Hearing protector fit testing with off-shore oil-rig inspectors in Louisiana and Texas

References

• ANSI. 2013. ANSI/ASA S3.1-1999 (R2013), Maximum Permissible Ambient Noise Levels for Audiometric Test Rooms. New York: American National Standards Institute.
   Google Scholar
• ANSI 2007. ANSI/ASA S1.4-1983 (R2007), Specification for Sound Level Meters. New York: American National Standards Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Berger E.H., Franks J.R., Behar A., Casali J.G., Dixon-Ernst C., et al. 1998. Development of a new standard laboratory protocol for estimating the field attenuation of hearing protection devices. Part III. The validity of using subject-fit data. J Acoust Soc Am, 103, 665–672.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger E., Le Cocq C., Kieper R. & Voix J. 2011. Development and validation of a field microphone-in-real-ear approach for measuring hearing protector attenuation. Noise and Health, 13, 163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne D.C., Murphy W.J., Stephenson M.R., Michael K.L., Ghent R.M., et al. 2014. Inter-laboratory comparison of three fit-test systems with laboratory real-ear attenuation at threshold measurements. Las Vegas NV: Presentation at the National Hearing Conservation Association Meeting.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards R.G., Hauser W.P., Moiseev N.A., Broderson A.B. & Green W.W. 1978. Effectiveness of earplugs as worn in the workplace. Sound Vib, 12, 12–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards R.G., Broderson A.B., Green W.W. & Lempert B.L. 1983. A second study of the effectiveness of earplugs as worn in the workplace. Noise Control Eng J, 20, 6–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards R.G. & Green W.W. 1987. Effect of an improved hearing conservation program on earplug performance in the workplace. Noise Control Eng J, 28, 55–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Code of federal regulations 40 CFR 211 subpart B labeling hearing protection devices. Federal Register, 44, 56130–56147.
   Google Scholar
• Franks J.R., Murphy W.J., Johnson J.L. & Harris D.A. 2000. Four earplugs in search of a rating system. Ear Hear, 21, 218–226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franks J.R., Murphy W.J., Harris D.A., Johnson J.L. & Shaw P.B. 2003. Alternative field methods for measuring hearing protector performance. AIHA J (Fairfax, VA), 64, 501–509.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gauger D. & Berger E.H. 2004. A new hearing protector rating: The noise reduction statistic for use with a weighting (NRSA). A report prepared at the request of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, reviewed and approved by ANSI S12/WG11, E-A-R 04-01/HP, Indianapolis, IN.
   Google Scholar
• Heyer N.J., Morata T.C., Pinkerton L.E., Brueck S.E., Stancescu D., et al. 2011. Use of historical data and a novel metric in the evaluation of the effectiveness of hearing conservation program components. Occup Environ Med, 68, 510–517.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joseph A.R., Punch J., Stephenson M.R., Paneth N., Wolfe E., et al. 2007. The effects of training format on earplug performance. Int J Audiol, 46, 609–618.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masterson E.A., Deddens J.A., Themann C.L., Bertke S. & Calvert G.M. 2015. Trends in worker hearing loss by industry sector, 1981–2010. Am J Ind Med, 58, 392–401.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masterson E.A., Bushnell P.T., Themann C.L., Thais C. & Morata T.C. 2016. Hearing impairment among noise-exposed workers: United States, 2003–2012. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep, 65, 389–394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michael P.L., Kerlin R.L., Bienvenue G.R., Prout J.H. & Shampan J.I. 1976. A real-ear field method for the measurement of the noise attenuation of insert-type hearing protectors. Dhew (Niosh), 76–181, 1–168.
   Google Scholar
• Michael K. & Bloyer C. 1999. Hearing protector attenuation measurement on the end-user. Presentation at the National Hearing Conservation Association Meeting, Atlanta GA.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy W.J., Franks J.R., Berger E.H., Behar A., Casali J.G., et al. 2004. Development of a new standard laboratory protocol for estimation of the field attenuation of hearing protection devices: Sample size necessary to provide acceptable reproducibility. J Acoust Soc Am, 115, 331–323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy W.J., Davis R.R., Byrne D.C. & Franks J.R. 2007. Advanced hearing Protector Study, NIOSH EPHB Report No. 312-11a. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy W.J. 2013. Comparing personal attenuation ratings for hearing protector fit-test systems. Council Accredit Occup Hear Conserv, 25, 1–3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Murphy W.J., Jerome T.W., Gallagher H.L., Theis M.A. & McKinley R.L. 2015a. Comparison of Three Noise Reduction Rating Calculators for Passive and Active Hearing Protection Devices. NIOSH EPHB Report No. 360-13a. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy W.J., Themann C.L. & Murata T.K. 2015b. Field testing NIOSH HPD Well-Fit: Off-Shore Oil Rig Inspectors in Texas and Louisiana. NIOSH EPHB Report No. 360-11a. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson D.I., Nelson R.Y., Concha-Barrientos M. & Fingerhut M. 2005. The global burden of occupational noise-induced hearing loss. Am J Ind Med, 48, 446–458.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NIOSH. 1998. Criteria for a recommended standard: occupational noise exposure; revised criteria. Cincinnati, OH: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 98–126.
   Google Scholar
• OSHA. 1983. CPL 2-2.35A-29CFR 1910.95(b)(1) Guidelines for noise enforcement: Appendix A, US Department of Labor. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, December 19, 1983.
   Google Scholar
• OSHA. 2008. OSHA/NHCA/NIOSH Alliance, Best Practice Bulletin: Hearing Protection-Emerging Trends: Individual Fit Testing. Retrieved from: www.hearingconservation.org.
   Google Scholar
• OSHA. 2016. Methods for Estimating HPD Attenuation, Noise and Hearing Conservation Appendix IV: part C. Retrieved from: https://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/noise/hcp/attenuation_estimation.html
   Google Scholar
• Radtke T. 2007. Noise Exposure Survey, US Dept. Interior, Minerals Management Service, New Orleans Region.
   Google Scholar
• Roche A.F., Mukherjee D., Chumlea W.C. & Champney T.F. 1983. Examination effects in audiometric testing of children. Scand Audiol, 12, 251–256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royster J.D. & Royster L.H. 1986. Using audiometric data base analysis. J Occup Med, 28, 1055–1068.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schmitt L., Murphy W.J. & Byrne D.C. 2015. Attenuation Comparison of Headphones, Poster presentation at the 40th meeting of the National Hearing Conservation Association, New Orleans, February 20, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Schulz T.Y. 2011. Individual fit-testing of earplugs: A review of uses. Noise Health, 13, 152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephenson M.R., Shaw P.B., Stephenson C.M. & Graydon P.S. 2011. Hearing loss prevention for carpenters: Part 2: demonstration projects using individualized and group training. Noise Health, 13, 122–131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tak S. & Calvert G.M. 2008. Hearing difficulty attributable to employment by industry and occupation: An analysis of the national health interview survey—United States, 1997 to 2003. J Occup Environ Med, 50, 46–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Themann C.L., Suter A.H. & Stephenson M.R. 2013. National research agenda for the prevention of occupational hearing loss: Part 2: Hearing protection devices. Semin Hear, 34, 208–251.
   Google Scholar
• Trompette N. & Kusy A. 2013. Suitability of commercially available systems for individual fit tests of hearing protectors, Proceedings of Inter-Noise, Innsbruck Austria.
   Google Scholar
• Voix J. [2006]. Development of a “Smart” Earplug. PhD Dissertation, L'ecole de Technologie Superieure, 1–249.
   Google Scholar
• Voix J. & Laville F. 2009. Prediction of the attenuation of a filtered custom earplug. Appl Acoust, 70, 935–944.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar