The aim of this study was to examine the music exposure and hearing of disc jockeys (DJs). We conducted personal noise dosimetry on 30 DJs and interviewed them regarding their hearing and their job. We conducted pure-tone audiometry, and transient and distortion product otoacoustic emissions before their exposure to music during their work. This first test was preceded by a period of at least 12 hours without exposure to music or noise. We repeated the pure-tone audiometry and otoacoustic emissions after their music exposure, and poorer performances were registered in all retests. The nightclubs' average sound level ranged between 93.2 to 109.7 dB(A). Statistical analysis showed significant bilateral temporary threshold shifts at all frequencies between audiometry performed pre- and post-exposure to amplified music. Transient otoacoustic emissions showed a significant difference in bilateral amplitude and reproducibility at all frequency bands tested. The comparison of distortion product otoacoustic emissions results pre- and post-music exposure showed there was a significant difference in amplitude. Music exposure was associated with temporary and permanent auditory dysfunction among professional DJs.

Because of the fishermen's increased risk of hearing disorders, a variety of solutions are recommended, which include dissemination of information on control of noise emissions generated by the boat engines, audiological care, and hearing loss prevention services tailored to workers from small-scale fisheries.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the workers' perception of comfort and use aspects regarding two types of hearing protectors (shell and earplug), in three units from a lumbering company, with different implantation times for Hearing Preservation Programs.METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study comparing 440 workers' perception of hearing protectors, from three companies in Paraná State (Brazil), with different times for Hearing Preservation Programs. Two closed questionnaires were applied (9 and 10 questions, respectively), with a scale of answers varying from 1 to 5 (Likert's scale) regarding the perception of the comfort of hearing protectors. Then, audiometry results were analyzed.RESULTS: About 17.5% presented audiogram examinations with alterations. With regard to the questionnaire about the comfort perception, the importance of noise attenuation (mean of 4.25) was the most relevant aspect, followed by communication possibility (mean of 4.15). In the protector assessment, Unit A with more Hearing Preservation Program time presented better scores for both the worker's perception of important aspects regarding hearing protector and for the assessment of the used hearing protector. There was a significant difference on communication difficulty with the use of a hearing protector among workers with normal and altered audiograms (p=0.0371). With regard to the global comfort in the comparison of workers using the shell-type hearing protector with those using insert-type hearing protectors, there was no difference (p=0.2264), irrespective of the type of the unit.CONCLUSION: In general, the unit workers presented a good perception of the important aspects about the hearing protection use of both types of hearing protectors.

Introduction The occupational risk due to high levels of noise in the hospital environment has been recognized, and the National Agency of Sanitary Surveillance of the Ministry of Health recommends evaluation and control of noise in hospital areas. Objectives To assess the sound environment in the emergency ward of a general trauma reference hospital in the city of Curitiba, Parana State, Brazil. Methods In this descriptive study, noise levels were assessed on mornings, afternoons, and evenings using an integrating Bruel & Kjaer (Denmark) calibrated sound level meter, type 2230. Ten indoor points in the emergency ward were assessed; the helicopter as well as several available pieces of equipment in the ward were assessed individually. Results Noise levels in sound pressure level ambiance [dBA] ranged from 56.6 to 68.8. The afternoon period was the noisiest. The helicopter at 119 dBA and the cast saw at 90 dBA were the noisiest equipment, and the lowest noise level found was the activated oximeter at 61.0 dBA. Conclusion In all assessed points, noise levels were above the comfort levels recommended by the Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (1987), which may harm users' and professionals' health as well as influence professional performance in the emergency ward. Sound pressure levels of the helicopter and cast saw reach high hearing hazard levels, requiring professionals to use individual protection equipment, and point to the need for creation and implementation of effective control measures of noise levels in emergency wards.