Objectives: The overall aim of this study was to evaluate the perception of and annoyance due to the noise from wind turbines in populated areas of Poland. Material and Methods: The study group comprised 156 subjects. All subjects were asked to fill in a questionnaire developed to enable evaluation of their living conditions, including prevalence of annoyance due to the noise from wind turbines and the self-assessment of physical health and well-being. In addition, current mental health status of the respondents was assessed using Goldberg General Health Questionnaire GHQ-12. For areas where the respondents lived, A-weighted sound pressure levels (SPLs) were calculated as the sum of the contributions from the wind power plants in the specific area. Results: It has been shown that the wind turbine noise at the calculated A-weigh ted SPL of 30-48 dB was noticed outdoors by 60.3% of the respondents. This noise was perceived as annoying outdoors by 33.3% of the respondents, while indoors by 20.5% of them. The odds ratio of being annoyed outdoors by the wind turbine noise increased along with increasing SPLs (OR = 2.1; 95% CI: 1.22-3.62). The subjects' attitude to wind turbines in general and sensitivity to landscape littering was found to have significant impact on the perceived annoyance. About 63% of variance in outdoors annoyance assessment might be explained by the noise level, general attitude to wind turbines and sensitivity to landscape littering. Conclusions: Before firm conclusions can be drawn further studies are needed, including a larger number of respondents with different living environments (i.e., dissimilar terrain, different urbanization and road traffic intensity).

Background: It has been shown that musicians are at risk of noise-induced hearing loss. The aim of the study has been to evaluate the temporary changes of hearing in the case of orchestral musicians after group rehearsals. Material and Methods: The study group comprised 18 orchestral musicians, aged 30-58 years old (mean: 40 years old) having 12-40 years (mean: 22 years) of professional experience. The temporary changes in hearing after group rehearsals were determined using transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs). Noise exposures during group rehearsals were also evaluated. Results: Musicians' hearing threshold levels were higher (worse) than expected for the equivalent non-noise-exposed population. Moreover, the high frequency notched audiograms were observed in some of them. After rehearsals, during which musicians were exposed to orchestral noise at A-weighted equivalent-continuous sound pressure level (normalized to 8-h working day) varied from 75.6-83.1 dB (mean: 79.4 dB). The significant post-exposure reductions of TEOAE amplitudes (approx. 0.7 dB) both for the total response and frequency bands of 2000 and 3000 Hz were noted. However, there were no significant differences between pre-and postexposure reproducibility of TEOAE. Conclusions: Obtained results have confirmed that orchestral musicians are at risk of hearing loss due to their professional activities, even at exposures to orchestral noise less than the limit values for occupational noise. Med Pr 2015;66(4): [479][480][481][482][483][484][485][486]

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess hearing of music students in relation to their exposure to excessive sounds. Material and Methods: Standard pure-tone audiometry (PTA) was performed in 168 music students, aged 22.5±2.5 years. The control group included 67 subjects, non-music students and non-musicians, aged 22.8±3.3 years. Data on the study subjects' musical experience, instruments in use, time of weekly practice and additional risk factors for noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) were identified by means of a questionnaire survey. Sound pressure levels produced by various groups of instruments during solo and group playing were also measured and analyzed. The music students' audiometric hearing threshold levels (HTLs) were compared with the theoretical predictions calculated according to the International Organization for Standardization standard ISO 1999:2013. Results: It was estimated that the music students were exposed for 27.1±14.3 h/week to sounds at the A-weighted equivalent-continuous sound pressure level of 89.9±6.0 dB. There were no significant differences in HTLs between the music students and the control group in the frequency range of 4000-8000 Hz. Furthermore, in each group HTLs in the frequency range 1000-8000 Hz did not exceed 20 dB HL in 83% of the examined ears. Nevertheless, high frequency notched audiograms typical of the noise-induced hearing loss were found in 13.4% and 9% of the musicians and non-musicians, respectively. The odds ratio (OR) of notching in the music students increased significantly along with higher sound pressure levels (OR = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.014-1.13, p < 0.05). The students' HTLs were worse (higher) than those of a highly screened non-noise-exposed population. Moreover, their hearing loss was less severe than that expected from sound exposure for frequencies of 3000 Hz and 4000 Hz, and it was more severe in the case of frequency of 6000 Hz. Conclusions: The results confirm the need for further studies and development of a hearing conservation program for music students. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2017;30(1):55-75

The aim of this study was to evaluate the perception and annoyance of noise from wind turbines in populated areas of Poland. A questionnaire inquiry was carried out among 517 subjects, aged 18–88, living within 204–1726 m from the nearest wind turbine. For areas where respondents lived, A-weighted sound pressure levels (SPLs) were calculated as the sum of the contributions from the wind power plants in the specific area. It has been shown that the wind turbine noise at the calculated A-weighted SPL of 33–50 dB was perceived as annoying or highly annoying by 46% and 28% of respondents, respectively. Moreover, 34% and 18% of them said that they were annoyed or highly annoyed indoors, respectively. The perception of high annoyance was associated with the A-weighted sound pressure level or the distance from the nearest wind turbine, general attitude to wind farms, noise sensitivity and terrain shape (annoyance outdoors) or road-traffic intensity (annoyance indoors). About 48–66% of variance in noise annoyance rating might be explained by the aforesaid factors. It was estimated that at the distance of 1000 m the wind turbine noise might be perceived as highly annoying outdoors by 43% and 2% of people with negative and positive attitude towards wind turbines, respectively. There was no significant association between noise level (or distance) and various health and well-being aspects. However, all variables measuring health and well-being aspects, including stress symptoms, were positively associated with annoyance related to wind turbine noise.

The aim of the study was to assess the hearing threshold levels (HTLs) in employees exposed to noise generated by low-frequency ultrasonic technological equipment in comparison with the HTLs of workers exposed to audible noise at the similar A-weighted equivalent-continuous sound pressure level.The study includes measurements of ultrasonic and audible noise at workplaces and hearing tests, i.e. conventional pure-tone audiometry and extended high-frequency audiometry. The study group comprised 90 workers, aged 41.4±10.0 years (mean±SD), exposed for 17.3±9.8 years to noise generated by ultrasonic devices at mean daily noise exposure level ( L EX,8h ) of 80.6±2.9 dB. The reference group consists of 156 subjects, exposed to industrial noise (without ultrasonic components) at similar A-weighted equivalent-continuous sound pressure level ( L EX,8h = 81.8±2.7 dB), adjusted according to age (39.8±7.7 years), gender and job seniority (14.0±7.0 years). This group was selected from database collected in the Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine. Audiometric hearing threshold levels in the frequency range of 0.5-6 kHz were similar in both groups, but in the frequency range of 8-12.5 kHz they were higher in the group of employees exposed to ultrasonic noise.The findings suggest that differences in the hearing threshold (at high frequencies) in analyzed groups may be due to differences in spectral composition of noise and show the need to continue the undertaken studies.