If the shoe fits.

If the glove does not fit, you must acquit.

There is an awful lot of talk about things fitting or not fitting right. “The economic plan does not fit with reality.” “He was a hard worker, but he didn’t fit into our company culture.”

A good fit and comfort level seem to be important factors in many lives. Why does it not seem to apply to some worksites, especially those construction sites where a hearing protection device (HPD) can and should be used?

HPD by darkbuffet

[Image courtesy of Flickr user darkbuffet via a Creative Commons license] Hearing protective devices, or HPDs, are vital in preventing noise damage to ears of workers. But with various issues with discomfort, HPDs are not used on construction sites nearly as much as they should, and a big part of it is more the fit of the devices rather than their ability to reduce noise.

Donald Garvey wrote a comprehensive piece about hearing protection in the September 2015 issue of Professional Safety magazine, published by ASSE. HPDs are a main focus of Garvey’s article, especially on the lack of use in the construction industry among construction site workers. In this new post, which follows the previous two in breaking down this article, we’ll be looking at probably the most important test of HPDs that isn’t being done prevalently like it should:

The fit test.

HPDs can be effective in reducing ambient noise around ears and protecting workers’ hearing, but only if the devices are actually being used. They do no one any good if they are uncomfortable for the workers or not conveniently available for them, regardless of the noise reduction rating (NRR) of the HPD. When it comes to having things in your ears or around your head, fit does matter, but it seems that many construction companies who offer HPDs only offer limited choices according to an NRR number rather than taking comfort and fit into consideration.

It is a delicate balancing act, for sure. As a construction company safety officer, you want to show a good-faith effort in promoting hearing safety among your workforce when they are on the job site, but you also want your workers to be able to work comfortably. Based on the impact of those few workers who actually wear HPDs at least part of the time, some companies might be better off not having the HPDs in the first place.

When you are talking about HPDs, every set of ears and every head is different, so you need to consider each individual taste. Sometimes you may have to sacrifice a couple NRR points in exchange for the kind of comfortable fit that will encourage workers to keep their HPDs in place through their entire shift. Garvey spent a little time in his article discussing “fit testing” of HPDs, talking about them in two ways:

  1. A subjective test, which is based on a HPD wearer’s responses to a test signal;  and
  2. An objective test, which is based solely on actual numerical measurements of sound levels.

You notice that NRR is not really mentioned in a fit test. Is that important? Well, NRR is important only to a point. It matters if the NPD is comfortable enough to be worn by a worker for an entire shift. How much noise is reduced is only one part of the puzzle, but there are several benefits behind conducting fit tests on HPDs before they are used on the worksite. Garvey address some of these benefits:

  • Workers can choose HPDs based on comfort level and noise protection, not just the NRR alone. HPDs are more effective when they are worn, and they are worn more when they are comfortable. Fit tests makes HPDs more customized and personal.
  • Comfort may override some of the noise reduction so that workers can still communicate wih supervisors and can hear any warning signals that may come.
  • Trainers can be trained to understand what constitutes proper fit for individuals and can assess the value of the noise reduction with the various HPDs that are used.
  • Establish a good inventory that either provides a wider or narrower selection of HPDs according to what works best for workers.
  • An opportunity to have documentation of HPDs being used by workers that will pass muster in case of a safety audit.
  • For those who may still have trouble finding the right balance between comfort and protection, safety officers and trainers will have the chance to conduct some re-training to assist those workers in doing the due diligence to protect themselves.

Other challenges to more regular HPD use among construction workers, Garvey writes, include the issue of HPDs being compatible (or incompatible)  with other safety equipment like safety glasses, welding shields and headgear as examples; and newer features with certain HPDs, including earplugs that may be used with gloved hands, for example.

Next up: Training workers in hearing conservation and its importance on a worksite.