Efficacy of a computer-based hearing test and tailored hearing protection intervention. Effectiveness of a tailored intervention to increase factory workers' use of hearing protection. Effectiveness of an intervention to increase construction workers' use of hearing protection. Hearing conservation program for agricultural students: short-term outcomes from a cluster-randomized trial with planned long-term follow-up. Effectiveness of computer-based tailoring versus targeting to promote use of hearing protection. A multi-component intervention to promote hearing protector use among construction workers. The effectiveness of hearing protective devices. Effects of booster interventions on factory workers' use of hearing protection. Generalizability of trial results based on randomized versus nonrandomized allocation of OME infants to ventilation tubes or watchful waiting.
Advances in computer technology and accessibility enable researchers to provide individually tailored interventions for behavioral change. Using multimedia technology, this study developed and tested a computer-based hearing test and a tailored intervention. The purpose of this study was to evaluate, using a randomized experimental design, the efficacy of the intervention to increase workers' use of hearing protection. The tailored intervention developed by the research team showed more significant short-term effect measured immediately after the intervention than the control intervention. For the long-term effect measured 1 year after the intervention, both tailored and control groups showed significant increase in their reported use (7% vs. 6%) from preintervention to postintervention, but no significant difference between the two groups. The change accomplished in this study was small progress toward the desired level of 100% use of hearing protection to prevent noise-induced hearing loss. This finding showed that changing workers' hearing protection behavior is difficult. In the United States it is estimated that more than 30 million workers are exposed to harmful levels of noise on the job. When engineering or administrative controls cannot be used to reduce noise, workers should always use hearing protection devices (HPDs) when exposed to loud noise to prevent noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). Previous research has shown that workers do not always use HPDs when required; therefore, it is essential that workers assume personal responsibility for preventing NIHL by increasing their use of HPDs.
                This study tested the effectiveness of an individually tailored multimedia intervention to increase use of HPDs by factory workers.
                A randomized controlled design was used to compare the effects of a tailored intervention (n= 446) with two other interventions (a nontailored predictor-based intervention (n= 447) and a control intervention (n= 432)) on workers' self-reported use of HPDs 6 to 18 months following the intervention.
                Only those workers receiving the tailored intervention significantly increased their use of HPDs from pretest to posttest. However, this increase significantly differed from the nontailored group but not from the control group.
                Individually-tailored interventions offer promise for changing behavior. In light of the similarity between the results for the tailored intervention and the control intervention groups, further research is needed to understand barriers to HPD use and how to maximize the benefits of individually tailored interventions in this setting. In this project we tested the effectiveness of a theory-based intervention (video, pamphlets, and guided practice session) to increase the use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) among Midwestern construction workers and a national group of plumber/pipefitter trainers. Posttest measures were collected 10-12 months following this intervention. Pender's Health Promotion Model (1987) provided the conceptual basis for development of the training program. A total of 837 high-noise-exposed workers were included in the analysis: 652 regional Midwestern construction workers and 185 national plumber/pipefitter trainers. Effectiveness of the intervention was determined through the sequence of analyses recommended by Braver and Braver (1988) for the Solomon Four-Group Design. Analysis of variance and covariance of postintervention use and intention to use HPDs and a meta-analytic test were done. These analyses indicated that the intervention significantly increased use of HPDs but had no effect on intention to use HPDs in the future. Pretesting had no effect on use. Actual or potential applications of this research include guidance in the development of successful theory-based interventions to increase use of HPDs. (1) To conduct a contemporary analysis of historical data on short-term efficacy of a 3-year hearing conservation program conducted from 1992 to 1996 in Wisconsin, USA, with 753 high school students actively involved in farm work; (2) to establish procedures for assessment of hearing loss for use in a recently funded follow-up of this same hearing conservation program cohort.
                We analyzed a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial, with schools as the unit of randomization. Thirty-four rural schools were recruited and randomized to intervention or control. The intervention included classroom instruction, distribution of hearing protection devices, direct mailings, noise level assessments, and yearly audiometric testing. The control group received the audiometric testing.
                Students exposed to the hearing conservation program reported more frequent use of hearing protection devices, but there was no evidence of reduced levels of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL).
                Our analysis suggests that, since NIHL is cumulative, a 3-year study was likely not long enough to evaluate the efficacy of this intervention. While improvements in reported use of hearing protection devices were noted, the lasting impact of these behaviors is unknown and the finding merits corroboration by longer term objective hearing tests. A follow-up study of the cohort has recently been started. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 2 computer-based interventions and booster messages on construction workers' use of hearing protection. Construction workers (n = 343) were randomly assigned to receive tailored (addressing individual characteristics) or targeted (addressing shared characteristics) education, with or without booster messages, in an experimental 4-group pretest-post-test design. Post hoc message matching compared the value of tailored and targeted approaches. Participants improved use of hearing protection from 42% to 50% of the time they were exposed to noise 1 year post-intervention. Differences between intervention groups were not significant. The significant improvement in use of hearing protection demonstrates that interventions can have an impact on preventing noise-induced hearing loss. Since targeted and tailored intervention groups did not significantly differ in use of hearing protection, and since targeted interventions are less costly to develop, targeted interventions offer greater value. Hearing protection devices (HPD) remain a primary method of prevention of noise-induced hearing loss despite their well-known limitations. A three-pronged intervention to increase HPD use was conducted among construction workers and included a baseline hearing loss prevention training, follow-up 'toolbox' (TB) reinforcement trainings, and use of a personal noise level indicator (NLI). A total of 176 subjects on eight sites completed three assessments. Prior to intervention, HPDs were used an average of 34.5% of the time and increased significantly, up about 12.1% after intervention and 7.5% two months after interventions were completed. The increase in HPD use was greatest among the group receiving both TB and NLI interventions; up about 25% from baseline, and this group was about two times more likely to use HPDs than the BL (baseline) training only group. This study demonstrates the mild impact of a well-constructed HPD use training and provides support for the additional use of a personal NLI to increase use of HPDs among construction workers. The most effective procedures for using such instruments require further exploration. The effectiveness of a hearing conservation program, and specifically the effectiveness of hearing protection devices (muffs in this case), was investigated over a five-year period, since the inception of the program at a major plant of the Ingersoll-Rand Company. The study concentrated on three groups (Class I, II, and III) of 213 employees whose noise level exposure did not change during the five-year study period. A hearing conservation criterion of 90dBA was utilized. One group consisted of office workers in which the level was well below this, a second group from a machine shop in which the level was slightly below the criterion, and a third group from foundry areas in which the levels were considerably above the 90dBA level. Personal ear protection was worn during the study period only by the last group. The mean differences in hearing levels were insignificant and were essentially the same in the three groups, at each frequency, and regardless of the baseline hearing thresholds. It is apparent that there were no significant changes in hearing threshodls during the study period among a non-noise exposed group; a mild to moderate noise-exposed group; and a group exposed to high levels of steady state noise, but wearing ear protectors. These results indicate that a hearing conservation program which includes audiometric testing and personal ear protection, utilizing a hearing conservation criterion of approximately 90dBA, does adequately protect the hearing of noise-exposed workers. The provision of reinforcements or boosters to interventions is seen as a logical approach to enhancing or maintaining desired behavior. Empirical studies, however, have not confirmed the effectiveness of boosters nor assessed the optimum number of boosters or the timing for their delivery.
                This randomized controlled trial contrasted the effect of four booster conditions (a). 30 days; (b). 90 days; (c). 30 and at 90 days; and (d). no boosters of the intervention to increase the use of hearing protection devices (HPDs).
                A total of 1325 factory workers completed a computerized questionnaire and were randomly assigned to one of three computer-based (tailored, nontailored predictor-based, or control) multimedia interventions designed to increase the use of hearing protection devices. After the intervention, colorful boosters specific to the type of training received were mailed to workers' homes. Posttest measures of use were administered at the time of their next annual audiogram 6 to 18 months after the intervention. RESULTS Repeated measures of analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a significant main effect for the booster (after 30 days) in the group that received tailored training (F[3442] = 2.722; p =.04). However, in the assessment of the interaction between time (pretest and posttest) and boosters (four groups), the ANOVA did not find significant differences in hearing protection device use for any of the training groups. To assess for significant differences between groups, post hoc comparisons were conducted at the pretest and posttest for the total sample and for the subsample of workers who reported using hearing protection devices less than 100% of the time needed. Sheffé contrasts by intervention group, gender, ethnicity, and hearing ability found no significant changes in the mean use of hearing protection devices for the booster groups.
                Although the provision of boosters represented a considerable commitment of resources, their use was not effective in this study. However, it would be premature to eliminate boosters of interventions. Further study is needed to explore the effects of different booster types for increasing the use of hearing protection devices, and to assess carefully the effects of boosters on other health behaviors in studies with controlled designs. The objective was to study the generalizability of trial results by comparing randomized patients to eligible but nonrandomized patients who received the same management. Implementation of trial results is only justifiable when the results can be generalized to the total domain population. The design was a multicentre randomized controlled trial on the effect of early screening and treatment with ventilation tubes on infants with otitis media with effusion. Randomized (n = 187) and nonrandomized eligible patients (n = 133) were followed up. The study population comprised children who were detected by auditory screening at the age of 9-12 months and who were subsequently diagnosed with persistent bilateral otitis media with effusion for 4-6 months. A significant difference was found in the distribution of some prognostic factors: more randomized children had older siblings, did not attend day care and had mothers with a lower educational level than the nonrandomized children. These factors, however, did not modify the outcome. No differences were found in mean hearing levels between the randomized and nonrandomized children: in both the randomized and nonrandomized children ventilation tubes improved the hearing level, especially after 6 months. However, in the long term (12 months), the hearing levels were equal again. The results of the randomized and nonrandomized patients were comparable. The results of this trial appear to be generalizable to the total domain population. The procedure of following up both randomized and nonrandomized patients is recommended when there is concern about selective participation and reduced generalizability.
The evidence found in this review shows that some interventions improve the mean use of hearing protection devices compared to non-intervention. Future trials should have standard outcomes and interventions to allow the combining of results in meta-analysis.