Quieting Weinberg 5C: A case study in hospital noise control

MacLeod, M. K.; Dunn, J W; Busch‐Vishniac, Ilene J.; West, James E.; Reedy, Anita

doi:10.1121/1.2723655

Cited by 34 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Preliminary research on the use of special sound-absorbing materials in ICU's confirms the positive impacts of this measure. 28,42 Another cost-effective alternative is the use of earplugs or earmuffs, which has also been subjected to research. 43,44 It should be noted that this measure only applies to hospital patients and not to hospital staff.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Noise in an intensive care unit

Salandin

Arnold

Kornadt

2011

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients and staff in hospitals are exposed to a complex sound environment with rather high noise levels. In intensive care units, the main noise sources are hospital staff on duty and medical equipment, which generates both operating noise and acoustic alarms. Although noise in most cases is produced during activities for the purpose of saving life, noise can induce significant changes in the depth and quality of sleep and negatively affect health in general. Results of a survey of hospital staff are presented, as well as measurements in two German hospital wards: a standard two-bed room and a special intermediate care unit (IMC-Unit), each in a different intensive care unit (ICU). Sound pressure data were collected over a 48 hour period and converted into different levels (L(AFeq), L(AFmax) L(AFmin), L(AF 5%)), as well as a rating level L(Ar), which is used to take tonality and impulsiveness into account. An analysis of the survey and the measured data, together with a comparison of thresholds of national and international regulations and standards describe the acoustic situation and its likely noise effects on staff and patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Noise in an intensive care unit

Salandin

Arnold

Kornadt

2011

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have shown that installing sound-absorbing ceiling tiles and panels results in reduced noise levels and perceptions of noise leading to improved speech intelligibility and reduced perceived work pressure among staff (Blomkvist et al, 2005;MacLeod et al, 2007). Single-bed rooms are probably the single most-effective strategy for reducing noise in wards (Joseph and Ulrich, 2007).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Assessment of noise pollution in and around a sensitive zone in North India and its non-auditory impacts

Ravindra

Singh

Tripathy

et al. 2016

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Noise pollution in hospitals is recognized as a serious health hazard. Considering this, the current study aimed to map the noise pollution levels and to explore the self reported non-auditory effects of noise in a tertiary medical institute. The study was conducted in an 1800-bedded tertiary hospital where 27 sites (outdoor, indoor, road side and residential areas) were monitored for exposure to noise using Sound Level Meter for 24h. A detailed noise survey was also conducted around the sampling sites using a structured questionnaire to understand the opinion of the public regarding the impact of noise on their daily lives. The equivalent sound pressure level (Leq) was found higher than the permissible limits at all the sites both during daytime and night. The maximum equivalent sound pressure level (Lmax) during the day was observed higher (>80dB) at the emergency and around the main entrance of the hospital campus. Almost all the respondents (97%) regarded traffic as the major source of noise. About three-fourths (74%) reported irritation with loud noise whereas 40% of respondents reported headache due to noise. Less than one-third of respondents (29%) reported loss of sleep due to noise and 8% reported hypertension, which could be related to the disturbance caused due to noise. Noise levels in and around the hospital was well above the permissible standards. The recent Global Burden of Disease highlights the increasing risk of non communicable diseases. The non-auditory effects studied in the current work add to the risk factors associated with non communicable diseases. Hence, there is need to address the issue of noise pollution and associated health risks specially for vulnerable population.

show abstract

“…Another effective strategy in controlling the levels of sound absorption is considered. In a study using fiberglass acoustic panels on the ceiling and walls of the oncology section 5 dB of ambient noise level was reduced (19,20).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the Noise level at Qazvin University Hospital’s Intensive Care Units

Nikpey¹,

Ghalenoei²,

Variani³

et al. 2015

Biotech Health Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Noise at Intensive Care Units (ICU) has an adverse effect on patients and ICU staff. There are some evidences that sleep, recovery from critical illness and average background noise in hospitals as recommended by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and World Health Organization (WHO) should not exceed 30 A-weighted decibel (dBA) and peaks during night time should be less than 40 dBA. This survey was conducted to measure noise levels and their relationship with the time of the day and location in the ICU. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to measure noise levels and evaluate their relationship with time of day and location in the ICU. Materials and Methods: This cross sectional study was conducted in a public university hospital, namely Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran. Noise levels were measured with SLM Sound level meter (model: Tes-1443) during 24 hours with the equivalent sound level (LEQ), maximum (Max) and peak sound pressure based on the ISO 9612.this tool can measure in the range of 30 to 110 dB dynamic network. While frequency A, fast time scale networks with 125 ms fast response microphones were selected. This method says that measuring point must have distance 1.5 meter from the wall at a height of 1.25 m above ground level. At the bedside of patients measurement done by 3 TES model 1353 H Tool by a Taiwanese company. Results: This survey showed that the Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) in ICU was much higher than the standard level. The Maximum Sound Level (Lmax) in most places was 84 -89 dBA and just in one measurement in the Internal ICU reached 90 dB. The average level of Leq in ICU was 70 dB. Conclusions: Equivalent noise level and Noise Criteria in ward remarkably exceeds the standards levels. This condition will be produce Dangerous circumstances for admitted patients in ward.

show abstract

Quieting Weinberg 5C: A case study in hospital noise control

Cited by 34 publications

References 16 publications

Noise in an intensive care unit

Noise in an intensive care unit

Assessment of noise pollution in and around a sensitive zone in North India and its non-auditory impacts

Evaluating the Noise level at Qazvin University Hospital’s Intensive Care Units

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About