4.7 Article

Exposure to workplace noise and the risk of cardiovascular disease events and mortality among older adults

Journal

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
Volume 53, Issue 6, Pages 390-394

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.10.001

Keywords

Workplace noise exposure; Cardiovascular disease; Stroke; Angina; Mortality; Blue Mountains Hearing Study

Funding

  1. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council [974159, 991407, 211069, 262120]
  2. HEARing CRC under the Australian Government's Cooperative Research Centres

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. We aimed to examine whether cross-sectional (prevalence) and longitudinal relationships (5-year incidence and 10-year mortality) exist between workplace noise exposure and cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Methods. 2942 participants aged 55+ years of the Blue Mountains Eye Study, Australia (1997-9 and 2002-4). Participants self-reported workplace noise exposure, hearing protector use and physician diagnosed CVD. CVD deaths were confirmed using the Australian National Death Index. Results. 133 and 937 participants self-reported workplace noise exposure, and use or non-use of hearing protection devices, respectively. After multivariate adjustment, those who did not use hearing protection devices were 53% and 75% more likely to have prevalent CVD and angina, respectively, compared to those never exposed to workplace noise. Exposure to severe workplace noise for less than 1 to 5 years versus no exposure was associated with incident stroke OR 3.44 (95% CI 1.11-10.63). The mortality rate of CVD was 0.94% per year in people unexposed to workplace noise. Participants reporting less than 1 to 5 years versus those with no workplace noise exposure had a higher risk of CVD mortality, hazard ratio. HR, 1.60 (95% Cl 1.10-2.33). Discussion. These data highlight the public health impact of workplace noise exposure on the vascular health of older adults. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.d

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available