| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2022 | Volume
: 24
| Issue : 115 | Page : 237--247 |
A Comparison of Self-Reported Nonoccupational Noise Exposure in a Large Cohort of Listeners
Kendell Adson, Kamryn James, Nirmal Srinivasan, Saradha Ananthakrishnan
Department of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, Towson University, Towson, Maryland, USA
Correspondence Address:
Nirmal Srinivasan
Department of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, Towson University, 8000 York Road, Towson, Maryland 21252
USA
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/nah.nah_24_22
Objective: A variety of questionnaires have been developed to describe and quantify occupational and nonoccupational noise exposure, which are associated with hearing loss and tinnitus. The main aim of this study was to compare and contrast three commonly used nonoccupational noise exposure measurement questionnaires in a group of young adults. Materials and Methods: A total of 197 participants were recruited for this study. All the participants completed three commonly used nonoccupational noise exposure measurement questionnaires via Qualtrics software (Qualtrics, Provo, UT). General patterns in the nature of noise exposure were highlighted and statistical agreement and correlations between the three instruments were calculated. Comparisons were made between self-percept of noise exposure and annual noise exposure metrics obtained using questionnaires. Results: Strong statistical agreement and correlation (r = 0.57, P < 0.001) was found between the selected instruments similar in their constructs of noise exposure. When compared to quantified scores of noise exposure, self-report of exposure to loud noise was highly sensitive but associated with poor specificity (3.61%) and a high false-positive rate (96.38%). The majority of participants reported exposure to noise from listening to music and attending loud recreational activities, with a differential effect of sex on average annual noise exposure values depending on the questionnaire used. Conclusions: The outcomes of this analysis could assist in comparing noise exposure quantifications across research studies, and determining if and how these questionnaires may be utilized clinically to effectively identify and counsel those at risk for noise-induced hearing loss.
[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
|
Search Pubmed for
