Home Email this page Print this page Bookmark this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size
Noise & Health  
 CURRENT ISSUE    PAST ISSUES    AHEAD OF PRINT    SEARCH   GET E-ALERTS    
 
 Next article
 Previous article
Table of Contents

Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Citation Manager
Access Statistics
Reader Comments
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed5584    
    Printed195    
    Emailed2    
    PDF Downloaded178    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 10    

Recommend this journal

 

 ARTICLES
Year : 2004  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 24  |  Page : 75--84

Does the presentation of audiometric test data have a positive effect on the perceptions of workplace noise and noise exposure avoidance?


1 National Acoustic Laboratories, Chatswood, Australia
2 New England Area Health Service, Tamworth, NSW, Australia

Correspondence Address:
W Williams
National Acoustic Laboratories, 126 Greville Street, Chatswood, NSW 2067
Australia
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


PMID: 15703143

Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

Research and 'common knowledge' has for many years accepted that education and feedback supplied to individuals during and immediately after workplace health assessments provides valuable information to workers about their health. Further, if more relevant and detailed information could be supplied then awareness and preventative action may increase proportionately. This research carried out with a rural Australian population has shown that preventative action did not increase in proportion to a corresponding increase in the amount and variety of information provided in connection with hearing health status. Two research groups underwent hearing tests, both with pure tone audiometry (PTA) while the second group also underwent otoacoustic emission (OAE) testing. Test results were presented to the subjects at the conclusion of their test session. An analysis of questionnaire responses at six week and twelve months follow up showed that more information did not result in increased preventative action. Barriers seem to exist such that individuals feel that they are not able to effectively act to reduce overall noise exposure. While self-efficacy initially increased, it declined to close to its initial value over the longer period. Other measures such as perceived susceptibility to hearing loss and the benefits of exposure reduction significantly increased and remained at the same increased level after twelve months. So, while overall awareness of noise and the risks of exposure were increased after both types of hearing test there was no increased hearing health benefit due to additional testing and hearing information.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article