
12. Casali JG, Lam ST, Epps BW. Rating and ranking methods for hearing protector wearability. Sound Vibration 1987;21:10-8.
13. Ivarsson A, Toremalm NG, Brühl P. Eczema, itching, heat and humidity problems: Impediments to the effective use of hearing protectors. Internoise 1990;90:1093-6.
14. Park MY, Casali J. An empirical study of comfort afforded by various hearing protection devices: Laboratory versus field results. Appl Acoust 1991;34:151-79.
15. Bhattacharya SK, Tripathi SR, Kashyap SK. Assessment of comfort of various hearing protection devices (HPD). J Hum Ergol 1993;22:163-72.
16. Davis RR. Comfort as a predictor of effective hearing protector use. Research Plan. Division of Applied Research and Technology. Available from the author. 2003
17. Davis RR, Murphy WJ, Byrne DC, Shaw P. Hearing protector comfort in a highly experienced user cohort [In press].
18. Franks JR, Davis RR, Murphy WJ. Field measurement of hearing protection device performance. Proceedings of Inter-noise, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: 2005. Aug 7-10.
19. Morata TC, Themann CL, Randolph RF, Verbsky BL, Byrne DC, Reeves ER. Working in noise with a hearing loss: Perceptions from workers, supervisors, and hearing conservation program managers. Ear Hear 2005;26:529-45.