Skip Navigation



Occupational Medicine Advance Access published online on August 10, 2009
Occupational Medicine, doi:10.1093/occmed/kqp114
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rashaad Hansia, M.
Right arrow Articles by Dickinson, D.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rashaad Hansia, M.
Right arrow Articles by Dickinson, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Short Report

Hearing protection device usage at a South African gold mine

Mohammed Rashaad Hansia and David Dickinson

Wits Business School, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

Background Occupational noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) occurs in many industries despite interventions such as hearing conservation programmes.

Aims To determine the actual and reported use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) in noise-exposed gold mine workers and their reported knowledge, attitudes and practices relating to NIHL and HPDs.

Methods A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted in which 101 noise-exposed mine workers were interviewed and their use of HPDs observed.

Results Thirteen percent of respondents erroneously indicated that their workplaces were not noisy, 16% did not appreciate noise as a hearing loss hazard, 6% did not know that HPDs protect hearing and 3% believed that HPDs did not protect hearing. While 93% of respondents reported using HPDs, only 50% were observed to be doing so. Observed use was less among lower skilled workers, and, despite training, 8% of respondents claimed never to have been informed about the benefits of HPDs. Consistent and continuous use was reported by 24% and 31% of respondents, respectively. Reasons for not using HPDs included discomfort. Most respondents (57%) preferred training methods other than the current computer-assisted training.

Conclusions The persistence of NIHL may be explained by limited use of HPDs, along with the suboptimal knowledge of noise as a hazard, workplace noisiness and the benefits of HPDs among some workers. Concurrent with engineering controls, a range of HPDs should be available free of charge, and HPD training reviewed particularly for lower skilled workers.

Keywords      Gold mine workers; hearing defenders; hearing loss; personal protective equipment training

Correspondence to: Mohammed R. Hansia, PO Box 1482, Crown Mines, 2025 Gauteng, South Africa. Tel: +27 (0)84 699 1771; fax: +27 (0)86 653 2853; e-mail: mrhansia{at}gmail.com


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.