A video describing proper usage of soft foam earplugs<unk>  can be prevented through the use of simple, widely available, and economical tools. This includes but is not limited to personal<unk>  reduction through the use of ear protection (i.e. earplugs and earmuffs), education, and hearing conservation programs. For the average person, there are three basic things that one can do to prevent<unk> : turn down the volume on devices, move away from the source of<unk> , and wear hearing protectors in loud environments. Non-occupational<unk>  exposure is not regulated or governed in the same manner as occupational<unk>  exposure; therefore prevention efforts rely heavily on education awareness campaigns and public policy. The WHO cites that nearly half of those affected by hearing loss could have been prevented through primary prevention efforts such as: "reducing exposure (both occupational and recreational) to loud sounds by raising awareness about the risks; developing and enforcing relevant legislation; and encouraging individuals to use personal protective devices such as earplugs and<unk> -cancelling earphones and headphones." Personal<unk>  reduction devices Personal<unk>  reduction devices can be passive, active or a combination. Passive ear protection includes earplugs or earmuffs which can block<unk>  up to a specific frequency. Earplugs and earmuffs can provide the wearer with 10 dB to 40 dB of attenuation. However, use of earplugs is only effective if the users have been educated and use them properly; without proper use, protection falls far below manufacturer ratings. A Cochrane review found that training of earplug insertion can reduce<unk>  exposure at short term follow-up compared to workers wearing earplugs without training. Higher consistency of performance has been found with custom-molded earplugs. Because of their ease of use without education, and ease of application or removal, earmuffs have more consistency with both compliance and<unk>  attenuation. Active ear protection (electronic pass-through hearing protection devices or EPHPs) electronically filter out<unk> s of specific frequencies or decibels while allowing the remaining<unk>  to pass through. A personal attenuation rating can be objectively and subjectively measured by using a hearing protection fit testing system. Education Education is key to prevention. Before hearing protective actions will take place, a person must understand they are at risk for<unk>  and know their options for prevention. Hearing protection programs have been hindered by people not wearing the protection for various reasons, including the desire to converse, uncomfortable devices, lack of concern about the need for protection, and social pressure against wearing protection. Although youth are at risk for hearing loss, one study found that 96.3% of parents did not believe their adolescents were at risk, and only 69% had talked to their children about hearing protection; those aware of<unk>  risks were more likely to talk to their teens. A systematic review of the effectiveness of interventions to promote the use of hearing protection devices such as earplugs and earmuffs among workers found that tailored interventions improve the average use of such devices when compared with no intervention. Tailored interventions involve the use of communication or other types of interventions that are specific to an individual or a group and aim to change behavior. Mixed interventions such as mailings, distribution of hearing protection devices,<unk>  assessments, and hearing testing are also more effective in improving the use of hearing protection devices compared with hearing testing alone. Programs that increased the proportion of workers wearing hearing protection equipment did reduce overall hearing loss. Hearing conservation programs Workers in general industry who are exposed to<unk>  levels above 85 dBA are required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to be in a hearing conservation program (HCP), which includes<unk>  measurement,<unk>  control, periodic audiometric testing, hearing protection, worker education, and record keeping. Twenty-four states, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have OSHA-approved state plans and have adopted their own standards and enforcement policies. Most of these state standards are identical to those of federal OSHA. However, some states have adopted different standards or may have different enforcement policies. Most health and safety regulations are designed to keep damage risk within "acceptable limits" — that is, some people are likely to incur a hearing loss even when exposed to less than the maximum daily amount of<unk>  specified in a regulation. Hearing conservation programs in other arenas (schools, military) have become more common, and it has been established that unsafe listening behaviors, such as listening to loud<unk>  for extended periods of time without protection, persist despite knowledge of potential hearing loss effects. However, it is understood that HCPs are designed to change behavior, which is known to be a complex issue that requires a multi-faceted approach. According to Keppler et al. in their 2015 study of such programming, they cite the necessary attitude change towards the susceptibility of risk and degree of severity of hearing loss. Among young adults, the concept of severity is most crucial because it has been found that behavior change may not occur unless an individual experiences<unk>  or similarly related<unk>  tinnitus, furthering warranting a multi-pronged approach based on hearing conservation programming and education. Interventions to prevent<unk>  often have many components. A 2017 Cochrane review found that hearing loss prevention programs suggest that stricter legislation might reduce<unk>  levels. Giving workers information on their<unk>  exposure levels by itself was not shown to decrease exposure to<unk> . Ear protection, if used correctly, has the potential to reduce<unk>  to safer levels, but does not necessarily prevent hearing loss. External solutions such as proper maintenance of equipment can lead to<unk>  reduction, but further study of this issue under real-life conditions is needed. Other possible solutions include improved enforcement of existing legislation and better implementation of well-designed prevention programmes, which have not yet been proven conclusively to be effective. The implications is that further research could affect conclusions reached. Several hearing conservation programs have been developed to educate a variety of audiences about the dangers of<unk>  and how to prevent it. Dangerous Decibels aims to significantly reduce the prevalence of<unk>  and tinnitus through exhibits, education and research. We're hEAR for You is a small non-profit that distributes information and ear plugs at concert and music festival venues. The Buy Quiet program was created to combat occupational<unk>  exposures by promoting the purchase of quieter tools and equipment and encourage manufacturers to design quieter equipment. The National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders developed the It's a<unk>  Planet. Protect their Hearing educational campaign to inform preteens, parents, and educators about the causes and prevention of<unk> . The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health partnered with the National Hearing Conservation Association in 2007 to establish the Safe-in-Sound Excellence and Innovation in Hearing Loss Prevention Awards to recognize organizations that are successfully implementing hearing loss prevention concepts into their daily routines. Medication Medications are still being researched to determine if they can prevent<unk> . No medication has been proven to prevent or repair<unk>  in humans. There is evidence that hearing loss can be minimized by taking high doses of magnesium for a few days, starting as soon as possible after exposure to the loud<unk> . A magnesium-high diet also seems to be helpful as an<unk> -preventative if taken in advance of exposure to loud<unk> s. Along the same line of research, higher dietary or supplemental intakes of magnesium combined with antioxidant vitamins, specifically β-carotene and vitamin C, appear to be associated with a lower risk of hearing loss. Consuming excessive amounts of magnesium can be potentially harmful, so any treatments should be followed with caution. Tentative research in a mouse model suggests that blocking the GluA2-lacking, calcium-permeable forms of the AMPA receptor protects against hearing damage. Sound or stress training Despite different people having different thresholds for what<unk> s are painful, this pain threshold has no correlation with which<unk> s cause hearing damage. The ear can not get more resistant to<unk>  harmfulness by training it to<unk> . The cochlea is partially protected by the acoustic reflex, but being frequently exposed to<unk>  does not lower the reflex threshold. It had been observed that<unk>  conditioning (i.e. exposure to loud non-traumatizing<unk>  several hours prior to the exposure to traumatizing sound level, significantly reduced the damages inflicted to the hair-cells. The same "protective effect" was also observed with other stressors such as heat-shock conditioning and stress (by restraint) conditioning. This "protective effect" only happens if the traumatizing<unk>  is presented within an optimum interval of time after the sound-conditioning session (-24 hours for a 15 min. sound-conditioning; no more protection after 48 hours). This "protective effect" had long been thought to involve the active mechanisms of the outer hair cells and the efferent system commanding them. The contractile effect of the outer hair cells, activated by the efferent nervous system has been proven to provide a protective effect against acoustic trauma. Cross-section of the cochlea. The inner hair cells are connected to afferent nerve fibers, and the outer
Noise-induced hearing loss
Vibroacoustic disease
Conductive hearing loss
Cochlear hydrops
Nasodigitoacoustic syndrome
Musical ear syndrome
Autoimmune inner ear disease
Sensorineural hearing loss