Are you Steven K Broste?

Claim your profile

Publications (2)7.97 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We had the rare opportunity to conduct a cluster-randomized controlled trial to observe the long-term (16-year) effects of a well-designed hearing conservation intervention for rural high school students. This trial assessed whether the intervention resulted in (1) reduced prevalence of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) assessed clinically and/or (2) sustained use of hearing protection devices. In 1992-1996, 34 rural Wisconsin schools were recruited and 17 were assigned randomly to receive a comprehensive, 3-year, hearing conservation intervention. In 2009-2010, extensive efforts were made to find and contact all students who completed the original trial. Participants in the 16-year follow-up study completed an exposure history questionnaire and a clinical audiometric examination. Rates of NIHL and use of hearing protection were compared. We recruited 392 participants from the original trial, 200 (53%) from the intervention group and 192 (51%) from the control group. Among participants with exposure to agricultural noise, the intervention group reported significantly greater use of hearing protection compared with the control group (25.9% vs 19.6%; P = .015). The intervention group also reported significantly greater use of hearing protection for shooting guns (56.2% vs 41.6%; P = .029), but the groups reported similar uses of protection in other contexts. There was no significant difference between groups with respect to objective measures of NIHL. This novel trial provides objective evidence that a comprehensive educational intervention by itself may be of limited effectiveness in preventing NIHL in a young rural population.
    PEDIATRICS 11/2011; 128(5):e1139-46. · 4.47 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: (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.
    Preventive Medicine 10/2009; 49(6):546-52. · 3.50 Impact Factor