occupational noise exposure amongst road...
Post on 05-Nov-2019
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
OCCUPATIONAL NOISE EXPOSURE AMONGST ROAD CONSTRUCTION
WORKERS
KAMILAH MOHD SAID
A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Engineering (Construction)
Faculty of Civil Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
AUGUST 2015
iii
This thesis is specially dedicated to my beloved parents
and children
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to thank Almighty Allah for helping and giving me the strength and
ability to complete my study successfully. My deep gratitude and appreciation goes
to Dr Zaiton Haron, who has supported me mentally and physically during my
study. She guided and encouraged me from early to the end of the journey.
My deep sense of gratitude go to Mah Sing Group, Kimlun Corporation and Bina
Water Sdn. Bhd, for their cooperation and help during data collection stage.
My appreciation also extend to my research group members and colleagues who
have given me their support and shared their knowledge which aided me in my
thesis. Last but not the least, my sincere appreciation also extends to my beloved
parents and all my family members for their support and encouragement.
v
ABSTRACT
Overexposure among construction workers to hazardous noise level may
affect workers safety and health. The aim of this study is to determine the level of
noise exposure among road construction workers. To achieve this aim, the sound
power level of construction machineries, workers noise exposure level and the
prevalence of hearing loss symptoms and hearing ability among them were
measured. Sound power level of machineries were measured according to ISO
112000. The workers consist of operator of machineries, site supervisors and premix
workers were measured according to Peraturan-Peraturan di bawah Akta Kilang
dan Jentera 1967 (Akta 139) P.U. (A) 1/89 Factories and Machinery (Noise
Exposure) Regulations 198. A total of seventy three workers who worked in road
work, drainage and pavement stage were measured their noise exposure level. These
workers also were evaluated their hearing loss symptoms and hearing ability using
questionaire survey and interview. Machineries consisting of roller compacter, back-
pusher, vibratory roller and paver have high sound power level. There are 44% of
workers including operators, site supervisors and premix workers had experienced
noise level above hazardous level (≥85 dBA). Vibratory roller operator obtaining
high exposure level with the highest exposure appeared in pavement stage. Highest
prevalence symptoms of hearing loss was recorded in road work stage with 39% of
workers positive hearing loss due to factors of workers’ age, racing and karaoke
activity. Poor hearing ability were observed for workers with age of 60 years old and
greater. It is suggested that workers exposed to noise greater than 85 dBA should
wear hearing protection device (HPDs) with suitable NRR values. In conclusion,
road construction workers also exposed to hazard which require them to wear
hearing protection.
vi
ABSTRAK
Pendedahan berlebihan bunyi bising di paras yang berbahaya di kalangan
pekerja binaan memberi kesan terhadap kesihatan dan keselamatan pekerja. Tujuan
penyelidikan ini adalah untuk mendapatkan tahap pendedahan bunyi di kalangan
pekerja pembinaan jalan . Untuk mencapai tujuan ini, tahap kuasa bunyi jentera
pembinaan, tahap pendedahan bunyi bising di kalangan pekerja dan kewujuadan
simptoms kehilangan pendengaran serta tahap pendengaran di kalangan pekerja
diukur. Tahap kuasa bunyi jentera diukur mengikut ISO 112000. Pekerja yang terdiri
daripada operator jentera, penyelia tapak dan pekerja turapan diukur mengikut
Peraturan-Peraturan di bawah Akta Kilang dan Jentera 1967 (Akta 139) P.U. (A)
1/89 Factories and Machinery (Noise Exposure) Regulations 198. Sejumlah 73
pekerja yang bekerja di dalam kerja jalan,kerja perparitan dan kerja turapan telah
diukur tahap pendedahan bunyi bising mereka. Pekerja-pekerja ini juga dinilai
kewujudan simptoms kehilangan pendengaran dan tahap pendengaran menggunakan
bancian dan temu bual. Jentera yang terdiri daripada penggelek, traktor, penggelek
bergegar dan penurap mempunyai kuasa bunyi yang tinggi. Sebanyak 44% pekerja
daripada operator jentera, penyelia tapak dan pekerja turapan mengalami pendedahan
bunyi bising di atas paras bahaya (≥85 dBA). Operator penggelek bergetar
merekodkan paras pendedahan bunyi tertinggi dengan pendedahan tertinggi
direkodkan dalam kerja turapan. tendedahan bunyi tertinggi direkodkan oleh
penggelek bergetar dari kerja turapan. Kewujudan simptoms kehilangan pendengaran
tertinggi direkodkan oleh kerja jalan dengan 39% pekerja positif simptoms
kehilangan pendengaran disebabkan oleh factor umur pekerja, aktiviti berlumba dan
karaoke. Tahap pendengaran yang buruk didapati pada pekerja yang berumur lebih
daripada 60 tahun. Cadangan untuk pekerja yang terdedah pada bunyi bising
melebihi 85 dBA boleh meggunakan alat pelindung pendengaran dengan nilai NRR
yang sesuai. Kesimpulannya, pekerja pembinaan jalan juga terdedah kepada bahaya
yang memerlukan mereka memakai alat pelindung pendengaran.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER TOPIC PAGE
TITLE i
DECLARATION ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES xii
LIST OF FIGURES xiv
LIST OF SYMBOL xviii
LIST OF ABBREVIATION xix
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Background of Study 2
1.3 Problem Statement 2
1.4 Aim and Objectives 3
1.5 Research Scope 3
1.6 Significance of Research 4
viii
1.7 Brief Methodology 5
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction 6
2.2 Road Construction 6
2.3 Noise Source 7
2.4 Factory and Machinery (Noise Exposure) Regulation
1989 10
2.4.1 8-hour Time-Weighted Average (TWA) 11
2.5 Hearing Protection Device (HPDs) 11
2.6 Hearing Loss 14
2.6.1 Audiometric Test 15
2.6.2 Tinnitus 18
2.6.3 Inability to Communicate 18
2.7 Other Health Effects 19
2.8 Conclusion 19
3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction 21
3.2 Research Design and Procedure 21
3.3 Sound power level of construction
machineries from different road construction stages 24
3.4 Noise exposure levels of road construction workers 27
3.5 The effects of noise exposure on workers 30
3.6 Significant factors affected noise exposure level and
ix
prevalence symptoms of hearing loss 32
3.6.1 Normality Test 32
3.6.2 Correlation Test (Pearson, Spearman and
Fisher Exact Test) 33
3.6.3 Multiple Linear Regression Analysis 33
3.6.4 Logistic Regression Analysis 34
3.6.5 T-test 35
3.6.6 Kruskall Wallis non-parametric test 36
3.6.7 One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) 37
3.7 Suitable NRR values of hearing protector for construction
workers. 38
3.8 Conclusion 40
4 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
4.1 Introduction 41
4.2 Road Construction Stages (Road work, Drainage
work and Pavement) 41
4.3 Sound Power Level of Construction Machineries 45
4.4 Noise Exposure Level of Construction Worker 46
4.4.1 Noise Exposure in Road Work Stage
48
4.4.2 Noise Exposure in Drainage Stage 49
4.4.3 Noise Exposure in Pavement Stage 50
4.5 Factors affeted Noise Exposure Level and Prevalence
Symptoms of Hearing Loss 51
4.5.1 Normality Test 51
4.5.2 Correlation Test 52
x
4.5.3 Multiple Linear Regression Analysis 53
4.6 TWA of Building and Road Construction Workers 54
4.7 Safety 57
4.8 Prevalence of Hearing Loss Symptoms 56
4.9 Other Causes of Hearing loss 58
4.9.1 Correlation Test 60
4.9.2 Logistic Regression Analysis 59
4.10 Hearing Ability of Construction Worker 60
4.10.1 Association between Hearing Ability with Age
and Experience in Construction Sector 61
4.11 Suitable NRR values of hearing protector for construction
workers 64
4.12 Discussion and conclusion 65
5 CONCLUSION
5.1 Introduction 67
5.2 Conclusion 68
5.3 Recommendations 71
xi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE
2.1 FMR 1989 Permissible Noise Exposures 13
2.2 Simplified guidance on selection of hearing protection 14
3.1 Rating of Hearing Ability 31
3.2 Dummy Variables in Logistic Regression Analysis 35
3.3 Suitable NRR for Overexposed Worker 39
4.1 Workers from different sites and stages 42
4.2 Significant different in Sound Power Level 46
4.3 Significant Different in Daily Noise Exposure and Peak
Level of Noise between Stages 47
4.4 Descriptive Analysis of machine’s operator 51
4.5 Normal Distribution of Parameter 52
4.6 Correlation Test (TWA) 52
4.7 Results of Multiple Linear Regression 53
4.8 T-test for TWAs of Construction Workers in Different
Sites 55
4.9 Correlation Test (Prevalence of Hearing Loss) 59
4.10 Logistic Regression Analysis 59
4.11 Suitable Hearing Protector for overexposed workers 63
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE
2.1 Noise spectrum of workers that work with and without
use machinery 9
2.2 Daily noise exposure of construction workers 10
2.3 Hearing protector 12
2.4 Relation between hearing loss and duration of exposure 16
2.5 Mean hearing levels according to years in construction 17
2.6 Rate of hearing loss among construction workers in
screening audiometry between industry 17
3.1 Framework of research methodology 23
3.2 Positions of sound level meter for noise emission level
Measurement 24
3.3 Distometer 25
3.4 Sound Level Meter 26
3.5 Schematic diagram of noise measurement for dynamic
Machinery 27
3.6 Personal Noise Dosimeter 28
3.7 Backhoe’s operator is wearing Dosimeter 29
3.8 Quest Pro Technologies Software 29
3.9 Briefing to the worker in the measurement process 30
4.1 Mean TWA, Sound Power (Lw) and Peak Level (Lcpk) in
Three Construction Stages 44
4.2 Mean Sound Power Level of Machinery 45
4.3 Percentage of workers exposed according FMR 1989 46
4.4 Workers exposure level according to stages 47
xiii
4.5 Worker’s daily noise exposure Level in road work stage 48
4.6 Noise Exposure Level of Workers in Drainage stage 49
4.7 Noise exposure level of workers in Pavement Stage 50
4.8 Range of Exposure of Building and Road Construction
Worker 54
4.9 Workers expression towards noise interfere with
workers’ communication 56
4.10 Perception workers on noise masking shouts 56
4.11 Percentage prevalence hearing loss symptoms 57
4.12 Hearing ability of construction workers 60
4.13 Association between hearing ability and workers’
experience 62
4.13 Association between hearing ability and worker’s age 62
4.14 Protected TWA level of overexposed workers 63
xiv
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
OSHA = Ocupational Safety and Health Administration
NIOSH = National Institute of Safety and Health
NIHL = Noise-Induced Hearing Loss
HPDs = Hearing Protection Devices
PPE = Personal Protective Equipment
dB = Decibel without frequency weighting
dBA = Decibel in A-Weighted
NRR = Noise Reduction Rating
HCP = Hearing Conservation Program
ER = Exchange Rate
ISO = International Organization for Standardization
MLR = Multiple Linear Regression
TWA = 8-hoursTime-Weighted Average
xv
LIST OF SYMBOLS
LAeq = A-Weighted Daily Noise Exposure Level
Lw = Sound Power Level
R = Distance (m)
Te = Time of measurement
T0 = 8 hours time of measurement
Lavg = Exposure level over the entire time of measuremt
Lmin = Minimum exposure level
Lmax = Maxmimum exposure level
xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX TITLE PAGE
A Sample of questionnaire 77
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
Malaysia is one of the rapidly industrializing countries. Major and minor
construction projects, including road construction are all over Malaysia which
indicate that the road construction is increasing every year. This growth was viewed
as an accomplishment for our nation, but the noise generated from construction
activities were observed to affect worker’s safety and health. Noise is one of a
common problem at workplace in most countries. Generally, noises from
construction sites are generated by construction machineries. The noise generated by
these machineries was very loud and brought negative impacts on the machineries
operators and nearby workers (Carletti, 2013).
2
1.2 Background of Study
Noise in industry is widespread and is one of a common occupational hazard
in various industrial sectors including construction (Suter, 2002). This is because
construction site is a noisy workplace due to the usage of noisy construction
machineries. Among others, old machineries are used widely in construction sector
which could generate loud noise compare to new machineries. This loud noise is
potentially harmful to workers which may cause hearing loss, annoyance and
disturbance to physical and psychosocial well-being, distraction and loss in
productivity, Tinnitus and interference with communication. International Standards
Organization (ISO) determined that the maximum exposure in workplace should
range from 85dBA to 90 dBA for 8 hours/day to prevent the risk of harmful effects.
Previous studies have highlighted the effects of noise towards worker’s safety and
health. In construction industry, there were fewer studies on loud noise generated by
road construction activities compare to other construction projects. Road
construction appeared to generate noisy activities especially during pavement stage.
Therefore, this study is significant to determine the levels of exposure among road
construction workers.
1.3 Problem Statement
Construction machineries mostly generated high noise levels at construction
sites. Sound power levels of these machineries affect the operators directly since
their positions are on the machineries. Nearby workers are also exposed to sound
generated by these machines according to their distance from the machineries.
Prolong exposure to loud noise might affect workers’ safety and health including
hearing impairment which caused higher compensation in the construction industry
3
(Pinto et al, 2011). Therefore, OSHA required noise monitoring among overexposed
workers since the noise from construction activities mostly exceeded. Noise
monitoring performed by Hong (2005), and Suter (2002)showed that most
construction workers worked in the presence of hazardous noise. Noise control on
the machineries was hard to implement due to the construction culture where most
contractors rent or lease the machineries rather than own it. Thus, hearing protector
was provided to protect the workers as required by FMR 1989. However, previous
studies from Endelson et al., (2009) and Lusk et al., (1999) showed that the usage of
hearing protector among construction workers was poor. Therefore, this study
determines the hazard level of noise exposure among road construction workers in
Malaysia.
1.4 Objectives
The objectives of the study are:
• To obtain sound power level of construction machineries from different road
construction stages.
• To obtain noise exposure levels of road construction workers
• To determine the effects of noise exposure on workers
• To evaluate the factors affected noise exposure level and prevalence
symptoms of hearing loss
• To obtain workers’ hearing ability
• To propose suitable NRR values of hearing protector for construction
workers
4
1.5 Research Scope
The scopes of this research are as follows:
1. This research focus only on new construction and reconstruction of road in
Johor Bharu, Malaysia.
2. The data were collected using Sound Level Meter Type 1and Personal Noise
Dosimeter during working hours.
3. machineries and construction workers that undergo noise measurement were
randomly selected from different road construction sites around Johor Bahru.
4. Road construction stage in this research was created according to the
availability of the activities from representing sites.
1.6 Significance of Research
Sound power level generated by construction machineries affected the
exposure level of the operators as well as nearby workers on site. Their noise
exposure levels were believed to be higher compare to other off-site workers.
Prolong exposure to loud noise is capable of worsening human hearing ability.
Malaysia implements Factory and Machinery Noise Exposure Regulation 1989
which set a limit to the noise exposure level at the workplace in order to protect the
workers from developing hearing impairment and other adverse effects. However,
studies from Yoshioko et al (2010) and Spencer (2007)) showed that construction
workers are exposed to hazardous noise level and are prone to suffer from hearing
loss. Therefore, this study was conducted in order to give information on the
exposure level of construction workers on site and the prevalence of hearing loss
5
symptoms among them since workers’ awareness of the risks of noise and other
exposures is low in this industry (Nietzal and Seixas., 2005).
1.7 Brief Methodology
This research was carried out in five phases according to research objectives.
Phase 1 of the study focused on the on-site measurements of construction
machineries sound power level. Follow-up measurement of worker’s noise exposure
was conducted in phase 2. The third phase involved identification of workers with
positive hearing loss symptoms and hearing ability of measured worker was rated.
Statistical analysis was performed in phase 4 to find the factors affected workers’
noise exposure level and prevalence symptoms of hearing loss. Suitable NRR values
of hearing protector for construction workers were proposed in stage 5.
Recommendations were given in this research to improve the existing system in
order to protect workers safety and health.
92
REFERENCES
Ahmed, H. O., Dennis, J. H., Badran, O., Ismail, M., Ballal, S. G., Ashoor,
A., and Jerwood, D. (2001). Occupational Noise Exposure and Hearing Loss of
Workers in Two Plants in Eastern Saudi Arabia Ann. Occup. Hyg.. Vol. 45 (5), 371-
380.
Arndt, V., Rothenbacher, D., Brenner, H., Fraisse, E., Zschenderlein, B.,
Daniel, U., Schuberth, S and Fliedner, T. M. (1996). Older workers in the
construction industry: results of a routine health examination and a five year follow
up. Occupational and Environmental Medicine; 53:686-691
Barrientos M. C., Campbell-Lendrum D, Steenland K. (2004) Occupational
Noise. Environment Burden Disease. Series 9.
Bell, D and Waclawski, E. (2008). Audiometry for Noise Exposed Workers
NHS OHS Guidance, November.
Carletti, E. (2013). A Perception-Based Method for the Noise Control of
Construction Machines, Archieves of Acoustics, Vol. 38. (2) pp. 253–258.
Ming, C. C., Tang, S. K. and Wong, H. (2009). A Statistical Model for Detecting
Jumps and Decaying Pulses In The Presence of a Background Noise. Applied
Acoustics.70, 498-506.
Chang, T., Jain, R., Wang, C., Chan, C. (2003). Effects of Occupational
Noise Exposure on Blood Pressure. Journal Occup Environ Med; 45:1289–1296
Ciorba, A., Benatti, A., Bianchini, C., Aimoni, C., Volpato, S., R.Bovo.,
Martini, A. (2011). High frequency hearing loss in the elderly: effect of age and
noise exposure in an Italian group. Journal of Laryngology & Otology 125, 776–780.
D. Zheng, D., Cai, X., Song, H. and Chen, T. (1996). Study on Personal
Noise Exposure in China. Applied Acotutics. Vol. 48, No. I, pp. 57
93
Davies, H. W., Teschke, K., Kennedy, S. M., Hodgson, M. R., Hertzman, C.,
and Demers, P. A. (2005). Occupational Exposure to Noise and Mortality From
Acute Myocardial Infarction. Journal of Epidemiology; Vol 16: 25–32)
Eaton, S. (2000). Constuction Noise. Workers Compensation Board of BC,
Engineering Section. Report. Ref. No:0135-20. Project No 7-11-99284.
Edelson, J., Neitzal, R., Meischke, H., Danielle, W., Shepperd, L., Stover, B.,
and Seixas, N. (2009). Predictors of Hearing Protection Use in Construction
Workers. Ann. Occup. Hyg.Vol. 53, No. 6, pp. 605–615
Fausti, S. A., Wilmington, D. J., Helt, P. V., Helt, W. J., Martin, D. K.
(2005). Hearing health and care: The need for improved hearing loss prevention and
hearing conservation practices, Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development,
Volume 42(4), 45–62
Fernández, M. D., Quintana, S., Chavarría, N., Ballesteros, J. A. (2008).
Noise exposure of workers of the construction sector. Applied Acoustics 70, 753-760.
Fernandez, M. D., Recuero, M., Blas, J. M. (2010). Definition of a labelling
code for the noise emitted by machines. Applied Acoustics. 69; 141–146
for Remediation; A Review and Analysis. AIHA Journal, 63, 768-789.
Gannoruwa, A., Ruwanpura, J. Y. (2007). Construction Noise Prediction and
Barrier Optimization Using Special Purpose Simulation. Proceedings of the 2007
Winter Simulation Conference.Canada.
Gopinath, B., Thiagalingam, A., Teber, E., Mitchell, P. (2011). Exposure to
workplace noise and the risk of cardiovascular disease events and mortality among
older adults. Preventive Medicine 53. 390–394.
Hamoda, M. F. (2008). Modeling of Construction Noise for Environmental
Impact Assessment. Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, Vol. 13. No.
1.
Hansen, C. H. (2001). Fundamentals of Acoustics. World Health
Organization, Geneva.
Haron, Z., Abidin, M. Z., Han, L. M., Yahya, K., Jahya, Z., Said, K. M.,
Saim, A. A. (2014). Noise Exposure Among Machine Operators on Construction
Sites in South Johor, MalaysiaAdvanced Materials Research Vols. 838-841, 2507-
2512.
94
Hattis, D. (1998). Occupational Noise Sources and Exposures in Construction
Industries. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. Vol. 4, No. 6, pp. 1417-1441
Health and Safety Executive. (2013). Noise Exposure Monitoring in
Malaysia.
Hong, O. S. (2005). Hearing loss among operating engineers in American
construction industry. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 78: 565–574
Kujawa, S. G. and Liberman, M. C. (2006). Acceleration of Age-Related
Hearing Loss by Early NoiseExposure: Evidence of a Misspent Youth.
Neuroscience, 26(7):2, pp 115–2123.
Kurmis, A. P. and Apps, S. A. (2007). Occupationally-Acquired Noise-
Induced Hearing Loss: A Senseless Workplace Hazard.International Journal of
Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health 20(2):127 – 136
Legris, M., Poulin, P. (1998). Noise Exposure Profile Among Heavy
Equipment Operators, Associated Laborers, and Crane Operators. American
Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 59:774–778
Lercher, P., Hortnagl, J., Kofler, W. W. (1993). Work noise annoyance and
blood pressure: combined effects with stressful working conditions. Int Arch Occup
Environ Health. Vol 65, pp 23-28
Lusk, S. L., Hong, O. S., Ronis, D. L., and Eakin, B. L., Kerr, M. J., Early,
M. R. (1999). Effectiveness of an Intervention to Increase Construction Workers’
Use of Hearing Protection. Human Factors. Vol. 41, No. 3, September 1999, pp.
487–494
Miyakita, T. and Ueda, A. (1997). Estimates of Workers with Noise –Induced
Hearing Loss and Population at Risk. Journal of Sound and Vibration. 205 (4) , 441-
449
Morata, T. C., Fiorini, A. C., Fischer, F. M., Colacioppo, S., Wallingford, K.
M., Krieg, E. F., Dunn, D. E., Gozzoli, L., Padrao, M. A., Cesar, C. L. (1997).
Toluene-induced hearing loss among rotogravure printing workers. Scand J Work
Environ Health 23(4):289-298.
Morata, T. C., Themann, C. L., Randolph, R. L., Verbsky, B. L., Byrne, D.
C., Reeves, E. R. (2005). Working in Noise with a Hearing Loss: Perceptions from
95
Workers, Supervisors, and Hearing Conservation Program Managers.Ear and
Hearing. Vol 26, 529-545.
Muchenje, L. S. (2008). Determination Of Backup Alarm Masked Threshold
In Construction Noise. Master of Science
Muller, J., and Janssen, T. (2008). Impact of occupational noise on pure-tone
threshold and distortion product otoacoustic emissions after one workday. Hearing
Research 246; 9–22
Nachtigall, P. E., Pawloski, J. L. and Au, W. W. L. (2003).Temporary
threshold shifts and recovery following noise exposure in the Atlantic bottlenosed
dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). J. Acoustical Society of America.Vol. 113, No. 6
Neitzel, R., and Seixas, N. (2005). The Effectiveness of Hearing Protection
Among Construction Workers. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
2: 227–238
Neitzel, R., Seixas, N. S., Camp, J., Yost,. M. (1999). An Assessment of
Occupational Noise Exposures in Four Construction Trades. American Industrial
Hygiene Association Journal. Vol 60, pp 807–817
Nelson, D. I., Nelson, R. Y., Concha-Barrientos, M., Fingerhut, P. H. M.
(2005). The global burden of occupational noise-induced hearing loss. American
Journal of Industrial Medicine. Copyright owner: Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Palmer, K. T., Griffin, M. J., Syddall, H. E., Davis, A., Pannett, B., Coggon,
D. (2002). Occupational Exposure toNoise and The Attributable Burden of Hearing
Difficulties in Great Britain.Occup Environ Med. 59 pp 634–639.
Peterson, J. S., Kovalchik, P. G. and Matetic, R. J. (2002). Research engineer,
noise control team leader and hearing loss prevention branch chief, National Institute
for Occupational Safety and Health, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Pinto, A., Nunes, I. L., Ribeiro, R. A. (2011). Occupational risk assessment in
construction industry – Overview and reflection. Safety Science 49, 616–624.
Whitaker, C. K.. R., Seixas, N. S., Sheppard, L., Neitzel, R. (2004). Accuracy
of task recall for epidemiological exposure assessment to construction noise. Occup
Environ Med 61:135–142.
Rehman, M. Z., Nawi, N. M., Ghazali, M. I. (2011). Noise Induced Hearing
Loss (NIHL) Prediction in Humans Using Modified Back Propagation Neural
96
Network. Proceeding of The International Conference on Advance Science
Engineering and Information Technology. 14-15 January 2011. Putrajaya, Malaysia.
Rybalko, N. and Syka, J. (2005). Effect of noise exposure on gap detection in
rats. Hearing Research, Vol 20, pp 63–72
Safework SA (2008). Noise in The Workplace. What you should know
Government of South Australia.
Seixas, N. S., Goldman, B., Sheppard, L., Neitzel, R., Norton, S., Kujawa, S.
G. (2005). Prospective Noise Induced Changes to Hearing Among Construction
Industry Apprentices.Occup Environ Med Vol 62:309–317
Seixas, N. S., Ren, K., Neitzel, R., Camp, J., Yost, M. (2001). Noise
Exposure amongConstruction Electricians. AIHAJ 62:615–621.
Shone, G., Altschuler, R. A., Miller, J. M. and Nuttall, A. L. (1999). The
effect of noise exposure on the aging ear. Hearing Research, 56 (1991) 173-178
Spencer, E. (2007). Heavy Construction Equipment Noise Study Using
Dosimetry and Time-Motion Studies. Noise Control Engineering Journa.l Vol 55,
No 4 pp 408-416
Suter, A. H. (2002). Construction Noise: Exposure, Effects, and the Potential
Suter, A. H. (2012). Engineering Controls for Occupational Noise Exposure;
The Best Way to Save Hearing.Sound/Vibration. 45th Anniversary Issues.Toppila,
E., Pyykko, I., Paakkonen, R. (2009). Evaluation of the Increased Accident Risk
From Workplace Noise. International Journal of Occupational Safety and
Ergonomics (JOSE). Vol. 15 (2), pp 155–162
Van Dijk, F. J. H. (1990). Epidemiological Research On Non-Auditory
Effects Of Occupational Noise Exposure. Environment International, Vol. 16, pp.
405-409.
Van Kempen, E. E. M. M., Kruize, H., Hendriek C., Boshuizen, Ameling, C.
B., Staatsen , B. A. M. and de Hollander, A. E. M. (2002). The Association between
Noise Exposure and Blood Pressure and Ischemic Heart Disease: A Meta-analysis.
Environ Health Perspect 110:307–317.
Yoshioka, M., Uchida, Y., Sugiura, S., Ando, F., Shimokata, H., Nomura, H.,
Nakashima, T. (2010). The impact of arterial sclerosis on hearing with and without
top related