A Quantitative General Population Job Exposure Matrix for Occupational Noise Exposure

Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>Occupational noise exposure is a known risk factor for hearing loss and also adverse cardiovascular effects have been suggested. A job exposure matrix (JEM) would enable studies of noise and health on a large scale. The objective of this study was to create a quantitative JEM for occupational noise exposure assessment of the general working population. Between 2001–2003 and 2009–2010, we recruited workers from companies within the 10 industries with the highest reporting of noise-induced hearing loss according to the Danish Working Environment Authority and in addition workers of financial services and children day care to optimize the range in exposure levels. We obtained 1343 personal occupational noise dosimeter measurements among 1140 workers representing 100 different jobs according to the Danish version of the International Standard Classification of Occupations 1988 (DISCO 88). Four experts used 35 of these jobs as benchmarks and rated noise levels for the remaining 337 jobs within DISCO 88. To estimate noise levels for all 372 jobs, we included expert ratings together with sex, age, occupational class, and calendar year as fixed effects, while job and worker were included as random effects in a linear mixed regression model. The fixed effects explained 40% of the total variance: 72% of the between-jobs variance, −6% of the between-workers variance and 4% of the within-worker variance. Modelled noise levels showed a monotonic increase with increasing expert score and a 20 dB difference between the highest and lowest exposed jobs. Based on the JEM estimates, metal wheel-grinders were among the highest and finance and sales professionals among the lowest exposed. This JEM of occupational noise exposure can be used to prioritize preventive efforts of occupational noise exposure and to provide quantitative estimates of contemporary exposure levels in epidemiological studies of health effects potentially associated with noise exposure.</jats:p>

An updated job-exposure matrix for occupational noise: development and validation

“…Similar developments of JEMs exist based on a sizeable number of measurements and with detailed noise assessments but limited to a specific work sector ( Neitzel et al 2018 ; Stokholm et al 2020 ). Other noise JEMs, and validation of these, based on questionnaires, have been described for German and American cohorts ( Schlaefer et al 2009 ; Choi et al 2012 ).…”

“…Should no measurements exist, the vacant cells can be filled using any of the several different methods, for example, expert assessment usually aided by published literature and communication with the relevant occupational personnel. With respect to other noise JEMs, previous versions have less-well-defined levels of noise assessment and span over shorter time periods ( Sjostrom et al 2013 ), involve data from questionnaires ( Schlaefer et al 2009 ; Choi et al 2012 ), or focus specific work environment sectors ( Neitzel et al 2018 ; Stokholm et al 2020 ). The above-mentioned limitations mean that large variations in exposure could hide within the same assessment level, measurement data were lacking, or measurement-based assessments for a large portion of the work sector were limited.…”

Respirable crystalline silica and lung cancer in community-based studies: impact of job-exposure matrix specifications on exposure–response relationships

“…We therefore assumed a constant exposure time trend prior to 1960 ( 10 ) regarding all SYN-JEM specifications, making study participants’ exposure estimates prior to 1960 possibly less accurate. Still, exposure estimates generated using alternative time trends in SYN-JEM have shown to be highly correlated ( 13 ).…”

“…The expert ratings serve as priors in the statistical model and are calibrated by personal quantitative silica measurements collated in the international exposure database ExpoSYN ( 9 ). The development of SYN-JEM and analogous quantitative JEM, eg, for benzene, noise, and daytime light exposure ( 11 – 13 ), constitutes a significant advancement in exposure assessment methodology and has improved and facilitated the assessment of quantitative exposure levels in community-based settings, achieving a level of quality comparable to that of industry-based studies ( 6 ).…”

Association between occupational noise and vibration and anxiety in the South Korean working population: a cross-sectional study

“…However, this was only observed at a milder degree of exposure among females. This may be explained by the findings of a previous study, which showed that even within the same jobs, females were less exposed to noise than males, owing to differences in tasks [ 24 ]. This is in line with the results of the current study.…”