Journal of Occupational
Health and Epidemiology
Rafsanjan university Of medical sciences
Volume 11, Issue 3 (Summer 2022)
J Occup Health Epidemiol 2022, 11(3): 209-222 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
sheikhmozafari M J, Ahmadi O. Reliability and Validity Assessment of the Persian Version of the Noise Exposure Questionnaire (NEQ): An NIHL Predictor Tool. J Occup Health Epidemiol 2022; 11 (3) :209-222
URL: http://johe.rums.ac.ir/article-1-526-en.html
URL: http://johe.rums.ac.ir/article-1-526-en.html
Related article in
Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Similar articles
1- M.Sc. in Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
2- Assistant Prof., Dept. of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. ,o.ahmadi@modares.ac.ir
2- Assistant Prof., Dept. of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. ,
Article history
Received: 2021/12/23
Accepted: 2022/08/13
ePublished: 2022/09/20
Accepted: 2022/08/13
ePublished: 2022/09/20
Subject:
Occupational Health
Abstract: (1459 Views)
Background: Noise and noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) are the most prevalent workplace problems. The best way to prevent NIHL is to monitor people's annual noise exposure (ANE) using tools, such as questionnaires. The present study aims to assess reliability of the Persian version of the Noise Exposure Questionnaire (NEQ) and NIHL scores among workers.
Materials & Methods: This descriptive study was designed in 2021. The backward-forward technique was employed for the purpose of translation. The questionnaires were distributed among 70 male employees of an oil company in Assaluyeh City. To evaluate reliability, the test-retest method and Cronbach's alpha were employed. For the test-retest method, the questionnaires were dispensed at two separate times under similar conditions.
Results: Using Cronbach's alpha and ICC, reliability was calculated at 0.918 and 0.856, respectively. We found that the participants had performed activities of high sound levels over the past year. Although participation in some activities was high, the final ANE was below the highest risk levels, with 17.14% of the people having had the highest risk levels. Besides, the employees’ ANE had a significant correlation with their age and type of work shift. Additionally, the 1-Minute Noise Screen method was determined as an accurate tool in rapidly predicting those participants with the highest risk of NIHL.
Conclusions: The NEQ and 1-Minute Noise Screen were proved to be practical tools for estimating individuals’ ANE and identifying participants with the highest risk of NIHL. These tools help professionals focus on protection measures to prevent hearing impairment.
Materials & Methods: This descriptive study was designed in 2021. The backward-forward technique was employed for the purpose of translation. The questionnaires were distributed among 70 male employees of an oil company in Assaluyeh City. To evaluate reliability, the test-retest method and Cronbach's alpha were employed. For the test-retest method, the questionnaires were dispensed at two separate times under similar conditions.
Results: Using Cronbach's alpha and ICC, reliability was calculated at 0.918 and 0.856, respectively. We found that the participants had performed activities of high sound levels over the past year. Although participation in some activities was high, the final ANE was below the highest risk levels, with 17.14% of the people having had the highest risk levels. Besides, the employees’ ANE had a significant correlation with their age and type of work shift. Additionally, the 1-Minute Noise Screen method was determined as an accurate tool in rapidly predicting those participants with the highest risk of NIHL.
Conclusions: The NEQ and 1-Minute Noise Screen were proved to be practical tools for estimating individuals’ ANE and identifying participants with the highest risk of NIHL. These tools help professionals focus on protection measures to prevent hearing impairment.
References
1. Taban E, Soltani P, Berardi U, Putra A, Mousavi SM, Faridan M, et al. Measurement, modeling, and optimization of sound absorption performance of Kenaf fibers for building applications. Build Environ. 2020;180:107087. [DOI]
2. Sheikhmozafari MJ, Mohammad Alizadeh P, Ahmadi O, Mazloomi B. Assessment of Noise Effect on Employee Comfort in an Open-Plan Office: Validation of an Assessment Questionnaire. J Occup Health Epidemiol. 2021;10(3):193-203. [DOI]
3. Vosoughi S, Alimohammadi I, Hosseini AF, Sedghi Noushabadi Zh. Designing a Questionnaire to Investigate the Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) of Printing Industry Workers Regarding Hearing Protection and Determining Its Validity and Reliability. J Occup Hyg Eng. 2019;6(1):43-51. [DOI]
4. Lin YT, Chen TW, Chang YC, Chen ML, Hwang BF. Relationship between time-varying exposure to occupational noise and incident hypertension: A prospective cohort study. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2020;226:113487. [DOI] [PMID]
5. Ileperuma D, Arachchige IR. Hearing Status and Noise Exposure Levels of Workers at a Laundry Plant in Sri Lanka. Audiol Speech Res. 2022;18(2):95-101. [DOI]
6. Stokholm ZA, Erlandsen M, Schlünssen V, Basinas I, Bonde JP, Peters S, et al. A quantitative general population job exposure matrix for occupational noise exposure. Ann Work Expo Health. 2020;64(6):604-13. [DOI] [PMID]
7. Le TN, Straatman LV, Lea J, Westerberg B. Current insights in noise-induced hearing loss: a literature review of the underlying mechanism, pathophysiology, asymmetry, and management options. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;46(1):41. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
8. Basheer R, Bhargavi PG, Prakash HP. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of printing press workers towards noise-induced hearing loss. Noise Health. 2019;21(99):62-8. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
9. Golmohammadi R, Khaefi N, AliabadiM. Assessment occupational noise and control plan presentation in Town Board Stations. J Sabzevar Uni Med Sci. 2019;26(3):319-327. [Article]
10. Miri SR, Zamani AR, Nasri A, Hadizadeh Goki H. Changes in the hearing threshold of workers in a steel industry: 5-year follow-up. Occup Med. 2020;12(3):35-43. [DOI]
11. Tak S, Davis RR, Calvert GM. Exposure to hazardous workplace noise and use of hearing protection devices among US workers—NHANES, 1999–2004. Am J Ind Med. 2009;52(5):358-71. [DOI] [PMID]
12. Thepaksorn P, Koizumi A, Harada K, Siriwong W, Neitzel RL. Occupational noise exposure and hearing defects among sawmill workers in the south of Thailand. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2019;25(3):458-66. [DOI] [PMID]
13. Sajin S, Chin CS, Neo J. Acoustics vs. psychoacoustics: An objective and subjective analysis of classroom acoustics in Singapore. Noise Control Eng J. 2019;67(2):80-97. [DOI]
14. Neitzel R, Seixas N, Goldman B, Daniell W. Contributions of non-occupational activities to total noise exposure of construction workers. Ann Occup Hyg. 2004;48(5):463-73. [DOI] [PMID]
15. Neitzel R.L, Svensson EB, Sayler SK, Ann-Christin J. A comparison of occupational and nonoccupational noise exposures in Sweden. Noise Health. 2014;16(72):270-8. [DOI] [PMID]
16. Johnson TA, Cooper S, Stamper GC, Chertoff M. Noise exposure questionnaire: A tool for quantifying annual noise exposure. J Am Acad Audiol. 2017;28(1):14-35. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
17. Bramhall N, Beach EF, Epp B, Le Prell CG, Lopez-Poveda EA, Plack CJ, et al. The search for noise-induced cochlear synaptopathy in humans: Mission impossible? Hear Res. 2019;377:88-103. [DOI] [PMID]
18. Ridley CL, Kopun JG, Neely ST, Gorga MP, Rasetshwane DM. Using thresholds in noise to identify hidden hearing loss in humans. Ear Hear. 2018;39(5):829-44. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
19. Sheikhmozafari MJ, Mohammad Alizade P, Ahmadi O. Validation of the Persian version of the Workplace Physical-Ergonomic Conditions Evaluation (PECE) Questionnaire. Int J Musculoskeletal Pain Prev. 2021;6(3):554-61. [DOI]
20. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(24):3186-91. [DOI] [PMID]
21. Torre P 3rd, Reed MB. Can self-reported personal audio system volume predict actual listening levels in young adults? J Am Acad Audiol. 2019;30(2):153-61. [DOI] [PMID]
22. Megerson SC. Development of a screening tool for identifying young people at risk for noise-induced hearing loss [PhD Thesis]. Lawrence, Kansas, United States: University of Kansas; 2010. [Thesis]
23. Athirah B, Nurul Shahida MS. Occupational Noise Exposure Among Airport Workers in Malaysia: An Ergonomic Investigation. In: J Phys: Conference Series, Vol 1262. Proceedings of the 1st Colloquium on Noise, Vibration and Comfort ; 2019 Mar 7; Selangor, Malaysia. Bristol, United Kingdom: IOP Publishing; 2019. P.012010. [DOI]
24. Han K, Wang Q, Yang L, Xu S, Li C, Lin J, et al. Development and initial validation of the Chinese Version of the Noise Exposure Questionnaire (C-NEQ). BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):207. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
25. Stamper GC, Johnson TA. Auditory function in normal-hearing, noise-exposed human ears. Ear Hear. 2015;36(2):172-84. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
26. Taylor L. Utilization of a clinical testing battery to help identify suspected hidden hearing loss (HHL) in humans [PhD Thesis]. Towson, Maryland, United States: Towson University; 2018. [Thesis]
27. Lee WL, Chinna K, Lim Abdullah K, Zainal Abidin I. The forward‐backward and dual‐panel translation methods are comparable in producing semantic equivalent versions of a heart quality of life questionnaire. Int J Nurs Pract. 2019;25(1):e12715. [DOI] [PMID]
28. Tsang S, Royse CF, Terkawi AS. Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. Saudi J Anaesth. 2017;11(Suppl 1):S80-9. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
29. 29. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure revised criteria 1998. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication; 1998 Jun. 132p. Report No.:98-126. [Report]
30. Engdahl B, Aarhus L. Personal music players and hearing loss: the HUNT cohort study. Trends Hear. 2021;25:23312165211015881. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
31. Mohajan HK. Two criteria for good measurements in research: Validity and reliability. Ann Spiru Haret Univ 2017;17(4):59-82. [DOI]
32. Go NS. Noise Exposure, Self-Reported Speech-in-Noise Perception, and the Auditory Brainstem Response in Normal-Hearing Human Ears [PhD Thesis]. Lawrence, Kansas, United States: University of Kansas; 2018. [Thesis]
33. Hlousek SA, Hoffman K, Bailey C, Washnik N. Noise Exposure Effects on Physiological and Perceptual Measures of the Auditory System. J Hear Sci. 2022;12(1).
34. 34. E Hanson. Identifying and Quantifying Hidden Hearing Loss [Ph.D Thesis]. Iowa City, Iowa, United States: University of Iowa; 2018.
35. Reeb-Whitaker CK, Seixas NS, Sheppard L, Neitzel R. Accuracy of task recall for epidemiological exposure assessment to construction noise. Occup Environ Med. 2004;61(2):135-42. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
