Effectiveness of hearing protector devices in impulse noise verified with transiently evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emissions

References

• American National Standards Institute. 1997. American national standards methods for measuring the real-ear attenuation of hearing protectors, S 12.6 (R2002).
   Google Scholar
• Ahroon W.A., Hamernik R.P., Lei S.F. The effects of reverberant blast waves on the auditory system. J Acoust Soc Am 1996; 100(4)2247–57
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Attias J., Bresloff I., Reshef I., Horowitz G., Furman V. Evaluating noise-induced hearing loss with distortion product otoacoustic emissions. Br J Audiol 1998; 32: 39–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attias J., Horowitz G., El-Hatib N., Nageris B. Detection and clinical diagnosis of noise-induced hearing loss by otoacoustic emissions. Noise & Health 2001; 3: 19–31
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Avan P., Bonfils P., Gilain L., Mom T. Physiopathological significance of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions at 2f1–f2 produced by high- versus low-level stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 2003; 113(1)430–441
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Balatsouras D.G., Tsimpiris N., Korres S., Papadimitriou N., Danielidis V. The effect of impulse noise on distortion product otoacoustic emissions. Int J Audiol 2005; 44: 540–49
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger E.H., Kerivan J.E. In?uence of the physiological noise and the occlusion effect on the measurement of real-ear attenuation at threshold. J Acoust Soc Am 1983; 74: 81–94
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger E.H. Methods of measuring the attenuation of hearing protection devices. J Acoust Soc Am 1986; 79: 1655–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger E.H., Casali J.G. Hearing protection devices. Audiology: Treatment, M. Valente, H. Hosford-Dunn, R.J. Roeser. Thieme Medical Pub, New York 1997; 669–689
   Google Scholar
• Berger E.H., Franks J.R., Behar A., Casali J.G., Dixon-Ernst C., et al. Development of a new standard laboratory protocol for estimating the ?eld attenuation of hearing protection devices. Part III. The validity of using subject-?t data. J Acoust Soc Am 1998; 103(2)665–72
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Berger E.H., Kieper R.W., Gauger D. Hearing protection: Surpassing the limits of bone-conduction pathways. J Acoust Soc Am 2003; 114(4)1955–67
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger E.H. 2005. Preferred methods for measuring hearing protector attenuation. In: Environmental Noise Control. Brazil: Inter Noise.
   Google Scholar
• Birch R.S., Gerges S.N., Vergara E.F. Design of a pulse generator and shock tube for measuring hearing protector attenuation of high-amplitude impulsive noise. Applied Acoustics 2003; 64: 269–86
   Google Scholar
• Buck K. & Dancer A. 2007a. The directive 2003/10/EU and its consequences for the exposure to weapon noise. In: Noise at Work 2007 – Proceedings. Lille, pp. 1379–85.
   Google Scholar
• Buck K. & Dancer A. 2007b. Performance of different types of hearing protectors undergoing high-level impulse noise. In: Noise at Work, 2007 undergoing high-level impulse noise. In: Noise at Work – Proceedings. Lille, pp. 1397–1406.
   Google Scholar
• Brownell W.E. Outer hair cell electromotility and otoacoustic emissions. Ear Hear 1990; 11: 82–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burkhard M., 1978. Ear simulators, designs, stability, etc. In: Manikin Measurements. Elk Grove Village Illinois, pp. 69–74.
   Google Scholar
• Casali J., Robinson G. Augmented HPDs: active noise reduction, level-dependent, sound transmission, uniform attenuation, and adjustable devices: Technology overview and performance testing issues. Workshop on Hearing Protector Devices, A.H. Suter. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 2003; 62–110
   Google Scholar
• Chan P.C., Ho K.H., Kan K.K., Stuhmiller J.H. Evaluation of impulse noise criteria using human volunteer data. J Acoust Soc Am 2001; 110(4)1967–75
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chasin M., Behar A. Hearing protection. Semin Hear 2003; 24: 345–53
   Google Scholar
• Chida E., Fukuda S., Satoh N., Kashiwamukra M., Matsumura M., et al. Optimal stimulus level conditions for measurements of DPOAEs. Auris Nasus Larynx 2001; 28 (suppl): S19–S22
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dancer A., Grateau P., Cabanis A., Barnabé G., Cagnin G., et al. Effectiveness of earplugs in high-intensity impulse noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 91(3)1677–89
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dancer A. La lutte contre le bruit. Les cahiers de l audition 2000; 13(3)7–19
   Google Scholar
• Dancer A. 2003. Last development in the nonlinear perforated ear plugs. In: Reconsiderations of the Effect of Impulse Noise-RTO Technical Reports. RTOTR-017.
   Google Scholar
• Dancer A. & Buck K. 2005. Noise: A limiting factor for the use of modern weapon systems? In: New Directions for Improving Audio Effectiveness – RTO meeting proceedings. The Netherlands: RTO Human Factors and Medicine Panel (HFM).
   Google Scholar
• Emmerich E., Richter F., Meissner W., Dieroff H.G. The effect of impulse noise exposure on distortion product otoacoustic emissions in the awake guinea pig. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2000; 257: 128–32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Parliament and Council. 2003. Directive 2003-10-EC on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (noise), 2003-10-EC.
   Google Scholar
• Glattke T.J., Pafitis I.A., Cummiskey C., Herer G.R. Identification of hearing loss in children and young adults using measures of transient otoacoustic emission reproducibility. Am J Audiol 1995; 4: 71–86
   Google Scholar
• Gorga M.P., Neely S.T., Bergman B.M., Beauchaine K.L., Kaminski J.R., et al. A comparison of transient-evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emissions in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 1993; 94: 2639–48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall A.J., Lutman M.E. Methods for early identification of noise-induced hearing loss. Audiology 1999; 38: 277–80
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hamernik R.P., Ahroon W.A., Hsueh K.D. The energy spectrum of an impulse: Its relation to hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 1991; 90(1)197–204
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hamernik R.P., Ahroon W.A., Lei S.F. The cubic distortion product otoacoustic emissions from the normal and noise-damaged chinchilla cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am 1996; 100(2)1003–12
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hamernik R.P., Patterson J.H., Ahroon W.A. & Stuhmiller J. 1998. A health hazard assessment for blast overpressure exposures-use of animal test data in the development of a human auditory hazard criterion for impulse noise. DAMD17-96-C-6007, San Diego: Jaycor.
   Google Scholar
• Harris F.P., Lonsbury-Martin B.L., Stagner B.B., Coats A.C., Martin G.K. Acoustic distortion products in humans: Systematic changes in amplitudes as a function of f2/f1 ratio. J Acoust Soc Am 1989; 85(1)220–229
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris F.P., Probst R. Reporting click-evoked and distortion-product otoacoustic emission results with respect to the pure-tone audiogram. Ear Hear 1991; 12: 399–405
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson D., Hamernik R.P. Impulse noise: Critical review. J Acoust Soc Am 1986; 80: 569–84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson D., Subramaniam M., Gratton M.A., Saunders S.S. Impact noise: The importance of level, duration, and repetition rate. J Acoust Soc Am 1991; 89(3)1350–57
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Henderson D., Subramaniam M., Boettcher F.A. Individual susceptibility to noise-induced hearing loss: An old topic revisited. Ear Hear 1993; 14: 152–68
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiselius P. Method to assess acoustical two-port properties of earplugs. Acta Acustica Acustica 2004; 90: 137–51
   Google Scholar
• Hiselius P. Attenuation of earplugs-objective predictions compared to subjective REAT measurements. Acta Acustica Acustica 2005; 91: 764–70
   Google Scholar
• Hotz M.A., Probst R., Harris F.P., Hauser R. Monitoring the effects of noise exposure using transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions. Acta Otolaryngol 1993; 113: 478–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. 1989. Acoustics-Audiometric test methods-Part 1: Basic pure-tone air and bone conduction threshold audiometry. ISO 8253-1.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. 1990. Acoustics -Hearing protectors -Part 1: Subjective method for the measurement of sound attenuation. ISO 4869 -1.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. 1994. Acoustics-Hearing protectors-Part 2: Estimation of effective A-weighted sound pressure level when hearing protectors are worn. ISO 4869-2.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. 2002. Acoustics-Determination of sound immissions from sound sources placed close to the ear-Part 1: Technique using a microphone in a real ear (MIRE technique). ISO 11904-1.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson D.L. 1996. Blast overpressure studies with animals and man. DAMD17-93-C-3101. Albuquerque: EG&G Management Systems.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson D.L., Papadopoulos P., Watfa N. & Takala J. 2001. Exposure criteria, occupational exposure levels. In: Occupational exposure to noise: evaluation, prevention and control, World Health Organization: Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, pp. 79–102.
   Google Scholar
• Kemp D.T. Stimulated acoustic emissions from within the human auditory system. J Acoust Soc Am 1978; 64: 1386–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemp D.T. Otoacoustic emissions, their origin in cochlear function, and use. Br Med Bull 2002; 63: 223–241
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konopka W., Pawlaczyk-Luszczynska M., Sliwinska-Kowalska M., Grzanka A., Zalewski P. Evaluation of transient and distortion product otoacoustic emissions before and after shooting practice. Noise & Health 2001; 3: 29–37
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Konopka W., Pawlaczyk-Luszczynska M., Sliwinska-Kowalska M., Grzanka A., Zalewski P. Effects of impulse noise on transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions in soldiers. Int J Audiol 2005; 44: 3–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kowalsky S., Sulkowski W. Measurements of click-evoked otoacoustic emission in industrial workers with noise-induced hearing loss. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 1997; 10: 441–59
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kulawiec J.T., Orlando M.S. The contribution of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions to the click evoked otoacoustic emissions. Ear Hear 1995; 16(5)515–20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lapsley Miller J.A., Marshall L., Heller L.M. A longitudinal study of changes in evoked otoacoustic emissions and pure-tone thresholds as measured in a hearing conservation program. Int J Audiol 2004; 43: 307–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lonsbury-Martin B.L., Harris F.P., Stagner B.B., Hawkins M.D., Martin G.K. Distortion product emissions in humans. I. Basic properties in normally hearing subjects. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 1990; 147: 3–14
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lonsbury-Martin B.L., Martin G.K. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions. Otoacoustic Emissions: Clinical Applications, M.S. Robinette, T.J. Glattke. Thieme Medical Publishers, New York 2002; 116–142
   Google Scholar
• McFadden D. A speculation about the parallel ear asymmetries and sex differences in hearing sensitivity and otoacoustic emissions. Hear Res 1993; 68(2)143–51
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McRobert H., Ward W.D. Damage-risk criteria: The trading relation between the intensity and the number of non-reverberant impulses. J Acoust Soc Am 1973; 53(5)1297–1300
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Murphy W.J., Berger E.H., Behar A., Casali J.G., Dixon-Ernst C., et al. Development of a new standard laboratory protocol for estimation of the ?eld attenuation of hearing protection devices: Sample size necessary to provide acceptable reproducibility. J Acoust Soc Am 2004; 115: 311–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakashima A., Buck K., Hamery P., De Mezzo S., Brom G. Impulse Noise: Measurement Techniques and Hearing Protector Performance. Defence Research and Development Canada, Toronto 2006
   Google Scholar
• Oeken J. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions in acute acoustic trauma. Noise & Health 1998; 1: 56–66
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Olszewski J., Milonski J., Sulkowski W.J., Majak J., Olszewksi S. Temporary hearing threshold shift measured by otoacoustic emissions in subjects exposed to short-term impulse noise. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2005; 18: 375–79
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Olszewski J., Milonsku M.D., Olszewksi S., Majak J. Hearing threshold shift measured by otoacoustic emissions after shooting noise exposure in soldiers using hearing protectors. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007; 136: 78–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ong M., Choo J., Low E. A self-controlled trial to evaluate the use of active hearing defenders in the engine room of operational naval vessels. Singapore Med J 2004; 45: 75–78
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pääkkönen R., Lehtomäki K., Myllyniemi J., Savolainen S., Hämäläsinen E. Noise attenuation of hearing protectors in the human ear: A method description. Acustica Acta Acustica 2000a; 86: 477–80
   Google Scholar
• Pääkköonen R., Savolainen S., Myllyniemi J., Lehtomäki K. Ear plug fit and attenuation: An experimental study. Acustica Acta Acustica 2000b; 86: 481–84
   Google Scholar
• Patterson J.H., Hamernik R.P. An experimental basis for the estimation of auditory system hazard following exposure to impulse noise. United States Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory, Fort Rucker, Alabama 1992
   Google Scholar
• Patterson J.H., Mozo B.T., Gordon E., Canales J.R., Johnson D.L. Pressure measured under earmuffs worn by human volunteers during exposure to freefield blast overpressures. United States Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory, Fort Rucker, Alabama 1997
   Google Scholar
• Pawlaczyk-Luszczynska M., Dudarewics A., Bak M., Fiszer M., Kotylo P., et al. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2004; 17: 285–94
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pekkarinen J.O., Starck J.P., Ylisoki J.S. Hearing protection against high-level shooting impulses in relation to hearing damage risk criteria. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 91(1)196–202
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pfander F., Bongartz H., Brinkmann H., Kietz H. Danger of auditory impairment from impulse noise: A comparative study of the CHABA damage-risk criteria and those of the Federal Republic of Germany. J Acoust Soc Am 1980; 96(2)628–633
   Google Scholar
• Plinkert P.K., Hemmert W., Zenner H.P. Comparison of methods for early detection of noise vulnerability of the inner ear. Amplitude reduction of otoacoustic emissions are most sensitive at submaximal noise impulse exposure. HNO 1995; 43: 89–97
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Plinkert P.K., Hemmert W., Wagener W., Just K., Zenner H.P. Monitoring noise susceptibility: Sensitivity of otoacoustic emissions and subjective audiometry. Br J Audiol 1999; 33: 367–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price G.R. Implications of a critical level in the ear for assessment of noise hazard at high intensities. J Acoust Soc Am 1981; 69(1)171–77
   Google Scholar
• Price G.R., Kim H.N., Lim D.J., Dunn D. Hazard from weapons impulses: Histological and electrophysiological evidence. J Acoust Soc Am 1989; 85(3)1245–54
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Price G.R., Kalb J.T. Insights into hazard from intense impulses from a mathematical model of the ear. J Acoust Soc Am 1991; 90(1)219–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prieve B.A., Falter S.R. COAEs and SSOAEs in adults with increased age. Ear Hear 1995; 16: 521–528
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Probst R., Coats A.C., Martin G.K., Lonsbury-Martin B.L. Spontaneous, click- and toneburst-evoked otoacoustic emissions from normal ears. Hear Res 1986; 21: 261–75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Probst R., Lonsbury-Martin B.L., Martin G.K. A review of otoacoustic emissions. J Acoust Soc Am 1991; 89: 2027–67
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Probst R., Harris F.P., Hauser R. Clinical monitoring using otoacoustic emissions. Br J Audiol 1993; 27: 85–90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rice C.G. Human response effects of impulse noise. J Sound Vibration 1996; 190(3)525–543
   Google Scholar
• Robinette M.S. Clinical observations with evoked otoacoustic emissions at Mayo Clinic. J Am Acad Audiol 2003; 14: 213–24
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roede J., Harris F.P., Probst R., Xu L. Repeatability of distortion product otoacoustic emissions in normally hearing humans. Audiology 1993; 32: 273–81
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Royster J.D., Berger E.H., Merry C.J., Nixon C.W., Franks J.R., et al. Development of a new standard laboratory protocol for estimating the ?eld attenuation of hearing protection devices. Part I. Research of working group 11, accredited standards committee s12, noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1996; 99: 1506–26
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroeter J. The use of acoustical test ?xtures for the measurement of hearing protector attenuation. Part I: Review of previous work and the design of an improved test ?xture. J Acoust Soc Am 1985; 79: 1065–81
   Google Scholar
• Schroeter J., Poesselt C. The use of acoustical test ?xtures for the measurement of hearing protector attenuation. Part II: Modeling the external ears, simulating bone conduction, and comparing test ?xture and real-ear data. J Acoust Soc Am 1986; 80: 505–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sliwinska-Kowalska M., Jedlinska U. Prolonged exposure to industrial noise: Cochlear pathology does not correlate with the degree of permanent threshold shift, but is related to duration of exposure. J Occup Health 1998; 40: 123–31
   Google Scholar
• Smoorenburg G.F. 2003. Risk of hearing loss from exposure to impulse sounds. In: Reconsiderations of the Effect of Impulse Noise – RTO technical reports. RTO-TR-017, pp. 1–30.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart M., Konkle D.F., Simpson T.H. The effect of recreational gunfire noise on hearing in workers exposed to occupational noise. Ear Noise Throat J 2001; 80: 32–40
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Suvorov G., Denisov E., Antipin V., Kharitonov V., Starck J., et al. Effects of peak level and number of impulses to hearing among forge hammering workers. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 2001; 16: 816–22
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vinck B.M., De Vel E., Xu Z.M., Van Cauwenberge P.B. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions: A normative study. Audiology 1996; 356: 231–245
   Google Scholar
• Vinck B.M., Van Cauwenberge P.B., Leroy L., Corthals P. Sensitivity of transient evoked and distortion product otoacoustic emissions to the direct effects of noise on the human cochlea. Audiology 1999; 38: 44–52
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Voix J. & Laville F. 2005a. Method and apparatus for objective assessment of in-ear device acoustical performance. US Patent & Trademark Office, no 20050123146.
   Google Scholar
• Voix J., Laville F. Problematiques associees au developpemenr d'un bouchon d'oreile intelligent. Pistes 2005b; 7: 1–19
   Google Scholar
• Zheng X.Y., McFadden S.L., Ding D.L., Henderson D. Cochlear degeneration and impulse noise-induced acoustic trauma in the chincilla. Hear Res 2000; 144: 187–95
   PubMedGoogle Scholar