Download PDF
Semin Hear 2003; 24(4): 345-354
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-815548
Copyright © 2003 by Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc., 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA. Tel.: +1(212) 584-4662

Hearing Protection

Marshall Chasin1,2 , Alberto Behar2
  • 1Audiologist, University of Toronto, Department of Linguistics
  • 2Musicians' Clinics of Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
15 January 2004 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Hearing protectors, unless specifically designed, attenuate the higher frequency sound energy more than lower frequency energy. Because such a nonuniform attenuation characteristic can be less than optimal for certain high-fidelity requirements, acoustically tuned hearing protectors were developed. These include the ER-15 and the ER-25 earplugs that-as the name suggests-provide a uniform attenuation of 15 dB and 25 dB, respectively. To obtain different attenuation characteristics, modifications of these earplugs are clinically possible, but they will lose their uniform attenuation property. Such earplugs can be used in the performing arts and in industrial settings with noise levels below 100 dBA. The ER-20 (or HI-FI earplug) noncustom earplug also is available. Objective techniques, such as microphone-in-real-ear (MIRE) and the use of acoustical test fixtures (ATF), and subjective techniques, such as real ear attenuation thresholds (REAT), are two valid methods for assessing the effects of hearing protection. Regardless of the technique, the resulting data can be expressed in a single number rating scheme such as the Noise Reduction Rating (NRR).

KEYWORDS

Attenuation - hearing protector - ER-15 - NRR - noise

REFERENCES

  • 1 Zwislocki J. Acoustic attenuation between the ears.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1953;  25 752-759
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Zwislocki J. In search of the bone-conduction threshold in a free sound field.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1957;  29 795-804
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Shaw E, Theissen G. Improved cushion for ear defenders.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1958;  30 24-36
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Shaw E, Theissen G. Acoustics of circumaural earphones.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1962;  34 1233-1243
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Berger E. Methods of measuring the attenuation of hearing protection devices.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1986;  6 1655-1687
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Schroeter J. The use of acoustical test fixtures for the measurement of hearing protector attenuation. Part I: review of previous work and the design of an improved test fixture.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1986;  79 1065-1081
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Berger E, Kerivan J. Influence of physiological noise and the occlusion effect on the measurement of real-ear attenuation at threshold.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1983;  1 81-94
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Berger H. Tips for Fitting Hearing Protectors.  E.A.R.LOG 19. Indianapolis, IN: Cabot Safety Corp; 1988
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 9 Abel S, Alberti P, Haythornwaite C, Riko K. Speech intelligibility in noise with and without ear protectors. In: Alberti PW, ed. Personal Hearing Protection in Industry New York: Raven Press 1982: 371-386
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 10 Killion M, DeVilbiss, Stewart J. An earplug with uniform 15-dB attenuation.  Hear J . 1988;  5 14-16
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Chasin M. The acoustic advantages of CIC hearing aids.  Hear J . 1994;  11 13-17
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Killion M, Stewart J, Falco R, Berger E. Improved audibility earplug. U.S. Patent 5,113,967; 1992
  • 13 Gauthier E, Burak M. Towards a high fidelity hearing aid: The folded horn.  Hear Aid J . 1983;  10 37-39
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Chasin M, Chong J. Localization problems with modified and non-modified ER-15 Musician's Earplugs.  Hear J . 1999;  2
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Chasin M, Chong J. A clinically efficient hearing protection program for musicians.  Med Probl Perform Art . 1992;  7 40-43
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Chasin M. Musicians and the Prevention of Hearing Loss.  San Diego, CA: Singular; 1996
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 17 Killion M. The parvum bonum, plus melius fallacy in earplug selection. In: Beilin L, Jensen GR, eds. Recent Developments in Hearing Instrument Technology (15th Danavox Symposium) Kolding, Denmark: Scanticon 1993: 415-433
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 18 Berger E. Can Hearing Aids Provide Hearing Protection?. E.A.R.LOG 18 Indianapolis, IN: Cabot Safety Corp; 1987
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 19 Hetu R, Tran Quoc H, Tougas Y. Can an inactivated hearing aid act as a hearing protector?.  Can Acoustics . 1992;  3 35-36
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Alberti P. Personal Hearing Protection in Industry.  New York: Raven Press; 1982
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 21 Behar A, Desormeaux J. NRR, ABC or .  . . Canadian Acoustics . 1994;  1 27-30
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Botsford J. How to estimate dBA reduction of ear protectors.  Journal of Sound Vibration . 1973;  6 32-33
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Preves D, Pehringer J. Calculating individuals NRRs in situ using subminiature probe microphones.  Hear Instrum . 1983;  3 10-14
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Johnson D, Nixon C. Simplified methods for estimating hearing protector performance.  Journal of Sound Vibration . 1974;  7 20-27
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar