Introduction
In this modern era, industrial noise is not merely a background element; it’s an omnipresent reality for countless workers, shaping their daily experiences and long-term health [
1,
2]. The escalating issue of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is starkly highlighted by the World Health Organization’s projection that by 2050, around 2.5 billion people globally — approximately 1 in 4 — will experience some form of hearing loss, with at least 700 million requiring ear and hearing care [
3]. NIHL, a prevalent occupational hazard, poses a significant risk to workers in various industries [
4]. The impact of excessive workplace noise extends beyond hearing damage; it impairs communication, reduces quality of life, and decreases productivity [
5,
6]. Alarmingly, over 1 billion young adults face the risk of NIHL from noise exposure in both recreational settings and workplaces [
7]. In the USA, for instance, one-fourth of workers are exposed to potentially harmful noise levels for a considerable part of their workday [
8]. This issue is not confined to any one region; it is a globally recognized occupational problem. In Finland, NIHL was reported as the most common occupational disorder from 2012 to 2016 [
9], and in Germany, it comprised 38.3% of all occupational disorders in 2019 [
10]. A study spanning five European countries revealed varying incidence rates of NIHL, highlighting its recognition as an occupational disease [
11]. These figures underscore the critical importance of adopting preventive behaviors and the use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) to combat NIHL [
12]. These statistics serve as a sobering reminder of the need to address the comprehensive health implications of noise exposure, emphasizing a societal and economic imperative that extends far beyond the individuals directly impacted. In this vein, understanding the full spectrum of NIHL impacts is essential for fostering improved workplace health policies and practices, which could significantly enhance worker well-being and productivity.
Within the domain of occupational health, the complex interaction of elements such as health issues, sleep disorders, and factors related to prevention is crucial in influencing not only individual health but also having wider implications for society as a whole. Chronic health issues arising from workplace conditions, such as noise exposure, not only diminish individual health and productivity but also lead to increased absenteeism and reduced workplace efficiency [
13,
14]. Insomnia, often linked to noise exposure, exacerbates this by heightening the risk of accidents and errors at work [
15,
16]. The perception of the severity of these health risks strongly influences preventive behaviors, with a higher perceived risk driving greater engagement in safety measures [
17]. However, the recognition of the benefits of preventive actions, like using hearing protection, is equally crucial in motivating these practices [
18]. Conversely, perceived barriers, such as limited access to protective equipment or time constraints, significantly hinder the implementation of safety measures [
19,
20]. Ultimately, the intention to engage in preventive behaviors, shaped by a combination of risk perception, benefits recognition, and barrier assessment, is a critical determinant of actual behavior change in the workplace [
21]. This complex nexus of personal health, safety perceptions, and workplace practices underscores the importance of these factors in the societal and economic discourse of occupational health.
Current research on NIHL largely centers on its direct auditory consequences, frequently neglecting the broader, interconnected health effects resulting from prolonged noise exposure [
22‐
24]. This narrow focus leaves a significant gap in understanding how these diverse health impacts, including psychological and physiological aspects, shape workers’ intentions and behaviors toward accident prevention in the workplace. Moreover, the complex interplay between exposure to workplace noise, resultant health outcomes, and consequent safety behaviors remains underexplored. There is a pressing need for a more comprehensive approach in research that not only examines the direct effects of NIHL but also explores its indirect impacts on overall worker health and safety practices. Such an approach would provide a more holistic understanding of the implications of workplace noise, thereby contributing to more effective occupational health policies and practices.
This study aims to bridge this research gap by providing a holistic framework that encompasses the multifaceted impacts of NIHL. The objective is to investigate not just the direct effects of noise on hearing but also how it affects sleep, health in daily life, and health problems in the workplace, subsequently influencing prevention behaviors. The core concerns of this research revolve around understanding the dynamics between NIHL, associated health issues, and prevention intention. The central research questions include: How do health problems of workers impact sleep and overall perceptions of preventive behavior? What is the relationship between these health impacts and workers’ prevention intentions?
The findings of this study have the potential to significantly enhance the health level of employees in noisy industrial environments. By providing empirical insights into the broader impacts of NIHL, this research can inform policymakers and workplace health practitioners, leading to more effective noise management and health promotion strategies. This study holds the potential to influence policy-making and workplace practices, ultimately benefiting the broader society by fostering safer and healthier work environments.
This paper is organized as follows: Sect.
2 presents the theoretical background, followed by the research model in Sect.
3. Section
4 details the research methodology, while Sect.
5 delves into the empirical results. Section
6 offers an in-depth discussion. Theoretical contributions and practical implications are summarized in the conclusion in Sect.
7, and the paper concludes with Sect.
8, outlining limitations and suggesting avenues for future research.
Discussion
This study aimed to examine the factors influencing prevention intention in the context of NIHL by considering health problems, components of the health belief model, and control variables.
This research revealed significant insights into the relationships between health problems, insomnia, perceived severity, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and workers’ prevention intentions in the context of noise-induced environments. Our findings indicate that health problems significantly contribute to insomnia (H1a) and perceived severity (H1b), but interestingly, they negatively impact perceived benefits (H1c). Health problems affects perceived barriers (H1d). However, the direct relationship between health problems and prevention intention (H1e) was not supported. Additionally, our study did not find a significant direct effect of insomnia on prevention intention (H2). Contrarily, perceived severity (H3) and perceived benefits (H4) significantly influenced prevention intention, as did perceived barriers (H5). Gender was found to have a significant effect on prevention intention, while age and noise level did not significantly affect prevention intention.
The objective of this research was to explore the dynamics between health problems due to noise exposure and their subsequent impact on workers’ preventive intentions. The findings have provided a clearer understanding of these relationships, particularly the significant role of perceived severity and benefits in motivating preventive behaviors in noisy work environments.
This study significantly advances the understanding of how health problems resulting from workplace noise exposure influence workers’ attitudes and behaviors towards preventive measures. Our findings align with and extend existing literature on the complexity of preventive behavior in occupational settings [
103‐
105], offering a more nuanced view of the interdependencies among health issues, perceptions, and preventive actions.
One of our key discoveries is the direct impact of health problems on insomnia and perceived severity, accompanied by a surprising decrease in the perceived benefits of preventive actions. The empirical relationship between health problems and insomnia could be attributed to the fact that workers with more health problems get less sleep. This aligns with observations in past research [
73,
74] and is likely due to mental and physical fatigue interfering with sleep quality. The significant correlation between health problems and perceived severity indicates that workers with more health issues are more cognizant and concerned about NIHL. This heightened awareness likely arises from their increased vulnerability to various health risks and hazards. It underscores the importance of targeted health communication strategies in workplaces to raise awareness and encourage preventive behaviors among all workers, regardless of their current health status. The negative effects of health problems on perceived benefits suggest that workers experiencing health issues might underestimate the benefits of prevention. This finding adds a new dimension to the development of workplace health interventions. This underestimation may stem from a lack of awareness or the overwhelming nature of their current health issues, overshadowing the long-term advantages of preventive measures.
Our research supports the positive relationship between perceived severity and prevention intention, in line with the health belief model. This model suggests that the perceived seriousness of a health risk is a powerful motivator for individuals to adopt protective behaviors [
82‐
84]. The findings corroborate previous studies [
86,
87], indicating that individuals who perceive higher severity in workplace hazards are more likely to engage proactively in preventive actions. Additionally, perceived benefits significantly influence prevention intentions. Workers who believe that preventive actions, such as wearing protective gear or following safety practices, will effectively reduce their risk of NIHL are more inclined to adopt such measures. This highlights the need for clear and effective communication about the benefits of preventive behaviors in the workplace. Notably, perceived barriers emerged as a significant hindrance to prevention intention, in line with existing literature [
21,
88]. This finding indicates that when workers face practical difficulties or perceive preventive measures as inconvenient, their willingness to engage in these behaviors decreases. Addressing these barriers, whether they be time constraints, lack of resources, or workplace culture, is crucial for enhancing preventive intentions.
Concerning control variables, the significant influence of gender on prevention intention is particularly revealing. This suggests a gender-specific approach in addressing workplace safety, considering the different exposure levels and perceptions between men and women in industrial settings, particularly in South Korea.
In summary, this study provides valuable insights into how health problems and perceptions about noise exposure and its consequences shape preventive behaviors in the workplace. It underscores the importance of comprehensive approaches that address not only the direct impacts of NIHL but also the broader, indirect effects on worker health and safety. The findings have significant implications for designing effective workplace health and safety policies, programs, and interventions.
Limitation and further research
While this study provides valuable insights into the impacts of NIHL on workplace behavior, it is important to acknowledge its limitations to contextualize the findings appropriately. One significant limitation is the cross-sectional nature of the study, which restricts the ability to establish causality or track changes over time. A longitudinal approach would offer a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics and evolution of workers’ perceptions and behaviors in response to noise exposure. Additionally, the study did not fully explore the effect of potential confounding variables that might influence the relationships between health problems, insomnia, perceived severity, benefits, barriers, and prevention intention. Factors such as personal health history, workplace culture, and individual coping mechanisms could play a significant role in shaping these relationships. Future research should consider employing a longitudinal design to observe how attitudes and behaviors evolve over time in response to workplace noise exposure. Investigating the role of confounding variables could also provide deeper insights. Furthermore, expanding the scope to include qualitative assessments could offer a richer, more nuanced understanding of the subjective experiences of workers dealing with noise-induced health issues. These approaches would contribute significantly to the development of more targeted and effective workplace interventions and policies.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.