Search

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) evaluated continuous and impact noise exposures and hearing loss among workers at a hammer forge company. Full-shift personal noise exposure measurements were collected on forge workers across 15 different job titles; impact noise characteristics and one-third octave band noise levels were assessed at the forge hammers; and 4,750 historic audiometric test records for 483 workers were evaluated for hearing loss trends. Nearly all workers' noise exposures exceeded regulatory and/or recommended exposure limits. Workers working in jobs at or near the hammers had full-shift time-weighted average noise exposures above 100 decibels, A-weighted. Impact noise at the hammers reached up to 148 decibels. Analysis of audiometric test records showed that 82% of workers had experienced a significant threshold shift, as defined by NIOSH, and 63% had experienced a standard threshold shift, as defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). All workers with an OSHA standard threshold shift had a preceding NIOSH significant threshold shift which occurred, on average, about 7 years prior. This evaluation highlights forge workers' exposures to high levels of noise, including impact noise, and how their hearing worsened with age and length of employment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Responses to complaints about low-frequency noise and infrasound at workplaces have not been extensively documented in the literature. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health evaluated low-frequency noise, infrasound, and health symptoms among employees of an organization providing services to homeless persons. The organization's campus was evacuated after two loud noise and vibration incidents related to methane flare on an adjacent landfill. Employees were interviewed about health symptoms, perceptions of noise, and how the incidents were handled. Available medical records were reviewed. Sound level and noise frequency measurements taken in vacated campus buildings not during these incidents revealed overall levels across frequencies up to 100 hertz were 64 to 73 dB, well below those associated with adverse health effects. However, an unbalanced frequency spectrum could have contributed to the unusual sounds or vibrations reported before the first incident. Some symptoms predating the incidents are consistent with low-frequency noise exposure but are also common and nonspecific. Most interviewed employees (57%) reported being uncomfortable returning to work on the campus. Multiple factors such as noise characteristics, health effects, and employee perceptions need to be considered when assessing health concerns related to low-frequency noise and infrasound. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Influenza can spread among students, teachers, and staff in school settings. Vaccination is the most effective method to prevent influenza. We determined 2012-2013 influenza vaccination coverage among school employees, assessed knowledge and attitudes regarding the vaccine, and determined factors associated with vaccine receipt. Methods: We surveyed 412 (49%) of 841 employees at 1 suburban Ohio school district in March 2013. The Web-based survey assessed personal and work characteristics, vaccine receipt, and knowledge and attitudes regarding the vaccine. Results: Overall, 238 (58%) respondents reported getting the 2012-2013 influenza vaccine. The most common reason for getting the vaccine was to protect oneself or one's family (87%). Beliefs that the vaccine was not needed (32%) or that it was not effective (21%) were the most common reasons for not getting it. Factors independently associated with vaccine receipt were having positive attitudes toward the vaccine, feeling external pressure to get it, and feeling personal control over whether to get it. Conclusions: Influenza vaccine coverage among school employees should be improved. Messages encouraging school employees to get the vaccine should address misconceptions about the vaccine. Employers should use methods to maximize employee vaccination as part of a comprehensive influenza prevention program.

The article discusses an evaluation made by the Health Hazard Evaluation Program following a request from a federal agency concerned about firearms instructor's exposures to high intensity impulsive noise from weapons firing using during employee tactical training. Recommendations included the installation of noise controls at the outdoor and indoor ranges, the use of noise suppressors on firearms and the use of the most protective criterion to limit the number of daily gunfire exposures.

We determined the prevalence of influenza-like illness (ILI) among employees of a suburban Ohio school district. In a survey of 412 of 841 employees (49%), 120 (29%) reported ILI symptoms during the school year, and 92 (77%) reported working while ill. Age ≥50 years and asthma were significantly associated with reporting of ILI symptoms. Encouraging school employees to receive the seasonal influenza vaccine and to stay home when ill should be part of a comprehensive influenza prevention strategy., (Published by Mosby, Inc.)

Background: A cluster of influenza-like illness (ILI) among physicians in training during the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic (pH1N1) led to a health hazard evaluation., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study to examine exposures, infection control practices, ILI prevalence, and transmission among physicians in training at 4 affiliated hospitals during the pandemic. We administered an electronic survey and met with physicians in training and hospital personnel., Results: Of the 88 responding physicians, 85% reported exposure to pH1N1. Exposures occurred at work from patients or coworkers and outside of work from coworkers, household members, or the community. Thirteen cases of ILI were reported in May-June 2009; 10 respondents reported working while ill (duration, 1-4 days). Between 13% and 88% of respondents knew which personal protective equipment (PPE) was recommended when caring for influenza patients at the 4 hospitals. The most common reasons for not using PPE were not knowing that a patient had pH1N1 or ILI and not having PPE readily available., Conclusions: Physicians in training have gaps in their knowledge of and adherence to recommended PPE and compliance with work restrictions. Our findings underscore the importance of installing isolation precaution signage, making PPE readily available near patients with influenza, and facilitating work restrictions for ill health care personnel., (Published by Mosby, Inc.)