Reduced noise in the emergency department: the impact on staff well-being and room acoustics.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Emergency Medicine Journal Pub Date : 2024-08-21 DOI:10.1136/emermed-2023-213471
Sofie Hendriks, Claudia M Vernooij, Rory D O'Connor, Kim E Jie
{"title":"Reduced noise in the emergency department: the impact on staff well-being and room acoustics.","authors":"Sofie Hendriks, Claudia M Vernooij, Rory D O'Connor, Kim E Jie","doi":"10.1136/emermed-2023-213471","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and introduction: </strong>The ED is often perceived as noisy. Excessive noise has deleterious effects on health and productivity. This study evaluated if a package of noise-reducing interventions altered workload, physical complaints, productivity and room acoustics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an observational pre-post implementation study. It was performed in our non-academic ED in the Netherlands from July 2021 to April 2022. Our primary objective was to determine if a combination of technical, acoustical and behavioural interventions was associated with improved staff well-being, and the secondary objective was to evaluate if these interventions resulted in better room acoustics. Moreover, the correlation of noise sensitivity with staff well-being and its effect on interventions were evaluated. All ED staff that were sufficiently exposed to the interventions received questionnaires to assess their well-being before and after the interventions. Room acoustics before and after interventions were expressed in reverberation time (seconds) and participant ratings are reflected as the mean of the sum of their Likert scale ratings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>43 participants were included. At baseline, individual noise sensitivity was significantly correlated with physical complaints (r=0.409, p=0.006) and productivity (r=0.399, p=0.008). After the interventions, a reduction in reverberation time was reached in the central ED area (0.49 s, SD 0.06 s vs 0.39 s, SD 0.05; p<0.001). Participants experienced significantly less noise disturbance during work (sum score 7.28 vs 3.19; p<0.001). Productivity and physical complaints improved significantly (sum score 4.81 vs 2.70; p<0.001 and sum score -3.74 vs -8.14; p<0.001, respectively). Participants also showed a perceived change in behaviour (sum score -2.00 vs -4.70; p<0.001). There was no confounding by noise sensitivity nor age.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The package of behavioural, acoustical and technical interventions was associated with increased staff well-being, reflected by decreased perception of noise, increased productivity, decreased physical complaints and observable changes in behaviour. Furthermore, the interventions positively influenced the room acoustics.</p>","PeriodicalId":11532,"journal":{"name":"Emergency Medicine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"538-542"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergency Medicine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2023-213471","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and introduction: The ED is often perceived as noisy. Excessive noise has deleterious effects on health and productivity. This study evaluated if a package of noise-reducing interventions altered workload, physical complaints, productivity and room acoustics.

Methods: This was an observational pre-post implementation study. It was performed in our non-academic ED in the Netherlands from July 2021 to April 2022. Our primary objective was to determine if a combination of technical, acoustical and behavioural interventions was associated with improved staff well-being, and the secondary objective was to evaluate if these interventions resulted in better room acoustics. Moreover, the correlation of noise sensitivity with staff well-being and its effect on interventions were evaluated. All ED staff that were sufficiently exposed to the interventions received questionnaires to assess their well-being before and after the interventions. Room acoustics before and after interventions were expressed in reverberation time (seconds) and participant ratings are reflected as the mean of the sum of their Likert scale ratings.

Results: 43 participants were included. At baseline, individual noise sensitivity was significantly correlated with physical complaints (r=0.409, p=0.006) and productivity (r=0.399, p=0.008). After the interventions, a reduction in reverberation time was reached in the central ED area (0.49 s, SD 0.06 s vs 0.39 s, SD 0.05; p<0.001). Participants experienced significantly less noise disturbance during work (sum score 7.28 vs 3.19; p<0.001). Productivity and physical complaints improved significantly (sum score 4.81 vs 2.70; p<0.001 and sum score -3.74 vs -8.14; p<0.001, respectively). Participants also showed a perceived change in behaviour (sum score -2.00 vs -4.70; p<0.001). There was no confounding by noise sensitivity nor age.

Conclusion: The package of behavioural, acoustical and technical interventions was associated with increased staff well-being, reflected by decreased perception of noise, increased productivity, decreased physical complaints and observable changes in behaviour. Furthermore, the interventions positively influenced the room acoustics.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
降低急诊室的噪音:对工作人员健康和室内声学的影响。
背景和引言:人们通常认为急诊室噪音很大。过度的噪音会对健康和工作效率产生有害影响。本研究评估了一揽子降噪干预措施是否会改变工作量、身体不适、工作效率和室内声学效果:这是一项实施前-实施后的观察性研究。研究于 2021 年 7 月至 2022 年 4 月在荷兰的非学术性急诊室进行。我们的首要目标是确定技术、声学和行为干预措施的结合是否与员工健康状况的改善有关,次要目标是评估这些干预措施是否能改善室内声学效果。此外,还评估了噪音敏感度与员工健康的相关性及其对干预措施的影响。所有充分接触到干预措施的急诊室工作人员都接受了问卷调查,以评估他们在干预措施前后的健康状况。干预前后的室内声学以混响时间(秒)表示,参与者的评分以其李克特量表评分总和的平均值表示:共纳入 43 名参与者。基线时,个人噪音敏感度与身体不适(r=0.409,p=0.006)和工作效率(r=0.399,p=0.008)显著相关。采取干预措施后,ED 中心区域的混响时间有所缩短(0.49 秒,SD 0.06 秒 vs 0.39 秒,SD 0.05;p 结论:行为、声学和技术方面的一揽子干预措施提高了工作人员的幸福感,这体现在对噪音的感知降低、工作效率提高、身体不适减少以及行为上的明显变化。此外,干预措施还对室内声学效果产生了积极影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Emergency Medicine Journal
Emergency Medicine Journal 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
6.50%
发文量
262
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Emergency Medicine Journal is a leading international journal reporting developments and advances in emergency medicine and acute care. It has relevance to all specialties involved in the management of emergencies in the hospital and prehospital environment. Each issue contains editorials, reviews, original research, evidence based reviews, letters and more.
期刊最新文献
Best evidence topic report: can intradermal sterile water injections provide effective pain relief in patients with renal colic? Correspondence on 'Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus andexanet alfa for the reversal of traumatic brain injuries' by Sadek et al. Correspondence on 'Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus andexanet alfa for the reversal of traumatic brain injuries' by Sadek et al. Is it time to reframe resuscitation in trauma? Are there differences in low-acuity emergency department visits between culturally and linguistically diverse migrants and people with English-speaking background: a population-based linkage study of adults over 45.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1