Introduction

Noise exposure is usually regarded as a significant threat when it comes to environmental health. Occupational noise exposure is regarded among the health risks that workers are subjected to as it can result in irreversible hearing damages. Ramp operators are usually at the risk of encountering varied health issues due to the nature of their work. When employees working in the airline ramps are exposed to high noise levels (greater than 85 dB(A)) for a long time, there is the probability of increased Noise Induced Permanent Threshold Shift (Landry and Ingolia, 2011).

Ramp operators perform their tasks in the exposure of noise coming from different sound sources and equipments that are used to execute specific activities including aeronautic noise. Data on the assessment of noise exposure is not very extensive since minimal research has been conducted in this area. This is an area that should be studied extensively given the potential health risks involved. When employees are informed, it would be easier for them to take the necessary measures to ensure they do not suffer the consequences of their workplace environment.

Figure 1. Anatomy of the Human Ear

 

 

            Figure 1 shows the anatomy of the ear. The ear is composed of the sound conducting and sound transducing mechanisms. The conducting mechanism is composed of the outer ear (pinna and ear canal) and the middle ear that consists of the tympanic membrane. The airspace found in the middle ear is connected to the nose using the Eustachian tube and to the mastoid air cells that house the malleus, the ossicular chain, incus and stapes. The inner ear; cochlea is responsible for transducing vibrations that are transmitted to the perilymph through the ossicular chain to a nervous impulse that is taken to the brain and perceived as sound. Noise exposure damages the ear by damaging the tiny hairs that “ride” the sound waves. As the hairs are damaged, they eventually die off resulting in hearing loss. These hair cells do not grow back in humans as it is with amphibians and birds.

Diagnosis of Hazard and the Health Problems

Thousands of workers are exposed to workplace noise hazards every year. Between 2004 and 2009, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that close to 125,000 workers had endured occupational hearing loss (CDC). Noise exposure has the ability to bring about permanent hearing loss that is not possible to correct using a hearing aid or surgery. Short-term exposure results to effects such as hearing the ears ringing or “stuffed up”, but this is likely to go away once the person affected leaves the noisy area. Repeated exposure to noise hazards, on the other hand, is likely to result to permanent tinnitus, reduced productivity, the creation of psychological and physical stress, and interference with concentration and communication among other issues.

The risk assessment, in this case, will involve five steps. The steps include identification of the hazard, making a decision of the people likely to be harmed and how, evaluating the risks involved and making a decision on control measures, recording the findings, and a review of the assessment while making updates where necessary. To monitor the noise exposure hazard, it would be prudent to note some of the warning signs. Among them is having to shout to coworkers in order to hear each other despite the distance between them being minimal, experiencing temporary hearing loss after leaving the workplace, and humming and ringing ears after work(Landry and Ingolia, 2011).

Past and Existing Studies Regarding the Noise Exposure

There are several studies that have been conducted with regards to noise exposure and its effects on workers. Among them is the study “Noise Exposure to Airline Ramp Employees” by Randy L. Tubbs (2015). This study was instigated by the concerns that employees had regarding a jet aircraft that was bringing about noise pollution at the workplace resulting in permanent ear damage (Tubbs et al., 2015). This study was able to identify the noisiest area around the ramp, and the effects that this noise brought to the employees.

Another viable study is the “Noise Exposure of the Ramp’s Operators in Airport apron” by Gugliermetti et al. (2010). This study concentrated on the airport apron, which is considered as a peculiar site given the nature of the operations involved. It is difficult to perform measurements in this area due to the risks involved and the evaluation of different noise sources. Research on this area becomes difficult since it is not easy to use a dosimeter owing the nature of hard works being executed in the area (Gugliermetti et al., 2010). The study has gone along to show the results of the measures taken. Some preventive solutions have been provided with regards to employees losing their hearing ability due to the nature of the environment they are subjected to. Among them is using appropriate hearing devices and using equipment that result to lower emission levels.

Methodology

Different studies tend to use varying methodology while assessing noise exposure. The methodology used is always dependent on the nature of study being conducted and the environment involved. Among the methodologies used is making the employees working at the airport ramp to wear noise dosimeters. The dosimeters can be attached to the workers’ belts and a small remote microphone fastened on the shirt. The dosimeter is paused after an employee’s shift is over, and the data available is downloaded to a PC for interpretation. QuestSuite for windows is among the software used for this purpose.

Another common methodology is the one that involves the use of the Precision Integrating Sound Level Meter. This methodology aims at measuring Sound Pressure Level in different areas. It helps in the determination of equivalent continuous sound level and sound exposure level. It is usually a hand-held device which the subjects to a study can easily carry around. The device involved can be easily used with other instruments. For the purpose of laboratory analysis, the signal can be recorded using portable tape recorders.

Figure 2. Decibel Scale

            Figure 2 represents a decibel scale that shows different sound levels (in dBA) in different environmental settings. This is to show that different environments will always present different levels of noise exposure. This is why OSHA regulations have gone ahead to postulate the different levels of noise and the amount of period that an employee to be exposed to this noise. The higher the level of the noise, the less the period that an employee should get exposed to the noise (See Table G-16 below). Employees can be subjected to low levels of noise for long periods without getting any health implications, but the same cannot be said to high levels of noise.

Prevention and Control

Given the shortcomings associated with noise exposure, it is important for relevant stakeholders to take the relevant control and prevention measures to ensure that the health of employees is protected at all times. Among these measures there is elimination, substitution, engineering, administrative controls and personal protective equipment (Landry and Ingolia, 2011). These control measures are applied in a hierarchical structure. Elimination involves the process of eradicating the source of the noise. A good example of noise elimination involves avoidance of machinery or processes that result in excessive noise. Substitution, on the other hand, involves replacement of these processes and equipment. Engineering control on its part is more about making changes to the machinery and processes involved to ensure that the noise the employees are exposed to is minimal. Among the engineering measures, there is the enclosure of noisy machinery, avoidance of metal-to-metal contact using plastic bumpers, using absorbent lining to cushion the surfaces among other ways (Murphy and King, 2014). Administrative controls can be used to reduce the number of hours where employees are exposed to the noise.

It is important to give employees adequate training upon being recruited to the workplace. This is because the organization involved might put in place numerous measures to ensure the safety of employees, but how employees carry themselves determines how effective these measures are. If employees are given equipment to help reduce noise exposure, it is how they use these equipments will determine how effective they become.

Future Direction

Noise exposure is an issue that can be taken lightly since most people are not familiar with the eminent effects involved. More than 20 million Americans are exposed to workplace environments that propagate noise exposure every year (CDC). It is upon all the stakeholders involved to ensure that such employees are protected against the negative effects that might accrue as a result. These stakeholders include people like policymakers. There should be a set of rules and regulations to ensure that employers accord employees working in environments that bring about noise exposure the relevant protection. This is by passing regulations on the quality of equipments that ought to be used and other control measures for equipments that cannot be replaced effectively. Employers failing to meet the regulation should be subject to law suits.

Employers should also ensure that they give their employees the relevant training upon recruitment to ensure they are able to protect themselves against the effects of noise exposure. Employees in return should take the initiative of ensuring that relevant protective measures have been taken. This would be more feasible if they learned the effects that noise exposure is likely to bring about.

Public Health Implication

Noise exposure brings about negative public health implications for employees working in the airline ramp. There are several health issues that can be attributed to noise exposure. Among them is that noise can permanently damage an employee’s hearing ability. The damage caused in this case might not be corrected with surgery or by use of hearing aid. Noise exposure also increases the probability of occurrence of diseases such as high blood pressure, headache and heart failure among others(Landry and Ingolia, 2011). There is also the probability of encountering constriction of blood vessels, pupil dilation, and damage to brain and liver.

These health implications result to employees involved to invest a lot of funds while seeking medical help. Despite seeking health attention, the conditions might keep deteriorating. The funds used for medical expenses could be used in other developmental areas if the hazard did not exist in the first place. The only sure way to prevent these health issues is by ensuring reduction of noise exposure to the affected employees.

Figure 3. Distribution of Occupational Injury and Illness Cases

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, October 2011

            Figure 3 shows the distribution of injury and illness cases in 2010 experienced in the private sector. While injuries took 94.9%, illness contributed to 5.1% of the cases. From the 5.1%, hearing loss contained 12% of this number. This is a notable number given that there are numerous illnesses that employees can contract while working in different workplace environments. It is an indication of the detrimental effects of noise exposure associated with the prevailing labor force.

Regulation

There is the existence of OSHA regulations on what the limit of noise exposure ought to be. Section 5(a)(1) of the OSHA Act requires employers to place their employees in an environment that is free of known hazards likely to bring about serious physical harm or death to the employees. The limits provided by OSHA are based on an employee’s time-weighted average that spreads over an 8 hours day. The acceptable exposure limit for noise is 90 dBA for all employees for 8 hours a day (OSHA, 2017).

TABLE G-16 – PERMISSIBLE NOISE EXPOSURES (1)

______________________________________________________________

|

Duration per day, hours   | Sound level dBA slow response

____________________________|_________________________________

|

8………………………|                    90

6………………………|                    92

4………………………|                    95

3………………………|                    97

2………………………|                   100

1 1/2 ………………….|                   102

1………………………|                   105

1/2 ……………………|                   110

1/4  or less…………….|                   115

____________________________|________________________________

Source: www.osha.gov

As seen in the table above, the regulation of the limit changes in accordance with the time involved for the exposure. It is upon the employers to ensure that this time limits are observed as provided by the OSHA regulations.

OSHA does not provide adjusted limit levels for noise exposure at the airports. The standards already set are meant to be implemented in every industry. Ensuring there is standardization is one way of ensuring that stakeholders in these industries comply as it would be expected of them (Murphy and King, 2014). This is because setting different levels for every industry will result to a backlash of the stakeholders involved and continuous outcry for the levels to be increased in some sectors so that they can be at par with others hence making this impractical.

There are several epidemiological studies that have tried to link airport ramp workers to varied health outcomes. A good example is “Noise exposure as a risk factor for cardiovascular diseases in workers” by Yousefi Rizi and Hassanzadeh (2010). Workers in different working environments that are exposed to noise can experience different health implications ranging from sleep disturbance and hearing loss. In this study, the methodology used 80 employees to help ascertain the impacts of noise exposure on blood pressure. SEL 440 sound level meter was used in measuring the noise exposure. ALPK2 mercury sphygmomanometer was used to measure the control groups’ blood pressure in the workplace. Pearson’s correlation coefficient and the t-test were used to analyze the data. The study showed the mean level of 95.21 dB, which is high than the permitted limit. Blood pressure remained normal for 28.8% of the participants, but was high for 50.1%. For 21.1% of the workers, it was between this. The conclusion was that prolonged exposure to the industrial noise is associated with high blood pressure, which provides a risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (Yousefi Rizi and Hassanzadeh, 2010). Airport ramp workers are usually exposed to noise within these levels hence making the study applicable to this section of employees.

To prevent long-term employees’ exposure at the workplace, there are legal duties and obligations bestowed on the employers to help protect the employees. The employers are expected to protect employees from the risk of excessive noise exposure. The Control of Noise at Work Regulations of 2005 requires employers to take varied actions to this effect (Acton, 2012).The recommendations include conducting a noise assessment and taking relevant steps to control or prevent the risks involved. In areas where it is possible, the employer is expected to eliminate the exposure at source. Where it is not possible to eliminate the exposure, the employer is expected to provide employees with personal protective equipment to deter the negative effect of the noise (Acton, 2012). Providing employees with relevant information and training is also recommended together with regular monitoring and reviewing the effectiveness of the measures already implemented.

There are numerous control measures proposed to employees. Among them, there is the implementation of a quieter way of doing work and using quieter equipment. Companies should also have policies that ensure low-noise purchasing of equipment and also improve maintenance procedures. Effective maintenance helps to reduce noise as a result of friction and moving parts. Dumping vibrating machinery and adding sound absorbing materials are also viewed as good practices with this regard. Employers should also take the initiative of positioning noisy processes and machinery away from workers (Murphy and King, 2014). These are good practices that will help to protect employees from long-term exposure.

 

 Reference:

1. Acton, A. (2012). Issues in environment, health, and pollution. Scholarly Editions.
2. “CDC – Facts And Statistics: Noise – NIOSH Workplace Safety & Health.” Cdc.Gov, 2016,https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/noise/stats.html.
3. Gugliermetti, F., Bisegna, F., Violante, A. C., & Aureli, C. (2010). Noise exposure of the ramp’s operatorsin airport apron. In 20th International Congress on Acoustics 2010, ICA 2010-Incorporating the 2010 Annual Conference of the Australian Acoustical Society.
4. Landry, J., & Ingolia, S. (2011). Ramp Safety Practices(Vol. 29). Transportation Research Board.

 

5. Murphy, E., & King, E. (2014). Environmental noise pollution: Noise mapping, public health, and policy. Newnes.

 

6. (2017). Safety and Health Topics | Occupational Noise Exposure | OccupationalSafety and Health Administration. Osha.gov. Retrieved 5 December 2017, from https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/noisehearingconservation

 

7. Tubbs, R. L. (2000). Case studies noise exposure to airline ramp employees. Applied occupational and environmental hygiene, 15(9), 657-663.

 

8. Yousefi Rizi, H., & Hassanzadeh, A. (2013). Noise exposure as a risk factor of cardiovascular diseases in workers. Journal Of Education And Health Promotion, 2(1), 14. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2277-9531.112683

 

Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?