The Impact of Earmuff use in relation to Blood Pressure Due to Noise Exposure Among Machine Operators at Workshops

References

[3] . This is accurate since the majority of industrial machine operators in metal and aluminium fabrication workplaces have complained that they don't wear ear protection because it interferes with their ability to communicate with co- workers. According to research, wearing earmuffs and Ongoing Professional Practice Evaluation (OPPE) simultaneously has an impact on the sound pressure level (SPL) beneath the earmuffs. The design of OPPE used in conjunction with earmuffs affects the SPL values reached. It is clear that different earmuff models result in different SPL variations caused by the usage of OPPE. The negative effects of OPPE on the effectiveness of hearing protection can be mitigated when earmuffs and OPPE are used in combination

[4] . Earmuffs and earplugs are hearing protection equipment that play a significant role in shielding industrial workers from noise exposure. In order to protect the ears and reduce irritation, these devices must be placed correctly to guarantee that the entire ear canal is closed

[5] . To increase adherence to their use, companies and industries must offer hearing protection equipment and hold frequent training sessions

[6] . Additionally, it is crucial for industry supervisors to keep monitoring employees' use of hearing protection devices in order to enhance workplace discipline

[7] . Noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) occurs when employees are exposed to noise levels that are harmful to their hearing mechanisms without wearing earmuffs or earplugs. Despite a large body of research on noise induced hearing loss (NIHL) in industry and workshop, prior publications have frequently been methodologically constrained, concentrating on the immediate impact on hearing using cross-sectional designs rather than examining changes over time

[8] . According to a study, earmuffs intended to shield workers from the damaging effects of noise increase generally accepted levels of weariness and impaired hearing

[9] . Workers' health is negatively impacted by excessive noise exposure, particularly in terms of the physiological and psychological effects

[10] . Depending on the amount and length of exposure, the effects of extreme noise exposure might range from temporary to permanent loss

[11] . Wearing hearing protection can lessen an employee's exposure to loud noises, according to several studies. On the other hand, nothing is known about hearing protection that can considerably lessen issues related to either temporary or permanent loss

[12] . Noise levels above the threshold have also been linked to occupational tiredness, according to several studies. Chung et al. found that using OPPE reduced earmuff attenuation by up to 9 dB, as did a study using a single earmuff model

[13] . Manufacturers specify the sound attenuation of hearing protectors in the user manual. The efficiency of protection under actual conditions frequently differs from the assumed effectiveness of hearing protection resulting from the usage of hearing protectors based on the sound attenuation levels stated in the user manual [14, 15]. These discrepancies are caused by the fact that tests to ascertain the sound attenuation of hearing protectors are carried out on brand-new samples of hearing protectors in controlled laboratory settings, often by a group of trained volunteers [16, 17]. Diastolic blood pressure (DBP) is the lowest pressure in the main arteries during diastole, when the heart relaxes and fills with blood. It is often less than 80 mmHg. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) is the highest pressure in the major arteries during systole, when the heart contracts, and it is typically less than 120 mmHg. Blood pressure variability (BPV), or the degree of blood pressure variation over time, has been linked to cardiovascular diseases, according to post hoc analysis of clinical trials and observational research [18, 19, 20]. Blood pressure naturally changes throughout the day and in reaction to environmental and lifestyle variables. Preventing long-term issues requires keeping track of patterns rather than specific actions. Any unusual or unexpected patterns should be assessed by a medical professional

[21] . Blood pressure variability is the term used to describe the systematic and non- systematic differences in blood pressure readings between and within individuals. It is influenced by a number of factors, including respiration, heart rate, and the sympathetic nervous system. This variability can make identifying and managing hypertension more challenging because it may affect the risk of cardiovascular disease and the effectiveness of treatment options

[22] . However, it has been found that using an angle grinder or aluminium cutter in a workshop without ear protection directly affects the SBP/DBP of industrial machine operators, increasing their risk of cardiovascular diseases and other health problems associated with high noise exposure levels in workshop environments

[23] . Furthermore, little research has been done on how earmuffs affect industrial machine workers' blood pressure variations and hearing impairment. A focused effort that assesses the effectiveness of earmuff protection in lowering hearing issues among machine operators at metal and aluminium workshops as well as any effects on blood pressure (systolic or diastolic) is necessary to close this knowledge gap. Future research may therefore offer suitable suggestions for ear protection techniques targeted at metal and aluminium fabrication workshops, enhancing worker occupational health outcomes. The process of choosing hearing protectors involves determining the A-weighted sound level beneath them using the workplace's noise characteristics and the hearing protectors' sound attenuation

[24] . In certain cases, wearing hearing protection is the only way to lessen workers' exposure to noise. Complete hearing protection is only possible with carefully chosen and used hearing aids. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of noise exposure in workshops on the blood pressure of machine operators wearing earmuffs. While several studies have looked at how earmuffs reduce noise, comparatively few have looked at how earmuff use impacts people's general well-being. This study relates changes in blood pressure to industrial machine operators' use of earmuffs. II. MATERIALS AND METHOD A. Instruments and equipment The following are the specifications of the instruments and equipment adopted in the research process: The Maxicom Digital Blood Pressure Monitor (model RAK269) is an oscillographic, completely automatic instrument with a pressure range of 0~280 mmHg and an accuracy of ±3 mmHg and a portable Garmin 73 GPS unit. The angle grinder commonly used at the workshops are: Bosch angle grinder GWS 2000 9inch 2000W (Germany) and Smartec ST-2304 angle grinder 2200W, 230mm disc (China) while the commonly used aluminium/steel cutter used were Bosch mitre saw GCM254 D, 1800W (Germany), Rich-Plus mitre saw RP25516M, 1800W (China) and Max-Mech mitre saw Max-92552A (China). An Ear-muff with Noise reduction rating between 20dBA to 35dBA and plastic material with equivalent standards of ANSIS3.19, Safety goggles and boots for personal protection and safety. A Sound Level Meter (SLM) with Range from 30dBA to 130dBA with frequency weighting of (dBA), accuracy of ±1.5dBA, Resolution of 0.1dBA, and a slow or fast response time. B. Method There are 125 operators with earmuffs that used standard angle grinders or aluminium cut-off and mitre saws at the workshop participated in this study and adopted a longitudinal study approach to prospect data at metal and aluminium workshops. Three age groups comprised the earmuff-wearing participants: 20–29, 30–39, and 40–49. Only operators between the ages of 20 and 49 who had been working for at least two years had their blood pressure measured in accordance with the included criteria. Operators who took medicine, had been employed for less than two years, were younger than twenty, or were older than fifty due to age-related hearing loss (ARHL) and/or exercised in the morning were not included. Before turning on and operating the angle grinder or the aluminium/steel cutter while wearing an earmuff at each workplace, the operator's blood pressure (SBP/DBP) was measured and recorded using a digital blood pressure monitor while they were appropriately seated. A smart digital sound level meter was used to monitor and record the sound pressure levels at the workshop where the operators operate the machine while wearing earmuffs. Following a three-minute rest, the operators' SBP/DBP was measured and recorded at each workshop after using an angle grinder or aluminium cut-off mitre saw machine for one to two hours and turning it off. The machine's details were noted. This process was repeated again at each workshop with the same participants on separate days in order to confirm whether or not the measured SBP/DBP altered. This approach was chosen to determine whether high noise exposure is the cause of the operators' blood pressure variation. 125 operators with earmuff-equipped at metal and aluminium workshops in the research area took part. At each session, the data gathered from the workshop sites was classified and organised using the letters A, B, C, D, and E based on the participants' age categories. The map of the metal and aluminium workshops in the research region is displayed in Figure 1. Figure 2 shows a digital blood pressure monitor. The following are typical industrial equipment used in the workshops, as seen in Figure 3: a Bosch mitre saw and cut-off machine (GCM 254D). Figure 4: Bosch GWS 2200 professional angle grinder, and Figure 5 displays the sound level meter (HA:2451980), and Figure 6 depicts the operator's earmuff (ANSI S3.19).The study area is located within Jos, Plateau State, Nigeria, with coordinates between latitude 9 ������ 82 ′ −9 ������ ̍ 90 ′ North and longitude 9 ������ 86 ′ − 9 ������ ̍ 90 ′ East where there are many metals and aluminium workshops. Figure 1. Map of the Metal/Aluminium workshops location in the study area Figure 2. Digital Blood Pressure Monitoring Device Figure 3. Bosch Cut-off machine and Mitre saw (GCM 254D) Figure 4. Bosch GWS 2200 Professional angle grinder Figures 5. Sound Level Meter (HA:2451980) Figure 6. An Ear-Muff (ANSI S3.19) III. RESULTS The results are summarized into tables, as Table 1 shows the SBP/DBP variation for 44 operators with ear muff and working age 20 to 29 years. Table 2 shows the variation in SBP/DBP for 64 operators with ear muff and working ages 30 to 39 years. The SBP/DBP variation for 17 operators with ear muff and working age 40 to 49 years is shown in Table 3. The American Heart Association (AHA) blood pressure categories are shown in Table 4, while Table 5 shows the normal blood pressure by age charts by Medecinnet.com, formulated from the AHA. Table 6 shows the WHO classification of hypertension. The SBP/DBP elevation and variation were analysed and presented in figures as shown in figure 7, which compared variation in SBP for operators with earmuffs and working age 20–29 years to AHA standards. Figure 8 shows the comparison in DBP variation for the same operators with earmuffs and working age 20–29 years to the AHA standard. The variation in SBP for operators with earmuffs and working age 30–39 years was compared to the AHA standard as shown in Figure 9. Figure 10 compared variation in DBP for operators with earmuffs and working age 30–39 years to AHA standards. The variation in SBP for operators with earmuffs and working age 40–49 years was compared to the AHA standard as shown in Figure 11. Figure 12 shows the comparison in DBP variation for operators with earmuffs and working age 40–49 years to the AHA standard. Table 1. Mean SBP/DBP Elevation of Operators WITH Ear-Muff (E) and working 20 to 29 years s/n W/S CODE Mean SBP Before (mmHg) Mean SBP After (mmHg) SBP Elevation (mmHg) Mean DBP Before (mmHg) Mean DBP After (mmHg) DBP Elevation (mmHg) Mean SPL (dBA) 1 A1-E 106 113 7 74 79 5 111.9 2 A2-E 109 115 6 75 77 2 113.9 3 A3-E 107 113 6 73 79 5 106.8 4 A4-E 107 115 8 74 79 5 111.9 5 A6-E 108 115 7 74 78 5 108.3 6 A7-E 107 115 8 75 80 5 108.7 7 A9-E 109 116 7 73 78 5 111.8 8 A11-E 108 115 7 75 79 5 113.0 9 A14-E 110 116 7 75 81 5 114.6 10 A16-E 107 115 8 74 79 4 111.9 11 A17-E 107 115 8 75 80 5 111.8 12 A23-E 110 115 5 74 79 5 114.5 13 A25-E 109 116 7 74 80 6 113.2 14 B1-E 109 116 7 74 79 4 113.4 15 B2-E 108 115 7 75 80 4 112.7 16 B8-E 110 118 8 76 81 5 111.4 17 B11-E 109 116 7 75 79 4 111.1 18 B12-E 107 115 7 74 79 6 110.3 19 B16-E 108 116 7 74 79 5 112.7 20 B17-E 109 113 4 75 79 4 110.4 21 B18-E 109 117 8 75 80 5 110.6 22 B19-E 108 116 8 74 79 5 114.5 23 B21-E 108 116 8 75 79 5 108.5 24 C23-E 109 117 8 76 80 4 112.4 25 D2-E 107 115 8 74 79 5 111.4 26 D6-E 108 117 9 75 80 5 110.4 27 D8-E 109 116 8 76 81 5 115.3 28 D14-E 107 117 9 75 80 5 112.0 29 D18-E 108 116 9 74 79 5 113.4 30 D20-E 108 116 8 75 79 5 112.4 31 D23-E 108 117 9 74 80 5 112.5 32 D24-E 109 117 8 75 79 5 111.1 33 E1-E 109 116 7 76 81 6 114.6 34 E3-E 108 116 7 73 78 5 115.9 35 E6-E 108 116 8 74 80 6 114.7 36 E9-E 108 117 9 74 79 5 113.5 37 E11-E 108 117 9 76 81 5 116.3 38 E12-E 109 116 7 75 80 5 114.8 39 E17-E 108 115 7 74 79 5 113.8 40 E19-E 112 119 6 74 79 5 116.4 41 E20-E 107 116 9 74 79 5 112.7 42 E22-E 108 116 8 74 78 4 116.3 43 E23-E 109 117 8 73 79 6 108.6 44 E25-E 109 116 8 74 79 5 107.5 Table 2: Mean SBP/DBP Elevation of Operators WITH Ear-Muff (E) and working 30 to 39 years s/n W/S CODE Mean SBP Before (mmHg) Mean SBP After (mmHg) SBP Elevation (mmHg) Mean DBP Before (mmHg) Mean DBP After (mmHg) DBP Elevation (mmHg) Mean SPL (dBA) 1 A5-E 110 116 6 76 81 5 110.5 2 A8-E 110 120 9 76 81 5 111.4 3 A10-E 111 119 8 76 81 5 114.1 4 A13-E 110 118 8 76 80 5 113.2 5 A19-E 110 119 9 76 80 4 113.6 6 A24-E 110 117 7 74 79 5 113.1 7 B3-E 109 117 8 76 81 5 111.6 8 B4-E 112 119 7 76 80 4 110.7 9 B5-E 109 118 9 75 80 5 111.3 10 B6-E 111 120 9 76 81 5 113.1 11 B7-E 110 119 9 75 80 5 110.8 12 B9-E 111 118 7 75 80 5 113.4 13 B10-E 110 117 7 76 81 5 111.8 14 B13-E 110 117 7 75 80 6 113.3 15 B14-E 112 120 7 77 82 5 112.2 16 B15-E 109 118 9 75 80 5 112.9 17 B20-E 110 118 9 75 79 5 114.0 18 B22-E 111 120 9 77 82 5 114.0 19 B23-E 111 118 7 74 80 6 114.2 20 B24-E 111 119 8 77 82 5 112.4 21 B25-E 110 119 9 76 80 4 111.5 22 C1-E 110 119 9 76 80 5 113.1 23 C3-E 111 120 9 74 78 5 113.3 24 C4-E 110 121 10 77 83 6 113.1 25 C5-E 111 119 8 76 82 6 110.8 26 C6-E 110 117 7 76 81 5 111.4 27 C7-E 109 117 8 74 79 5 111.4 28 C8-E 109 119 10 74 79 5 112.3 29 C9-E 111 123 12 75 80 5 110.0 30 C10-E 110 117 7 74 79 5 111.4 31 C11-E 111 121 10 75 80 5 112.3 32 C12-E 109 118 8 76 81 5 113.2 33 C13-E 111 119 9 74 79 5 112.8 34 C14-E 111 119 8 76 81 5 113.2 35 C15-E 109 119 10 74 79 5 111.4 36 C17-E 110 118 8 76 81 5 112.3 37 C18-E 109 118 9 74 79 5 113.1 38 C19-E 109 120 11 74 79 5 112.7 39 C20-E 111 119 9 74 80 5 110.0 40 C21-E 111 118 8 74 79 5 111.1 41 C22-E 109 118 9 75 80 5 110.9 42 C24-E 110 117 7 75 80 5 111.4 43 C25-E 111 119 9 77 83 5 112.3 44 D1-E 112 120 8 75 80 5 114.0 45 D3-E 111 120 9 76 81 5 110.5 46 D4-E 111 120 8 77 82 6 113.9 47 D5-E 110 119 9 77 82 5 111.0 48 D7-E 111 118 7 76 81 5 113.8 49 D9-E 111 120 10 76 81 5 113.4 50 D10-E 110 118 8 76 80 5 111.8 51 D12-E 111 120 9 75 81 5 114.1 52 D13-E 110 117 7 74 80 6 114.5 53 D15-E 110 120 9 74 80 5 115.8 54 D16-E 111 120 9 75 80 5 115.4 55 D17-E 109 119 9 75 80 5 110.9 56 D19-E 111 119 8 76 81 6 113.7 57 D21-E 110 119 9 75 81 5 114.5 58 E4-E 112 119 7 75 80 5 113.7 59 E5-E 110 117 7 74 79 5 115.4 60 E7-E 110 119 9 76 81 5 115.4 61 E10-E 111 119 8 75 80 5 111.6 62 E13-E 110 119 8 76 81 5 113.9 63 E14-E 111 120 9 75 80 5 116.4 64 E15-E 112 118 6 75 79 5 111.8 Table 3: Mean SBP/DBP Elevation of Operators WITH Ear-Muff (E) and working 40 to 49 years s/n W/S CODE Mean SBP Before (mmHg) Mean SBP After (mmHg) SBP Elevation (mmHg) Mean DBP Before (mmHg) Mean DBP After (mmHg) DBP Elevation (mmHg) Mean SPL (dBA) 1 A12-E 112 123 11 77 83 6 113.4 2 A15-E 111 121 10 77 83 5 112.0 3 A18-E 112 120 8 77 83 6 113.8 4 A20-E 111 121 10 77 84 6 112.7 5 A21-E 111 122 11 78 83 6 114.6 6 A22-E 110 122 12 78 83 5 112.2 7 C2-E 113 123 10 76 84 5 115.6 8 C16-E 112 123 11 77 83 3 112.7 9 D11-E 112 123 11 77 82 5 115.7 10 D22-E 112 121 9 77 83 6 116.4 11 D25-E 112 123 11 77 82 5 113.4 12 E2-E 111 121 10 77 82 5 111.4 13 E8-E 113 121 8 77 82 5 115.5 14 E16-E 113 120 8 77 83 6 113.4 15 E18-E 112 121 9 76 82 6 112.5 16 E21-E 113 121 8 77 82 6 114.2 17 E24-E 113 122 9 77 83 6 117.0 Table 4. American Heart Association (AHA) Blood Pressure Categories BLOOD PRESSURE CATEGORIES Systolic mmHg (Upper number) Diastolic mmHg (Lower number) Normal Less than 120 And Less than 80 Elevated 120 - 129 And Less than 80 High Blood Pressure (Hypertension) Stage 1 130 - 139 Or 80 - 89 High Blood Pressure (Hypertension) Stage 2 140 or Higher Or 90 or Higher Hypertension crisis (Consult Doctor immediately) Higher than 180 And/Or Higher than 120 Source: https://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/high-blood-pressure/

[27] Table 5. Normal Blood Pressure by Age Charts Age Systolic (mmHg) Diastolic (mmHg) Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum 20–29 years ~110 ~120 ~70 ~80 30–39 years ~115 ~125 ~75 ~80 40–49 years ~120 ~130 ~80 ~85 50–59 years ~125 ~135 ~80 ~85 60–69 years ~130 ~140 ~80 ~85 70+ years ~135 ~145 ~80 ~85 Source: https://www.medicinenet.com/ (Medically Reviewed on 12/5/2024)

[26] Table 6. Classification of Hypertension Blood Pressure Classification Systolic Blood Pressure [SBP] (mmHg) Diastolic Blood Pressure [DBP] (mmHg) Colour Indicator Optimal ˂ 120 ˂ 80 Green Normal 120 – 129 80 – 84 Green High- Normal 130 – 139 85 – 89 Green Grade 1 Hypertension 140 – 159 90 – 99 Yellow Grade 2 Hypertension 160 – 179 100 – 109 Yellow Grade 3 Hypertension ≥ 180 ≥ 110 Red Source: WHO/ISH definition and classification of Blood pressure level (2021)

[27] Figure 7. Comparing SBP Elevation of Operators WITH Ear-Muff and Working (20–29) years to A.H.A standard Figure 8. Comparing DBP Elevation of Operators WITH Ear-Muff and Working (20–29) years to A.H.A standard Figure 9. Comparing SBP Elevation of Operators WITH Ear-Muff and working (30–39) years to A.H.A standard Figure 10. Comparing DBP Elevation of Operators WITH Ear-Muff and working (30–39) years to A.H.A standard Figure 11. Comparing SBP Elevation of Operators WITH Ear-Muff and Working (40–49) years to A.H.A standard Figure 12. Comparing DBP Elevation of Operators WITHt Ear-Muff and working (40–49) years to A.H.A standard IV. DISCUSSIONS All operators wearing ear muffs had SBP elevation after operating the machines are within the recommended limit and below 120 mmHg, with mean SBP values ranging from 113 mmHg to 119 mmHg and a group mean of 116 mmHg, according to Figure 7, which compared SBP changes to the AHA standard for the age group 20 to 29 years. Additionally, it was discovered that the group's SBP elevation ranged from 4 to 9 mmHg. Figure 8 illustrates how the DBP of the same age was also compared to the standard. DBP varied from 77 to 81 mmHg, with an elevation of 2 mmHg to 7 mmHg and a mean of 79 mmHg, which is within the age group's recommended limit. Furthermore, from figure 7 and figure 8, the mean elevation of SBP/DBP for the operator with ear muff was found to be 8/5 mmHg while operating angle grinder or aluminium cut-off and mitre saw machine and exposed to sound pressure levels ranging from 106.8 to 116.4 dBA. Figure 9, which compared the SBP of age group 30 to 39 years to the AHA standard, showed that 61 operators had SBP less than or equal to the 120- mmHg normal level, while 3 operators had values greater than 120 mmHg, with values ranging from 121 to 123 mmHg, which is still within the recommended limit for the age group. The SBP ranged from 115.7 to 123.0 mmHg with a mean value of 118.8 mmHg, an SBP elevation from 5.6 to 11.7 mmHg. The DBP of the same group was compared to standard as shown in figure 10; it shows that 35 operators had DBP ≤ 80 mmHg, while 26 had DBP ˃ 80 mmHg with a value range of 81 to 83 mmHg, which is still within the recommended limit for the group. The DBP elevation for the group ranged from 4 to 6 mmHg. Additionally, from figure 9 and figure 10, the mean elevation of SBP/DBP was found to be 8/5 mmHg while operating angle grinder or aluminium cut-off and mitre saw machine with ear muff and exposed to a sound pressure level of ranging from 109.9 to 116.4 dBA. All operators using ear muffs had SBP elevation within the suggested limit and below 120 mmHg, with mean SBP values ranging from 120.3 mmHg to 123.0 mmHg and a group mean of 121.7 mmHg, according to Figure 11, which compared SBP changes to the AHA norm for the age group 40 to 49 years. Additionally, it was discovered that the group's SBP elevation ranged from 8.0 to 12.2 mmHg. 15 operators had SBP > 120 mmHg with values of 120.6 to 123.0 mmHg, which is normal for 40 to 49 years, whereas two operators had SBP values ≤ 120 mmHg. Figure 12 illustrates how the DBP of the same age was also compared to the standard. DBP varied from 79.7 to 83.6 mmHg, with an elevation of 3.1 mmHg to 6.3 mmHg and a mean DBP of 82.5 mmHg, which is within the age group's recommended limit. Furthermore, when using an angle grinder or an aluminium cut-off and mitre saw machine and being subjected to a sound pressure level between 111.4 and 117.6 dBA, the mean elevation of SBP/DBP was determined to be 9.8/5.5 mmHg (figures 11 and 12. The operators with ear muffs were subjected to a mean sound pressure level of 112.4 dBA for 20 to 29 years, which causes a mean elevation of 8/5 mmHg and a mean fluctuation of SBP/DBP of 116/79. The SPL/SBP had a negligible association with a Pearson correlation of 0.323 and an R 2 value of 0.1040 and 10.40%, whereas SPL/DBP had a weak correlation with a Pearson correlation of 0.1906 and an R 2 value of 0.0363 and 3.63% after using the machine. The operators are exposed to a mean sound pressure level of 112.7 dBA for 30 to 39 years, which causes a mean elevation of 8/5 mmHg and a mean variation of SBP/DBP of 119/80. The SPL/SBP had a negligible association with a Pearson correlation of 0.119 and an R² value of 0.0142 and 1.42%, whereas SPL/DBP had a negligible correlation with a Pearson correlation of 0.006 and an R² value of 0.00036 and 0.036% after operating the machines. The operators are exposed to a mean sound pressure level of 113.9 dBA, when using the machine for 40 to 49 years, which causes a mean elevation of 10/6 mmHg and a mean variation of SBP/DBP of 122/83. The SPL/SBP had a negligible Pearson correlation of 0.271 and an R² value of 0.0734 and 7.34%, whereas SPL/DBP had a negligible correlation with a Pearson correlation of 0.129 and a R² value of 0.0166 and 1.66%. V. CONCLUSION In conclusion, the research results showed a very insignificant link between the operators' SBP/DBP variation and the sound pressure level they have been exposed to when wearing an earmuff and using an industrial machine such as an angle grinder or an aluminium cutter at the workshop. Furthermore, there is no connection between noise exposure at the workshop and changes in SBP/DBP for an operator wearing an earmuff because the SPL has little to no effect on the operators' blood pressure. This has further demonstrated how important an earmuff is for reducing the intensity of noise that enters the ears when working in a workshop or other noisy environment. However, improper placement of earmuffs can cause thermal discomfort and interfere with protective glasses, which lowers the earmuffs' effectiveness. VI. RECOMMENDATION Therefore, in order to protect their health, machine operators must wear earplugs and other personal protective equipment (PPE) and monitor their blood pressure on a regular basis. To help to mitigate the consequences of exposure to noise pollution, regulatory bodies should also mandate the use of ear protection, such as earmuffs, earplugs, etc., at workshops. Because of the high level of risk associated with their profession, operators are encouraged to routinely check their blood pressure and hearing sensitivity. Earmuffs are especially important in preventing irreversible hearing loss since they block loud equipment noises that exceed 85 dB. They also enhance people's capacity to concentrate and focus at work by lowering the stress, exhaustion, and annoyance caused by loud noise. REFENCES

[1] Zhou, J., Shi, Z., Zhou, L., Hu, Y. and Zhang, M., 2020. Occupational noise-induced hearing loss in China: A systematic review and meta analysis. BMJ Open, 10(9), pp.1–9 https://

[2] Sumardiyono, S., Chahyadhi, B., Suratna, F.S.N., Fauzi, R.P., Wijayanti, R., Widjanarti, M.P. and ‘Ada, Y.R., 2023. Effect of Noise, Blood Glucose, and Body Mass Index on Lactate Levels in Textile Industry Workers.JurnalPenelitian Pendidikan IPA,9,pp.81–87. https:// pecialIssue.6009

[3] Stephanie, L. and Eyre, A.J., 2024. Personal protective equipment. In: Ciottone’s Disaster Medicine, 3th ed. Elsevier. pp.323329. https:// 12

[4] Emil Kozlowski and Rafal Mlynski (2019). Selection of Earmuffs and Other Personal Protective Equipment Used in Combination. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1477; https// www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph

[5] Natarajan, N., Batts, S. and Stankovic, K.M., 2023. Noise-induced hearing loss. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12(6), pp.1–34. https://

[6] Sari, V., Yuliati and Nurgahayu, 2021. Pengaruh Intensitas Kebisingan Terhadap Gangguan Pendengaran, Gangguan Psikologis Dan Gangguan Komunikasi Pada Pekerja. Window of Public Health Journal, 2(6), pp.1012–1022. https://

[7] Basner, M., Babisch, W., Davis, A., Brink, M., Clark, C., Janssen, S. and Stansfeld, S., 2014. Auditory and non-auditory effects of noise on health. The Lancet, 383(9925), pp.1325–1332. https:// 6736(13)61613-X

[8] Orikpete, O.F., Dennis, N.M., Kikanme, K.N. and Ewim, D.R.E., 2024. Advancing noise management in aviation: Strategic approaches for preventing noise-induced hearing loss. Journal of Environmental Management, [online] 363, pp.1–18. https:// 024.121413/

[9] Setyawan, H., Kusuma, N.N., Rahma, R.A.A., and Prasetya, T.A.E, (2026). The Impact of Earmuff Use on Hearing Function Impairment and Fatigue: A Time Series Study Among Weaving Workers in Surakarta, Indonesia. The Indonesian Journal of Public Health, 21(1), 57- 71. https:// 71

[10] Majid, M., Abid, R., Ali, A. and Ahmad, S., 2021. Physiological and Psychological Impacts of Noise Pollution on the Workers; a Case Study in Textile Mills of Multan, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Science, 73(2), pp.397– 402. https://

[11] Panggeleng, A.M.F., Ananda, R. and Maharja, R., 2022. Faktor Yang Berhubungan dengan Gangguan Fungsi Pendengaran Pekerja. Jurnal Keperawatan Profesional (KEPO), 3(2), pp.108–114. https://

[12] Dastpaak, H., Alimohammadi, I., Sameni, S. jalal, Abolghasemi, J. and Vosoughi, S., 2019. Effects of earplug hearing protectors on the intelligibility of Persian words in noisy environments. Applied Acoustics, 148, pp.19– 22. https:// 018.11.017.

[13] Azares, P.M.; Miguel, A.S. Assessing the use of hearing protection in industrial settings: A comparison between methods. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2013, 43, 518–525. [CrossRef]

[14] Rocha, C.H.; Longo, I.A.; Moreira, R.R.; Samelli, A.G. Evaluation of the hearing protector in a real work situation using the field- microphone-in-real-ear method. CODAS 2016, 28, 99–105. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

[15] Chung, D.Y.; Hardie, R.; Gannon, R.P. The effect of hair, glasses, or cap on the performance of one pair of Bilsom Viking circumaural hearing protectors. Can. Acoust. 1983, 11, 45–49.

[16] Occupational Safety and Health Administration (2025). Last updated: 1/22/2025 www.osha.gov

[17] National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency. (2009). National Environmental (Noise Standards and Control) Regulations. NESREA.

[18] ISO. ISO 4869-1:2018. Acoustics Hearing Protectors—Part 1: Subjective Method for the Measurement of Sound Attenuation; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018.

[19] ASA. ANSI/ASA S12.6-2016. Methods for Measuring the Real Ear Attenuation of Hearing Protectors; Acoustical Society of America: New York, NY, USA, 2016.

[20] Akinbode, A., Okeke, F., Lawal, B., and Hassan, Y. (2018). Urban noise pollution in Nigeria: A review. Journal of Environmental Management, 10(1), 88–97. Retrieved from https://jemng.org/

[21] Stansfeld, S. A. and Matheson, M. P. (2006). Noise pollution: Non-auditory effects on health. British Medical Bulletin, 68(1), 243–257

[22] Münzel, T., Sorensen, M., and Schmidt, F. (2021). Noise pollution and public health. Journal of Enviro Medicine, 19(1), 12–25.

[23] Aboche F.E., Makama E.K., Anjorin O.F., Chagok N.M.D (2026). Assessment of Blood Pressure Variation Due to Noise Exposure Among Machine Operators Without Ear- protection at Workshops. Engineering and Applied Sciences, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 129–140 https://

[24] CEN.EN458:2016HearingProtectors recommendation for Selection, Use, Care and Maintenance—Guidance Document; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium,

[25] American Heart Association (AHA) (2025). Guidelines. www.heart.org/en/health-topics/high-blood- pressure/

[26] MedicineNet. https://www.medicinenet.com/normal_blood_ pressure_and_pulse_by_age/ (accessed 23 July 2026).

[27] World Health Organization (2021). Guideline on pharmacological treatment of hypertension: policy impact. http://www.who.int/

@article{1722536,
      author = {Edwin Francis Aboche, Ezekiel Kaura Makama, Oladele Francis Anjorin, Nestor Monday Dangu Chagok},
      title = {The Impact of Earmuff use in relation to Blood Pressure Due to Noise Exposure Among Machine Operators at Workshops},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {10},
      number = {2},
      pages = {2948-2961},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1722536.pdf},
      abstract = {Earmuffs and earplugs are hearing protection devices that play a significant role in shielding industrial workers from noise exposure; these devices must be placed correctly to guarantee that the entire ear canal is closed. The majority of industrial machine operators at metal and aluminium fabrication workshops complained that they don't use ear protection because it interferes with communication with other workers. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of noise exposure in workshops on the blood pressure of machine operators wearing earmuffs. A digital blood pressure monitoring device was used to measure the SBP/DBP of 125 earmuff-wearing industrial machine operators, ages 20 to 49, both before and after they used the machine for at least two hours each day for three days. The findings revealed that when exposed to a noise level of 112.4 dBA, operators between the ages of 20 and 29 had an SBP/DBP increase of 8/5 mmHg, a negligible correlation of 0.323 for SPL/SBP and 0.1906 for SPL/DBP. When subjected to a noise level of 112.7 dBA, the operators, who were between the ages of 30 and 39, exhibited an insignificant correlation of 0.119 for SPL/SBP and 0.006 for SPL/DBP, with an elevation of 8/5 mmHg. When exposed to noise level of 113.9 dBA, the operators between the ages of 40 and 49 had an SBP/DBP increase of 10/6 mmHg, a weak correlation of 0.271 for SPL/SBP and 0.129 for SPL/DBP. The study concluded that there was a negligible correlation between the operators' SBP/DBP variation and the noise level they encountered when operating an industrial machine and wearing an earmuff. Additionally, for an operator wearing an earmuff, the BP elevation demonstrated a minimal elevation in SBP/DBP; therefore, the noise exposure had little to no impact on the operator's blood pressure. },
      keywords = {blood pressure, correlation, earmuff, sbp/dbp variation, noise level, noise exposure. },
      month = {August},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I2-1722536}
  }