Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1791210
A Pilot Dashboard System to Track Cumulative Exposure to Sound Levels during Music Instruction: A Technical Report
Abstract
Background Music-induced hearing loss (MIHL) is a critical public health issue. During music instruction, students and teachers are at risk of developing hearing loss due to exposure to loud and unsafe sound levels that can exceed 100 dBA. Prevention of MIHL in music students must be a desired action of all music educators.
Purpose To promote deliberate changes in music instruction and encourage more moderate sound creation and exposure during music education, it is essential to equip the instructors with live dynamic tools to monitor the overall sound intensities during music instruction. Equally important data to convey to the instructors are information regarding the intensity and duration of sounds at specific frequency regions in the music they are generating. Unfortunately, there are no feasible techniques to track cumulative live music exposures at various frequencies nor are there any guidelines for safe music exposure.
Research Design We created a visually appealing, user-friendly dashboard prototype system to display the accumulated time and intensity of sound exposure during live classes/rehearsals categorized into three frequency ranges. These visuals can be easily understood at a glance allowing musicians and instructors to make informed decisions about how to play music safely.
Experimental Approach and Results The dashboard included a collection of circular dial graphs that displayed in real time the accumulated sound exposure in the instructor's selected frequency range and showed the percentage of the maximum daily sound exposure based on the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Standards (NIOSH, 1998). Although NIOSH standards are not widely applied for music exposure, we propose that these standards can be used to provide initial guidelines to develop critical levels of music exposure. Additionally, the dashboard included a color-coded equalizer that displayed the instantaneous frequency distribution of sounds to indicate if sound levels at specific frequencies were too high even for short-term exposure.
Conclusion Less expensive than existing technology and more convenient to use, this dashboard will enable music instructors to make informed decisions on how to best adapt their teaching approaches to protect the hearing health of their students.
Keywords
music-induced hearing loss - recreational noise - music exposure - hearing health - NIOSH standardsPublication History
Received: 22 December 2022
Accepted: 07 February 2024
Article published online:
19 December 2024
© 2024. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
-
References
- 1 Skoe E, Tufts J. Evidence of noise-induced subclinical hearing loss using auditory brainstem responses and objective measures of noise exposure in humans. Hear Res 2018; 361: 80-91
- 2 Sliwinska-Kowalska M, Davis A. Noise-induced hearing loss. Noise Health 2012; 14 (61) 274-280
- 3 Morata TC. Young people: their noise and music exposures and the risk of hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2007; 46 (03) 111-112
- 4 Chasin M. (2006). Hear the music: hearing loss prevention for musicians. Accessed December 01, 2022 at: http://www.musiciansclinics.com/
- 5 le Clercq CMP, van Ingen G, Ruytjens L, van der Schroeff MP. Music-induced hearing loss in children, adolescents, and young adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Otol Neurotol 2016; 37 (09) 1208-1216
- 6 Gopal KV, Champlin S, Phillips B. Assessment of safe listening intentional behavior toward personal listening devices in young adults. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019; 16 (17) 3180
- 7 White PM. Perspectives on human hearing loss, cochlear regeneration, and the potential for hearing restoration therapies. Brain Sci 2020; 10 (10) 756
- 8 Harding GW, Bohne BA, Vos JD. The effect of an age-related hearing loss gene (Ahl) on noise-induced hearing loss and cochlear damage from low-frequency noise. Hear Res 2005; 204 (1-2): 90-100
- 9 Manchaiah V, Zhao F, Widen S. et al. Social representation of “loud music” in young adults: a cross-cultural study. J Am Acad Audiol 2017; 28 (06) 522-533
- 10 Niskar AS, Kieszak SM, Holmes AE, Esteban E, Rubin C, Brody DJ. Estimated prevalence of noise-induced hearing threshold shifts among children 6 to 19 years of age: the third national health and nutrition examination survey, 1988–1994. Pediatrics 2001; 108: 40
- 11 Kardous CA, Themann CL, Morata TC, Reynolds J, Afanuh S. Reducing the risk of hearing disorders among musicians. 2015 . Accessed December 01, 2022 at: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/wp-solutions/2015-184/pdfs/2015-184.pdf
- 12 Chesky K. Hearing protection devices (HPD) for student musicians. Is a hazard-based response appropriate. Spectrum 2008; 25 (04) 7-8
- 13 Gopal KV, Chesky K, Beschoner EA, Nelson PD, Stewart BJ. Auditory risk assessment of college music students in jazz band-based instructional activity. Noise Health 2013; 15 (65) 246-252
- 14 Berg AL, Ibrahim H, Sandler S, Salbod S. Music-induced hearing loss: what do college students know?. Contemp Issues Commun Sci Disord 2016; 43: 195-205
- 15 Washnik NJ, Phillips SL, Teglas S. Student's music exposure: full-day personal dose measurements. Noise Health 2016; 18 (81) 98-103
- 16 Phillips SL, Mace S. Sound level measurements in music practice rooms. Music Perform Res 2008; 2: 36-47
- 17 Chesky K, Pair M, Yoshimura E, Landford S. An evaluation of musician earplugs with college music students. Int J Audiol 2009; 48 (09) 661-670
- 18 Loughran MT, Lyons S, Plack CJ, Armitage CJ. Which interventions increase hearing protection behaviors during noisy recreational activities? A systematic review. BMC Public Health 2020; 20 (01) 1376
- 19 Powell J, Chesky K. Reducing risk of noise-induced hearing loss in collegiate music ensembles using ambient technology. Med Probl Perform Art 2017; 32 (03) 132-138
- 20 Kotus J, Kostek B. The noise-induced harmful effect assessment based on the properties of the human hearing system. Arch Acoust 2008; 33 (04) 435-440
- 21 Kardous CA, Willson RD, Murphy WJ. Noise dosimeter for monitoring exposure to impulse noise. Appl Acoust 2005; 66 (08) 974-985
- 22 Goldberg J, Flamme GA, Helmink DS, Killion MC. Method and system for noise dosimeter with quick-check mode and earphone adapter. 2010 . US Patent, 7836770. Accessed at https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/1f/90/a1/3fd2a17f440727/US7836770.pdf
- 23 Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Occupational safety and health standards: occupational health and environmental control (Standard No. 1910.95). Accessed at https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.95AppA
- 24 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Occupational noise exposure: criteria for a recommended standard. 1998. Accessed December 01, 2022 at: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/98-126/pdfs/98-126.pdf?id=10.26616/NIOSHPUB98126
- 25 https://www.zytrax.com/tech/audio/audio.html
- 26 WHO global standard for safe listening venues and events. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022. License: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO
- 27 Kardous CA, Shaw PB. Evaluation of smartphone sound measurement applications. J Acoust Soc Am 2014; 135 (04) EL186-EL192
- 28 Zahorik P, Kelly JW. Accurate vocal compensation for sound intensity loss with increasing distance in natural environments. J Acoust Soc Am 2007; 122 (05) EL143-EL150
- 29 Jacobsen F, de Bree H. A comparison of two different sound intensity measurement principles. J Acoust Soc Am 2005; 118 (03) 1510-1517