TY - JOUR
T1 - Cochrane method for systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions to prevent occupational noise-induced hearing loss - abridged
AU - Tikka, Christina
AU - Verbeek, Jos
AU - Kateman, Erik
AU - Morata, Thais Catalani
AU - Dreschler, Wouter
AU - Ferrite, Silvia
N1 - Funding Information: We would like to thank the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, Stichting Arbouw, and the Cochrane Editorial Unit for the grants received to complete and update the review in 2009, 2012, and 2017. In addition, we would like to thank Jani Ruotsalainen from Cochrane Work and Jenny Bellorini from Cochrane ENT for their support. We also thank Bas Sorgdrager who contributed to an earlier version of the full review. Publisher Copyright: © 2020 Revista Pro-Fono. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - PURPOSE: Assess the effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions at work on noise exposure or occupational hearing loss compared to no or alternative interventions. RESEARCH STRATEGIES: Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, OSHupdate, Cochrane Central and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT), Controlled Before-After studies (CBA) and Interrupted Time-Series studies (ITS) evaluating engineering controls, administrative controls, personal hearing protection devices, and hearing surveillance were included. Case studies of engineering controls were collected. DATA ANALYSIS: Cochrane methods for systematic reviews, including meta-analysis, were followed. RESULTS: 29 studies were included. Stricter legislation can reduce noise levels by 4.5 dB(A) (very low-quality evidence). Engineering controls can immediately reduce noise (107 cases). Eleven RCTs and CBA studies (3725 participants) were evaluated through Hearing Protection Devices (HPDs). Training of earplug insertion reduces noise exposure at short term follow-up (moderate quality evidence). Earmuffs might perform better than earplugs in high noise levels but worse in low noise levels (very low-quality evidence). HPDs might reduce hearing loss at very long-term follow-up (very low-quality evidence). Seventeen studies (84028 participants) evaluated hearing loss prevention programs. Better use of HPDs might reduce hearing loss but other components not (very low-quality evidence). CONCLUSION: Hearing loss prevention and interventions modestly reduce noise exposure and hearing loss. Better quality studies and better implementation of noise control measures and HPDs is needed.
AB - PURPOSE: Assess the effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions at work on noise exposure or occupational hearing loss compared to no or alternative interventions. RESEARCH STRATEGIES: Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, OSHupdate, Cochrane Central and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT), Controlled Before-After studies (CBA) and Interrupted Time-Series studies (ITS) evaluating engineering controls, administrative controls, personal hearing protection devices, and hearing surveillance were included. Case studies of engineering controls were collected. DATA ANALYSIS: Cochrane methods for systematic reviews, including meta-analysis, were followed. RESULTS: 29 studies were included. Stricter legislation can reduce noise levels by 4.5 dB(A) (very low-quality evidence). Engineering controls can immediately reduce noise (107 cases). Eleven RCTs and CBA studies (3725 participants) were evaluated through Hearing Protection Devices (HPDs). Training of earplug insertion reduces noise exposure at short term follow-up (moderate quality evidence). Earmuffs might perform better than earplugs in high noise levels but worse in low noise levels (very low-quality evidence). HPDs might reduce hearing loss at very long-term follow-up (very low-quality evidence). Seventeen studies (84028 participants) evaluated hearing loss prevention programs. Better use of HPDs might reduce hearing loss but other components not (very low-quality evidence). CONCLUSION: Hearing loss prevention and interventions modestly reduce noise exposure and hearing loss. Better quality studies and better implementation of noise control measures and HPDs is needed.
KW - Hearing protective devices
KW - Meta-Analysis
KW - Noise-induced hearing loss
KW - Occupational noise
KW - Systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85083079491&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20192019127
DO - https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20192019127
M3 - Article
C2 - 32267337
SN - 2317-1782
VL - 32
SP - e20190127
JO - CoDAS
JF - CoDAS
IS - 2
M1 - e20190127
ER -