Best Practices in Hearing Conservation

Download Report

Transcript Best Practices in Hearing Conservation

Determining Protected Exposures for Noise Exposed Workers

Theresa Y. Schulz, PhD.

Lt. Col. USAF (ret.)

Agenda

• Background • NRR • Fit-testing studies • Fitting HPDs • Motivation

Background

Noise-induced hearing loss is the most common permanent and preventable occupational injury in the world.

World Health Organization

Background Worker’s Compensation

In many countries, excessive noise is the

biggest compensable occupational hazard

. Cost of NIHL to developed countries ranges from

0.2 to 2% of its GDP

. NIHL is

on the rise

globally. (Source: WHO)

Background United States Statistics Most common

occupational injury in the United States.

22 million US workers

are exposed to hazardous noise at work on a daily basis. Approx.

8 million Americans suffer from NIHL

. (Source: NIOSH, 2009)

Background

In the United States,

76%

of noise-exposed workers need no more than

10 dB 90%

of protection. need no more than

15 dB

of protection.

Noise Reduction Rating (NRR)

Noise Reduction Rating

Noise Reduction Rating

Noise Level =

100 dB

Noise Reduction Rating =

30

How much noise is reaching the ear of the worker ?

dB

That is completely unknown …

(55 – 104 dB)

0

dB

0

dB

33

dB

EAR #

1

EAR #

2

How much protection?

EAR #

3

20 10 0 -10 50 40 30 90 80 70 60

Good Fit vs Bad Fit Frequency in Hz

Max Good Fit NRR = 33dB Max Poor Fit NRR = 0dB

Noise Reduction Rating

Noise Reduction Rating

• • A laboratory estimate of the amount of attenuation achievable by 98% of users when properly fit A population-based rating ― some users will get more attenuation, some will get less

The NRR is only a population estimate, not a predictor of individual attenuation.

Noise Reduction Rating

NVLAP-Accredited Labs

San Diego, CA Indianapolis, IN State College, PA

Noise Reduction Rating – Determining an NRR

• 10 human subjects tested in a reverberant room • Tested with ears open/occluded at nine frequencies • Each subject tested 3x • NRR calculated to be population average A test subject in the Howard Leight Acoustical Lab, San Diego, CA, accredited by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP)

Noise Reduction Rating – in the real world

Real-World Attenuation ≠ NRR

192 users of a flanged reusable earplug ~ 27 NRR 50

NRR = 27 Multiple-Use Earplug

40 30 20 10 0 -10 From Kevin Michael, PhD and Cindy Bloyer “Hearing Protector Attenuation Measurement on the End-User”

Noise Reduction Rating

De-Rating Methods OSHA NIOSH CSA

NRR ÷ 2 (feasibility of engineering controls) Earmuffs

Fit

Formable Earplugs

Test

All Other Earplugs NRR – 70% Class A up to 100 B up to 95 C up to 90

Noise Reduction Rating

Noise Reduction Rating

• The EPA recently made an announcement about a proposed change to the Noise Reduction Rating [NRR] • This is the first change in hearing protector regulation in nearly 30 years

Noise Reduction Rating

Three New Labels

LABEL Conventional HPD   DESCRIPTION Perform lab test with

20

subjects

who fit

protector after brief training the Estimates the range of protection achieved by 20% and 80% of users Active Noise Reduction [ANR] • Uses a Microphone-in-Real-Ear [MIRE] method to estimate protection • Measured with ANR turned OFF and ON to show the additional attenuation from the ANR Level Dependent/ Impulse Noise Reduction • Testing will occur over a range of impulse noise levels. Multiple tests to determine lower and upper ranges of impulse noise reduction • Will include two ranges to identify attenuation for passive and active modes

Noise Reduction Rating

The New System: A Range

• Represents a

range of expected protection

• Uses a new ANSI-standard (S12.6-2008) lab testing to generate the attenuation ratings • New NRR will provide an indication of how much attenuation

minimally-trained users

[the lower number] versus

highly-motivated trained users

[the higher number] can be expected to achieve • For some hearing protectors, the spread of this range may be quite significant

Noise Reduction Rating

Current vs. Proposed NRR

Rating Description of Rating Current NRR

A single-number estimate of protection Estimates the 98 th percentile of protection obtained by users when properly fitted

Proposed NRR

A high/low range of estimated protection Estimates the 80 th and 20 th percentile of protection obtained by users

Test Protocol

ANSI S12.6-2008 Method A ANSI S.3.19-1974 [Supervised Subject-Fit] [Experimenter Fit]

20 subjects [for earplugs] or 10 subjects for earplugs 10 subjects [for earmuffs], and earmuffs, HPDs fit by HPDs fit by subject after brief experimenter training

Noise Reduction Rating

Current vs. Proposed NRR

Current NRR Proposed NRR Application De-Rating Retesting

Intended for use with dBC noise measurements. Can be applied directly to Requires a 7 dB correction dBA noise measurements for use with dBA noise measurements.

Various de-rating schemes promulgated by various organizations [including OSHA] Currently, no retesting of HPDs required Designed to be used with no required de-rating Periodic retesting of HPDs required every 5 years

Noise Reduction Rating 80 th % Minimally trained 20 th % Proficient Users

Current NRR Label Mock-up of New Label

Noise Reduction Rating

How to Apply the New Label

Two-number range displays the estimated protection achievable by minimally-trained users [80%] versus proficient users [20%].

80% 20%

A wider range indicates greater variability in the fit of that HPD. Smaller ranges indicate more consistency of fit. For example, earmuffs will usually have a tighter fitting range than earplugs, and may have a smaller NRR range.

Noise Reduction Rating Will OSHA 29 CFR 1910.95 change?

• OSHA has not announced any proposed changes to the Occupational Noise Standard • OSHA will presumably respond to the revised NRR label by issuing a field directive or technical memorandum, informing its compliance officers how to deal with the new two-number NRR range

Noise Reduction Rating Will the new rating methods favor earplugs or earmuffs?

• While a well-fit foam earplug generally has greater attenuation than most earmuffs, earmuffs are inherently easier to fit for most users • There is less variability in the fit of earmuffs • Overall range of attenuation for earmuffs will usually be tighter and often higher, than earplugs • Workers should be offered a choice of earplugs, bands

and

earmuffs that meet the requirements of the work environment

Noise Reduction Rating

Earplug Fit Testing

Provides an accurate, real-world picture of hearing protector effectiveness.

Identify if hearing protection users are: • Receiving optimal protection • Require additional training • Need to try a different earplug style

Earplug Fit-testing As a problem solver:

• Derating Schemes • One-on-One Training • HPD Selection • NRR Change

Field Verification – Fit-Testing Real-Ear Attenuation at Threshold (R.E.A.T.) Loudness Balance ( Real-Ear Attenuation Above Threshold ) Microphone in Real-Ear (M.I.R.E.) In-Ear Dosimetry

Ear plug fit-testing methods Audiomet ric REAT FitCheck EARfit REAT MIRE Quiet Room Sound booth PAR Any earplug Very Quiet Room PAR Any earplug Special training required Special training required Derived PAR Selected modified earplugs Special training required VeriPRO REAAT Anywhere PAR Any earplug Anyone can perform

Reducing Costs + Claims OSHA Alliance: Best Practice Bulletin www.hearingconservation.org

Additional Information www.howardleight.com

Training tool for noise-exposed workers Train-the-trainer tool Follow-up on significant threshold shifts in hearing Documentation of HPD adequacy Assessment of overall HCP effectiveness Match HPD to worker’s specific noise level Selection of appropriate HPDs for new hires

Benefits per Best Practices Bulletin (OSHA Alliance)

Review of some fit-testing studies

Noise Reduction Rating – in the real world

Real-World Attenuation ≠ NRR

192 users of a flanged reusable earplug ~ 27 NRR 50

NRR = 27 Multiple-Use Earplug

40 30 20 10 0 -10 From Kevin Michael, PhD and Cindy Bloyer “Hearing Protector Attenuation Measurement on the End-User” Retraining and refitting resulted in an average 14 dB improvement for this group

Fit-testing Studies Variation from Published NRR

10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -25 -30 0

Published NRR

10 20 30

Distribution of PARs

40

12

50

10

60

Workers 8 2 0 6 4 -30

70

-25 -20

80 90 100

-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 Variation from Published NRR 15 20 25 30

Fit-testing Studies Distribution of PARs 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 Variation from Published NRR 15 20 25 30 Personal Factors Gender Age Years in Noise Ear Canal Size Familiarity Model of Earplug Program Factors # Group Trainings # Personal Trainings

Difference on 2nd / 3rd Test

-10 -15 -20 -25 -30 10 5 0 -5

Subjects Trying a second earplug often improves attenuation Published NRR

Self-Efficacy Pilot Study “How well can users predict their attenuation after a short fit-testing training session?”

Subjects

• Subjects: 17 construction workers with varied HPD experience levels • Equipment: VeriPRO earplug fit-test system • HPD: Volunteers • Process: 2-4 Quick Check fits where employee sees feedback of exact PAR

Pilot Study

Results

Data show improved PARs!

Initial Final RE=19 LE=22 RE=29 LE=27 Average improvement 7.5 dB

Pre- and Post-Test

How would you rate your ability to fit your earplugs?

1 2 3

Don’t know how I do OK

4 5

Expert

Initial Ability

Expert Pretty good I do OK

Post-Test Ability

Don't know how Not good I do OK Pretty good Expert Fitter

Expert I do OK Pretty good

Self-Efficacy

“How much noise do you think your earplugs block?”

76% (13 of 17) judged attenuation as HIGHER post-test

Post-Test

Are you better able to assess the effectiveness of your earplugs after VeriPRO fit-testing?

1 2 3 4 5

No Maybe No change Improved Yes

64% (11 of 17) rated their ability

HIGHER

post-test

“How well can users predict their attenuation after a short fit-testing training session?"

Ability to Predict Noise Reduction

20 18 16 14 12 10 2 0 8 6 4 Within 5 dB category +/- 7.5 dB (one Category off) +/- 12.5 dB (2 categories off)

Risk Management

Risk Management Indicators for Hearing Loss: • Standard Threshold Shift • Temporary Threshold Shift • Recordable Hearing Loss • Dosimetry • Labeled NRR (derated?) • In-ear Dosimetry • Personal Attenuation Level (PAR)

Risk Management Lagging Indicators vs. Leading Indicators

Risk Management Indicators for Hearing Loss: • Standard Threshold Shift • Temporary Threshold Shift • Recordable Hearing Loss • Dosimetry • Labeled NRR (derated?) • In-ear Dosimetry • Personal Attenuation Level (PAR)

Fit Testing In-Ear Dosimetry

In-ear dosimetry measures/records worker’s actual noise dose, with and without protection Provides real-time monitoring and alerts when worker approaches/exceeds safe limits Only metric with direct potential to measure and prevent further progression of occupational hearing loss

Employees with Documented Noise-Induced Hearing Loss or Standard Threshold Shift [STS] Employees At-Risk for NIHL Employee Training + Sampling Dual-Protection/Extreme Noise Exposure Engineering Controls

Risk Management

• •

Mean Hearing Threshold (2k, 3k, 4kHz): 2000 – 2007 (N = 46) Employees using continuous in-ear dosimetry starting in 2005

50

Employees using continuous ESP starting in 2005

ESP Introduced trend line 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 0 5 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year of test

Preventive Action After NIHL

In practice, an OSHA-recordable STS is not a preventive action

It is documentation of a hearing loss after the fact.

How soon will an employee suffering NIHL be re-fit / re-trained ?

“Best case scenario” per Hearing Conservation Amendment In ear dosimetry “worst case” scenario … 1 Day

• Audiometric test • Retest • Notification 0 2 4 6 8 Months 10 12 14 16

Fitting Tips

Roll-Down Foam Earplugs

1. Roll

entire earplug into a crease-free cylinder

2. Pull Back

pinna by reaching over head with free hand, gently pull top of ear up and out

3. Insert

earplug well into ear canal and hold until it fully expands

Earplug Fitting

Fitting Tips

Fitting Tips

Multiple-Use Earplugs

1. Reach

While holding the stem, reach hand overhead and gently pull top of ear up and back.

2. Insert

Insert earplug so all flanges are well inside the ear canal.

3. Fit

If properly fitted, only the stem of the earplugs should be visible to someone looking at you from the front.

Fitting Tips

Visual + Acoustical Checks

1. Visual Check

The earplug should sit well inside the ear canal and not stick out.

2. Acoustical Check

Cup hands over ears and release. Earplugs should block enough noise so that covering your ears with hands should not result in a significant noise difference.

Training + Motivation

Training + Motivation

Personalize Hearing Loss

Show, Don’t Tell

• Provide copy of annual audiogram to worker • Use personal examples to demonstrate consequences of hearing loss • Ask questions: • •

What is your favorite sound?

What sound would you miss the most if you couldn’t hear?

What sounds connect you to people and your environment?

Training + Motivation

Demonstrate Future Risk

• • • • •

Training Materials

www.hearforever.org

www.hearingconservation.org

atl.grc.nasa.gov/HearingConserv ation/Resources/index.html

www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/noise www.dangerousdecibels.org

Training + Motivation

Send Clear Message On + Off Job

HC Part of Everyday Life

• Include recreational hearing conservation in annual training • Provide extra HPDs for home use • Promote Hearing Conservation at company/family events

Training + Motivation Remove Barriers to HPD Use Make HPDs Available

• Highlight “where to find HPDs” in annual training • Make sure HPDs are well stocked and accessible • Include group of workers in selection process for increased acceptance • Offer wide variety to match comfort, job requirements

Training + Motivation

Hearing Loss Due To Noise Exposure Is … Painless Permanent Progressive … and very

Preventable

!