加强听力保护:评估创新训练模式以获得最佳配戴效果。

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Alessandra Giannella Samelli, Camila Maia Rabelo, Daiane Alves Martins, Indra Akina Shinya, Vitor Martins Guesser, Clayton Henrique Rocha
{"title":"加强听力保护:评估创新训练模式以获得最佳配戴效果。","authors":"Alessandra Giannella Samelli, Camila Maia Rabelo, Daiane Alves Martins, Indra Akina Shinya, Vitor Martins Guesser, Clayton Henrique Rocha","doi":"10.23749/mdl.v116i3.16606","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Measuring the effectiveness of training in properly fitting hearing protection devices (HPDs) is crucial, as it directly influences their attenuation. We assessed an earplug's personal attenuation ratings (PAR) following various intervention modalities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The sample consisted of 52 adults without experience using hearing protection devices (HPD). The Personal Attenuation Rating (PAR) was evaluated through real-ear attenuation at threshold (REAT) and microphone-in real-ear (MIRE) measurements after participants fitted the HPD as they saw fit. Participants were then randomly assigned to groups and given instructions on HPD fitting as follows: (G1) individual in-person demonstration; (G2) package reading; (G3) video; (G4) no intervention. PAR was subsequently reassessed. Data analysis was conducted using ANOVA and the Fisher Exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pre-intervention assessments showed no significant differences between the groups using either method. After training, G1, G2, and G3 significantly increased the PAR compared to G4, through both processes. The comparison of PAR post and pre-intervention revealed significant differences for G1, G2, and G3 (REAT) as well as for G1 and G3 (MIRE), in contrast to G4. Regarding \"pass\" and \"fail\" outcomes through MIRE, G1, G2, and G3 had more \"pass\" results after the intervention, compared to G4.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intervention, regardless of modality, effectively improved correct earplug HPD fitting, evidenced by increased PAR and higher rates of individuals achieving sufficient attenuation. Individual in-person demonstrations and video instructions proved to be the most effective training modalities.</p>","PeriodicalId":49833,"journal":{"name":"Medicina Del Lavoro","volume":"116 3","pages":"16606"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12199022/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enhancing Hearing Protection: Evaluating Innovative Training Modalities for Optimal Fitting Outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Alessandra Giannella Samelli, Camila Maia Rabelo, Daiane Alves Martins, Indra Akina Shinya, Vitor Martins Guesser, Clayton Henrique Rocha\",\"doi\":\"10.23749/mdl.v116i3.16606\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Measuring the effectiveness of training in properly fitting hearing protection devices (HPDs) is crucial, as it directly influences their attenuation. We assessed an earplug's personal attenuation ratings (PAR) following various intervention modalities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The sample consisted of 52 adults without experience using hearing protection devices (HPD). The Personal Attenuation Rating (PAR) was evaluated through real-ear attenuation at threshold (REAT) and microphone-in real-ear (MIRE) measurements after participants fitted the HPD as they saw fit. Participants were then randomly assigned to groups and given instructions on HPD fitting as follows: (G1) individual in-person demonstration; (G2) package reading; (G3) video; (G4) no intervention. PAR was subsequently reassessed. Data analysis was conducted using ANOVA and the Fisher Exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pre-intervention assessments showed no significant differences between the groups using either method. After training, G1, G2, and G3 significantly increased the PAR compared to G4, through both processes. The comparison of PAR post and pre-intervention revealed significant differences for G1, G2, and G3 (REAT) as well as for G1 and G3 (MIRE), in contrast to G4. Regarding \\\"pass\\\" and \\\"fail\\\" outcomes through MIRE, G1, G2, and G3 had more \\\"pass\\\" results after the intervention, compared to G4.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intervention, regardless of modality, effectively improved correct earplug HPD fitting, evidenced by increased PAR and higher rates of individuals achieving sufficient attenuation. Individual in-person demonstrations and video instructions proved to be the most effective training modalities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49833,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicina Del Lavoro\",\"volume\":\"116 3\",\"pages\":\"16606\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12199022/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicina Del Lavoro\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23749/mdl.v116i3.16606\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina Del Lavoro","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23749/mdl.v116i3.16606","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:测量正确安装听力保护装置(HPDs)培训的有效性是至关重要的,因为它直接影响到它们的衰减。我们评估了不同干预方式下耳塞的个人衰减等级(PAR)。方法:52名没有使用过听力保护装置(HPD)的成年人作为样本。个人衰减等级(PAR)是通过实耳阈值衰减(REAT)和实耳麦克风(MIRE)测量来评估的,在参与者装配了他们认为合适的HPD后。然后,参与者被随机分配到小组,并给予HPD装配指导如下:(G1)个人亲自演示;(G2)包装读取;(G3)视频;(G4)无干预。PAR随后被重新评估。数据分析采用方差分析和Fisher精确检验。结果:干预前评估显示两种方法组间无显著差异。训练后,G1、G2和G3均较G4显著提高PAR。干预后和干预前PAR的比较显示G1、G2和G3 (REAT)以及G1和G3 (MIRE)与G4相比有显著差异。对于通过MIRE的“合格”和“不合格”结果,干预后G1、G2和G3的“合格”结果多于G4。结论:无论采用何种方式进行干预,都能有效地改善耳塞HPD的正确贴合,PAR增加,个体达到充分衰减的比例更高。事实证明,个人亲自示范和视频指导是最有效的培训方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enhancing Hearing Protection: Evaluating Innovative Training Modalities for Optimal Fitting Outcomes.

Background: Measuring the effectiveness of training in properly fitting hearing protection devices (HPDs) is crucial, as it directly influences their attenuation. We assessed an earplug's personal attenuation ratings (PAR) following various intervention modalities.

Methods: The sample consisted of 52 adults without experience using hearing protection devices (HPD). The Personal Attenuation Rating (PAR) was evaluated through real-ear attenuation at threshold (REAT) and microphone-in real-ear (MIRE) measurements after participants fitted the HPD as they saw fit. Participants were then randomly assigned to groups and given instructions on HPD fitting as follows: (G1) individual in-person demonstration; (G2) package reading; (G3) video; (G4) no intervention. PAR was subsequently reassessed. Data analysis was conducted using ANOVA and the Fisher Exact test.

Results: Pre-intervention assessments showed no significant differences between the groups using either method. After training, G1, G2, and G3 significantly increased the PAR compared to G4, through both processes. The comparison of PAR post and pre-intervention revealed significant differences for G1, G2, and G3 (REAT) as well as for G1 and G3 (MIRE), in contrast to G4. Regarding "pass" and "fail" outcomes through MIRE, G1, G2, and G3 had more "pass" results after the intervention, compared to G4.

Conclusions: Intervention, regardless of modality, effectively improved correct earplug HPD fitting, evidenced by increased PAR and higher rates of individuals achieving sufficient attenuation. Individual in-person demonstrations and video instructions proved to be the most effective training modalities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medicina Del Lavoro
Medicina Del Lavoro 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
42
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: La Medicina del Lavoro is a bimonthly magazine founded in 1901 by L. Devoto, and then directed by L. Prieti, E. Vigliani, V. Foà, P.A. Bertazzi (Milan). Now directed by A. Mutti (Parma), the magazine is the official Journal of the Italian Society of Occupational Medicine (SIML), aimed at training and updating all professionals involved in prevention and cure of occupational diseases.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信