Management Tools for Occupational Noise Exposure Risks in the Workplace

This article proposes management tools to reduce the occupational risk for employees working in high-noise environments.

The relevance of the material presented is based on a study of actual employee morbidity compared to predictive methods. At our enterprise, an occupational health risk assessment was conducted for employees working in high-noise environments. The assessment was based on long-term noise level monitoring results from Special Assessment of Working Conditions (SAWC) and Industrial Environmental Control (IEC) records, as well as employee health data.

In a previous article, we discussed the decrease in the accuracy of predictive risk assessment methods due to imperfections in workplace noise exposure assessment methodologies. Today, we propose examining a second factor that affects research accuracy and, consequently, the cost-effectiveness of a company's preventive measures.

According to the GOST R ISO 1999-2017 predictive model, high noise levels can contribute to hearing loss in newly hired healthy individuals (aged 20 with no prior noise exposure) as early as 10 years later (with a 10% probability at noise levels up to 95 dB; 50-90% at noise levels of 95 and 100 dB, respectively). This leads to a loss of occupational fitness, the need for employee retraining, and new job placements. In workplaces with noise levels of 110 dB, there is a probability of developing deafness (in 10% of cases), which affects not only occupational but also general work capacity.

During the study, cases of significant hearing loss occurring earlier than calculated were noted.

A correlation was identified: employees in the occupations under review may have also been exposed to high noise levels while working in other roles and/or workplaces.

In this regard, we suggest considering our experience in creating management tools:

1. Before hiring candidates for specific roles, pay attention to their prior work experience involving exposure to high levels of industrial noise.
2. Conduct baseline audiological examinations before hiring, followed by annual audiogram monitoring to identify early signs of hearing loss and develop personalized preservation measures.
3. Create databases of noise levels for employees at every workplace where standards for this factor are exceeded. Understanding the professional path throughout a career will make risk assessment results more objective, help determine the contribution of specific workplaces or work areas to pathology development, and allow for the design of the most effective measures.
4. Develop similar occupational pathways as part of youth engagement programs (ages 18 to 35 inclusive). This will help increase the involvement of young employees in mutually beneficial cooperation aimed at preserving their health.

In conclusion, it must be emphasized that predictive risk assessment models are a convenient and important tool, but they provide only approximate, probabilistic values for expected hearing impairment. Using predictive models allows for the development of standard measures, which are not always satisfactory in terms of effectiveness. The management tools we have proposed will allow for the accumulation of factual, targeted data to improve the efficiency of risk management for those working in high-noise environments.