Article

Noise impacts from professional dog grooming forced-air dryers

Communication Sciences and Disorders Department, University of Cincinnati, USA.
Noise and Health (Impact Factor: 1.43). 09/2012; 14(60):224-6. DOI: 10.4103/1463-1741.102958
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study was designed to measure the sound output of four commonly used brands of forced-air dryers used by dog groomers in the United States. Many dog groomers have questions about the effect of this exposure on their hearing, as well as on the hearing of the dogs that are being groomed. Readings taken from each dryer at 1 meter (the likely distance of the dryer from the groomer and the dog) showed average levels ranging from 105.5 to 108.3 dB SPL or 94.8 to 108.0 dBA. Using the 90 dBA criterion required by the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration, dog groomers/bathers are at risk if exposure to the lowest intensity dryer (94.8 dBA) exceeds 4 hours per day. If the more stringent 85 dBA criterion and 3 dB tradeoff is applied, less than one hour of exposure is permissible in an 8 hour day. Cautions are recommended for any persons exposed to noise from forced-air dryers.

0 Followers
 · 
66 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: High sound levels are known to have adverse effects on the behaviour and physiology of laboratory animals, yet their acoustic environment is rarely monitored. In particular, high-frequency sounds that are above the limit of human hearing, but are well within the limits of many laboratory species (i.e., ultrasounds), are usually ignored. In this study, the acoustic environment of laboratory animals was investigated in a variety of different animal facilities. Sound pressure levels (dB SPL) were monitored for periods up to 24 h over two frequency ranges: a relatively low range (0.01-12.5 kHz), and a high range (12.5-70 kHz). While background sound levels in undisturbed situations were generally low (i.e., below 50 dB SPL), marked increases in sound levels often occurred during the working day, producing characteristic daily variations in the sound profile. Peak SPLs commonly reached values of 80-95 dB in the low-frequency range and 50-75 dB in the higher range. In most cases, sound levels were low over weekends. The results suggested that human activities were a very important source of sound in most animal facilities. In a few situations (e.g., rabbits, marmosets, dogs), the animals themselves provided a significant contribution to the acoustic environment. It is clear that the acoustic environment of laboratory animals is a daily variable that is usually uncontrolled and that may have important implications for behavioural and physiological experiments and for animal welfare.
    Physiology & Behavior 07/1993; 53(6):1067-76. DOI:10.1016/0031-9384(93)90361-I · 3.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sound levels in animal shelters regularly exceed 100 dB. Noise is a physical stressor on animals that can lead to behavioral, physiological, and anatomical responses. There are currently no policies regulating noise levels in dog kennels. The objective of this study was to evaluate the noise levels dogs are exposed to in an animal shelter on a continuous basis and to determine the need, if any, for noise regulations. Noise levels at a newly constructed animal shelter were measured using a noise dosimeter in all indoor dog-holding areas. These holding areas included large dog adoptable, large dog stray, small dog adoptable, small dog stray, and front intake. The noise level was highest in the large adoptable area. Sound from the large adoptable area affected some of the noise measurements for the other rooms. Peak noise levels regularly exceeded the measuring capability of the dosimeter (118.9 dBA). Often, in new facility design, there is little attention paid to noise abatement, despite the evidence that noise causes physical and psychological stress on dogs. To meet their behavioral and physical needs, kennel design should also address optimal sound range.
    Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 02/2006; 9(1):1-7. DOI:10.1207/s15327604jaws0901_1 · 0.69 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To estimate the prevalence of workplace noise exposure and use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) at noisy work, NIOSH analyzed 1999-2004 data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). A total of 9,275 currently employed workers aged > or =16 years were included in the weighted analysis. Hazardous workplace noise exposure was defined as self-reported exposure to noise at their current job that was so loud that the respondent had to speak in a raised voice to be heard. Industry and occupation were determined based on the respondent's current place and type of work. Twenty-two million US workers (17%) reported exposure to hazardous workplace noise. The weighted prevalence of workplace noise exposure was highest for mining (76%, SE = 7.0) followed by lumber/wood product manufacturing (55%, SE = 2.5). High-risk occupations included repair and maintenance, motor vehicle operators, and construction trades. Overall, 34% of the estimated 22 million US workers reporting hazardous workplace exposure reported non-use of HPDs. The proportion of noise-exposed workers who reported non-use of HPDs was highest for healthcare and social services (73.7%, SE = 8.1), followed by educational services (55.5%). Hearing loss prevention and intervention programs should be targeted at those industries and occupations identified to have a high prevalence of workplace noise exposure and those industries with the highest proportion of noise-exposed workers who reported non-use of HPDs.
    American Journal of Industrial Medicine 05/2009; 52(5):358-71. DOI:10.1002/ajim.20690 · 1.59 Impact Factor