Assessment of Citizens Perception towards Traffic Noise Induced Hearing loss in

Dhaka City
Dr. Ahmad Kamruzzaman Majumder
Lecturer
Department of Environmental Science
Stamford University Bangladesh
744, Satmasjid Road, Dhanmondi Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
Tel: +88 02 8153168-69, +88 02 8156122-23, +88 02 8155834 Ext.-338.
Fax: +88 02 8119956, +88 02 9143531.
Mob: +88-01712017725, +88-01816145191
E-mail: kamrul_sub@hotmail.com, kamrul_subd@yahoo.com

K. M. Nazmul Islam
Lecturer
Department of Environmental Science
Stamford University Bangladesh
744, Satmasjid Road, Dhanmondi Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
Tel: +88 02 8153168-69, +88 02 8156122-23, +88 02 8155834 Ext.-338.
Fax: +88 02 8119956, +88 02 9143531.
Mob: +88-01198205344, +88-01558615741
E-mail: kmni_noyon@yahoo.com, noyon.ifescu@gmail.com

Professor Dr. K. Maudood Elahi

Chairman
Department of Environmental Science
and
Pro-Vice Chancellor
Stamford University Bangladesh.
744, Satmasjid Road, Dhanmondi Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
Tel: +88 02 8153168-69, +88 02 8156122-23, +88 02 8155834 Ext.-298.
Fax: +88 02 8119956, +88 02 9143531.
Mob: +88-01819426088
E-mail: elahikm@stamforduniversity.edu.bd

Jussi Dayna Biswas

Lecturer
Department of Environmental Science
Stamford University Bangladesh
744, Satmasjid Road, Dhanmondi Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
Tel: +88 02 8153168-69, +88 02 8156122-23, +88 02 8155834 Ext.-338.
Mob: +88-01717143313
E-mail: diana_jussi2005@yahoo.com

Banasree Paul
Graduate Student
Department of Environmental Science
Stamford University Bangladesh
744, Satmasjid Road, Dhanmondi Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
Tel: +88 02 8153168-69
Mob: +88-01717290127

Page 1 of 15
Assessment of Citizens Perception towards Traffic Noise Induced Hearing loss in
Dhaka City

ABSTRACT

This paper aims to measure the traffic noise at the different spots adjacent to Sahabug
area of Dhaka city in four different times as day, noon, evening and night. The noise
levels were measured with the help of a portable precision digital sound level meter. To
evaluate the Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) an AC33 classic two-channel clinical
audiometer has used. A large number of Hawkers and Shopkeepers were present in the
study area but 50 hawkers and shopkeepers were considered for this study on the basis of
some selecting criteria. Again to know about the citizen’s perception towards traffic noise
pollution in Dhaka City perception study has carried out by a questionnaire administered
to 100 individuals including vehicle drivers, hawkers and shopkeepers in Sahabug Area.
It is being observed from the study that, the sound level is minimum for the third Monday
during the day time and maximum at the first Monday of that month at the day time
which was 68 dB (A) and 85 dB (A) respectively. The survey showed people exposing to
noise of that area are highly suffered from Mild type of hearing loss in the right ear with a
number of 55%. From the perception study it is found that, 60% respondents were not
satisfied about the noise level in their place. Headache, bad temper, hearing problem, loss
of concentration were some of the significant effects manifested by noise pollution.

Keyword: Environment, noise pollution, health hazard, Audiometric test.

INTRODUCTION

The hazardous effects of noise on hearing have been of interest for over a century. Over
the past few decades we have gained considerable in sight into the mechanisms and
features of noise-induced hearing loss (Humes, 1984). Noise Induced Hearing Loss
(NIHL) is a significant social and public health problem. With global urbanization, there
are many environment problems causing pollution and environmental degradation. Out of
many environmental problems, noise has emerged as one of major urban environmental
pollution (Joshi et. al., 2003, Majumder et.al., 2010). Adult-onset hearing loss has been
described as the 15th most serious health problem in the world and it is the second most
common type of hearing loss after presbyacusis (old age associated hearing loss), and all
age groups can be affected, with profound effects ranging from social isolation and
stigmatization of individuals to serious national economic burdens (Smith, 2004).

Page 2 of 15
Estimates of the number of people affected worldwide by noise induced hearing loss
increased from 120 million in 1995 to 250 million worldwide in 2004 (WHO, 1999;
WHO, 2001; WHO, 2002; WHO, 2004; Smith, 2004).

Summary statistics on traffic noise exposure are not available for most of the countries;
however, high occupational noise exposure levels were reported in 17 studies conducted
in 12 countries in South America, Africa, and Asia. In these studies high traffic noise
pollution have reported. Many of these studies reported hearing losses in exposed person.
Worldwide, 16% of the disabling hearing loss in adults is attributed to noise pollution.
The effects of the exposure to noise pollution are larger for males than females and higher
in the developing countries (Nelson, et. al., 2005).

Road traffic noise is a major source of noise in urban areas (Majumder, et.al., 2007). It
produces disturbance and give an impact to more people than any other forms of noise
source (Dix, 1981). Noise induced hearing loss is of a sensory neural type involving
injury to the inner ear. Hearing loss usually refers to hearing impairment that is causing
difficulties or to a hearing threshold level that has deteriorated (King, 1992). Hearing loss
can be caused in number of ways due to rupture of eardrum, breaking of the bones in the
middle ear etc. Prolong noise exposure to high intensity sound can damage the hair cells
of the inner ear leading to permanent hearing loss (Harrison, 2008). The audiogram
observed in cases of noise induced hearing loss is characterized by an onset of hearing
loss at 4000 Hz, visible as a dip in the audiogram. As exposure to excessive noise levels
continues, neighboring frequencies are progressively affected and the dip broadens,
encroaching at approximately 3000 Hz. Noise induced hearing loss is usually bilateral
and shows a similar pattern in both ears (Joshi et.al., 2003).

Page 3 of 15
Figure 1: Audiogram showing bilateral noise-induced hearing loss (source: Joshi et.al,
2003)

A number of studies related to noise induced hearing loss in Human have been conducted
around the world (Banerjee and Chakraborty, 2006; Chakraborty et al.,2002; Chung et.
al., 2005; Nelson et. al.,2005; Harrson, 2008; Joshi, et. al., 2003; Murthy, et. al.,2007;
Nirjar et al., 2003; Thakur, 2006). But in Bangladesh most of the work is related to noise
pollution assessment. Therefore the main objective of the study was to find out
environmental noise induced health effect on people exposed to noise pollution and to
know the people perception regarding noise pollution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Traffic Noise Pollution Monitoring

The traffic noise measured at the different spots adjacent to Sahabug area of Dhaka city in
four different times as day(9-12 pm), noon(12-3 pm), evening (3-6 pm) and night (6-9
pm) are shown in Table-1, 2, 3 and 4. The area comprises Bangabandhu Seikh Mujib
Medical University (BSMMU), Birdem hospital, Sheraton Hotel, National Museum,
Public library, Charukola Institute, Shisu park, Tennis Federation, Shopping mall and a
number of important office. There were in all 10 locations which are commercial in
nature and as such Sahabug area is a commercial hub of Dhaka. The noise levels were
measured with the help of a portable precision digital sound level meter (Model- ST-
8850, made in England). This instrument is primarily designed for community noise
surveys. A large digital display gives a single value indication of the maximum ‘A’
weighted RMS (root mean square) sound pressure level measured during the previous

Page 4 of 15
second. Measurements from 30 to 135 dB (A) can be carried out with this instrument. The
instrument calibration was achieved using manufacturer supplied calibrator capable of
producing known sound pressure level. Noise measurements were taken following the
prescribed procedure stipulated in the manual of the manufacturer of Sound Pressure
Level meter. The data was collected above 1.5 meter of the ground and the data was taken
by standing on the roadside. Any kind of noise barriers was avoided for measuring the
actual sound level produced by the vehicles. The results were filled in at the spot of
measurement in pre-designed formats.

Audiometric Test

To evaluate the Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) an AC33 classic two-channel
clinical audiometer has used. In the audiometer a wide range of input and output
selections are available ensuring flexible choices in test stimuli and transducer
combinations including the mixing of speech and noise which is a popular combination
for hearing aid evaluations. The patient wares a head phone which is connected with the
clinical audiometer. The audiologist press button of sound of various frequencies (low to
high) one by one. The patient also holds a button. When he hear the sound then he press
the button and he does not press when he does not hear. According to the response of the
patient audiologist note down the frequencies and audiometric report is prepared. A large
number of Hawkers and Shopkeepers were present in the study area but some Hawkers
and Shopkeepers were considered on the basis of some selecting criteria as: People has
not been affected by any kind of ear related disease since childhood to till now, people
whose age in between 20 to 50 years, people who are working more than 5 years in this
place and people who work here more than 9 hours daily.

Questionnaire Survey

To know about the citizen’s perception towards traffic noise pollution in Dhaka City
perception survey carried out by a questionnaire administered to 100 individuals
including vehicle drivers, hawkers and shopkeepers in Shahbag Area. For our study we
took Hawkers and shop keeper as a sample because they are directly exposed to the noise.
The people who work in BSMMU, BIRDEM, and National Museum etc are remain inside
the building so they are not affected by noise severely. The people (come to visit the
patient), the students and travelers are not permanently exposed in such noise. They
occasionally visit the area. That’s why Hawker and shop keeper are the prime

Page 5 of 15
consideration as a sampling group because they remain beside the road and they are
directly exposed to the traffic noise.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Traffic Noise Pollution
Table 1 summarized the analysis of noise pollution assessment data, recorded in different
day times of Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday in a month. It is being observed from the
study that, the sound level is minimum for the third Monday during the day time and
maximum at the first Monday of that month at the day time which was 68 dB (A) and 85
dB (A) respectively. Considering Tuesday at the day time the study have shown that, the
sound level was minimum at the first and second Tuesday of the month whereas the
maximum sound level was recorded at the second Tuesday that was 70 dB (A) and 82 dB
(A) respectively. The minimum level of sound for Wednesday was recorded at the second
Wednesday and the highest level was recorded at the third Wednesday of the month
showing the value of 69dB (A) and 84 dB (A) respectively. The study also enlighten the
fact that, during day time Monday 2 posses the minimum record of noise level and
Monday 1 posses the highest level of noise record with the value of 68 dB(A) and 85
dB(A) respectively. The highest minimum and maximum noise levels observed at the day
during Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday in a month are 78 dB (A) and 85 dB (A), 76 dB
(A) and 82 dB (A) , 74 dB (A) and 84 dB (A), respectively, whereas the permissible level
for road traffic noise is 70 decibels dB (A) (Murthy et. al., 2007). The source is
predominantly attributable to motor vehicular traffic. The min dB(A) of 9 days record,
adjacent to the Sahabug area, has bested the permissible limit except Monday 2 and
Wednesday 2, in the survey month (Table-1).
Table-1: Sound level with respect to time in Day for one Month.

Time Day’s in the N Sound Pressure levels, Highest record in a

Month dB(A) month, dB(A)
Min Max Min Max
9-12 Monday 1 10 78 85 68 85
pm Monday 2 10 68 83
(Day) Monday 3 10 73 80
Tuesday 1 10 70 75 70 82
Tuesday 2 10 70 82
Tuesday 3 10 76 70
Wednesday 1 10 74 82 69 84
Wednesday 2 10 69 76
Wednesday 3 10 72 84

Page 6 of 15
 N= number of observation

Table 2 summarized the analysis of noise pollution assessment data, recorded in different
noon times of Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday in a month. The lowest sound level for
Monday of the month was recorded at Monday 1 which was 56 dB (A) and the highest
sound level was recorded at Monday 2 and as well as for Monday 1 that is 83 dB (A) at
the noon time. The minimum sound level recorded at the month for Tuesday was
observed in the Tuesday 1 which was 59 dB (A) and the maximum value was 73 dB (A)
in the Tuesday 3 at the noon time of that particular month. The minimum level of sound
was recorded for Wednesdays of the month at the noon was in Wednesday 2 with the
value of 59 dB (A) and the maximum level was in the Wednesday 3 with the value of 73
dB (A). the values suggested that, lowest level of sound recorded among the sampled
days was on Monday 1 with value of 56 dB(A) and the highest level of sound were
recorded on both Monday 1 and 2 having a value of 83 dB (A) for the noon (12-3pm)The
highest minimum and maximum noise levels observed at the day during Monday,
Tuesday and Wednesday in a month are 59 dB (A) and 83 dB (A), 68 dB (A) and 73 dB
(A), 68 dB (A) and 73 dB (A), respectively. In different times of noon the min dB (A) of
9 days record, adjacent to the Sahabug area, is lower than the permissible limit, during the
survey month. However, all the Max record exceeds the permissible limit (Table-2).

Table-2: Sound level with respect to time in noon for one Month.

Time Day’s in the N Sound Pressure levels, Highest record in a

Month dB(A) month, dB(A)
Min Max Min Max
12-3 Monday 1 10 56 83 56 83
pm Monday 2 10 58 83
(Noon) Monday 3 10 59 82
Tuesday 1 10 59 70 59 73
Tuesday 2 10 68 71
Tuesday 3 10 63 73
Wednesday 1 10 68 72 59 73
Wednesday 2 10 59 71
Wednesday 3 10 68 73
N= number of observation

Table 3 summarized the analysis of noise pollution assessment data, recorded in different
evening times of Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday in a month. Form the study it has
been observed that the minimum sound level was recorded on Monday 3 and the

Page 7 of 15
maximum level was recorded for Monday 1 for one month at the evening hours( 3-6 pm),
which were 66 dB (A) and 77 dB(A) respectively. The minimum sound level recorded in
the value of 67 dB (A) was observed on Tuesday 2 and the maximum sound level in the
value of 82 dB (A) was observed on Tuesday 2 for one month during the evening hours
(3-6 pm). The minimum level of sound recorded for one month at the evening hours (3-6
pm) in Wednesday was at Wednesday 1 having the value of 68 dB (A) whereas the
maximum value was 82 dB(A) also recorded on Wednesday1 . among the observed days
Monday 3 posses the minimum level of noise having a value of 66 dB (A) and both
Tuesday 2 and Wednesday 1 showed the highest record of noise level with a value of 82
dB(A). The highest minimum and maximum noise levels observed at the day during
Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday in a month are 69 dB (A) and 77 dB (A), 70 dB (A)
and 82 dB (A), 70 dB (A) and 82 dB (A), respectively. In the evening all the min dB(A)
of 9 days record, is lower than the permissible limit, during the survey month, except
Tuesday 1, Tuesday 3, Wednesday 2. However, all the Max record exceeds the
permissible limit (Table-3).
Table-3: Sound level with respect to time in evening for one Month.

Time Day’s in the N Sound Pressure levels, Highest record

Month dB(A) in a month,
dB(A)
Min Max Min Max
3-6 pm Monday 1 10 69 77 66 77
(Evening) Monday 2 10 69 75
Monday 3 10 66 73
Tuesday 1 10 70 73 67 82
Tuesday 2 10 67 82
Tuesday 3 10 70 75
Wednesday 1 10 68 82 68 82
Wednesday 2 10 70 79
Wednesday 3 10 70 76
N= number of observation

Table 4 summarized the analysis of noise pollution assessment data, recorded during
different night times of Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday in a month. The minimum
sound level recorded for the month on Monday was 53 dB (A) on Monday 1 and the
maximum sound level was recorded as 66 dB (A) on Monday 2 during the night time (6-
9pm). The minimum sound level observed for the month was on Tuesday 3 and the
maximum sound level recorded was on Tuesday 1 and the values were 50 dB (A) and 68

Page 8 of 15
dB(A) respectively during the night time (6-9pm) for one month . The minimum noise
level recorded in the value of 52 dB (A) on Wednesday 2 and the maximum noise level
was observed on Wednesday 1 with the value of 68 for one month during the night time
(6-9pm). Among the total exemplified days Tuesday 3 have the minimum value of the
noise level with the value of 50 dB(A) whereas the maximum value was shown on both
Tuesday 1 and Wednesday 1 with a value of 68 dB(A) during the nights (6-9pm). The
highest minimum and maximum noise levels observed at the day during Monday,
Tuesday and Wednesday in a month are 57 dB (A) and 66 dB (A), 56 dB (A) and 68 dB
(A), 59 dB (A) and 68 dB (A), respectively. In the night all the min and max dB(A) of 9
days record, is lower than the permissible limit, during the survey month (Table-4).
Table-4: Sound level with respect to time in night for one Month.

Time Day’s in the N Sound Pressure levels, Highest record in a

Month dB(A) month, dB(A)
Min Max Min Max
6-9 pm Monday 1 10 53 62 53 66
(Night)Monday 2 10 57 66
Monday 3 10 55 64
Tuesday 1 10 51 68 50 68
Tuesday 2 10 56 63
Tuesday 3 10 50 61
Wednesday 1 10 59 68 52 68
Wednesday 2 10 52 64
Wednesday 3 10 57 67
N= number of observation

Noise Induced Hearing Loss and perception of the Respondents

Noise has the potential to damage the hearing cells of the cochlea in the inner ear (Chung
et. al., 2005). Figures 2 and 3 show what can happen to the delicate hair cells of the
cochlea of ear due to consistent exposure to noise pollution resulting into noise induced
hearing loss or acoustic trauma (Harrison, 2008). The organization of normal hair cells
(stereocilia) is showed in the figure 2. These stereocilia, when deflected by acoustic
signals cause an excitation or depolarization of the hair cell, resulting into neural activity
in cochlear afferent neurons that make up the auditory nerve (Chung et. al., 2005). For
each cell, the stereocilia are neatly organized in a bundle (left panel of figure 2). The
individual hairs are cross-linked, and when the whole bundle is displaced by sound
signals, some of these links pull open membrane ion channels on the surface of the hairs.
Flow of ions (mainly potassium) though these membrane channels change the hair cell

Page 9 of 15
receptor potential (Mathur and Roland, 2009). These entire micromechanical
arrangements and linkages of stereocilia, and the membrane ion channels are delicate
gradually damaged due to constant exposure to noise pollution (Harrison, 2008).
Some of the first obvious signs of acoustic over-stimulation are illustrated in figure 2. The
stereocilia appear to loose their rigidity and become splayed apart (right panel of figure
2). Clearly when this happens the linkages between the hairs are broken and can no longer
mediate the opening and closing of membrane ion channels; the hair cells can no longer
work as sensory receptors (Mathur and Roland, 2009). The cells cannot recover from this
state, and soon after this degree of damage, the cell self-destructs resulting into noise
induced hearing loss or acoustic trauma (right panel of figure 3). The stereocilia start to
be digested back into the cell and there is no recovery (Harrison, 2008).
Noise induced hearing loss -immediate effects

Early stages of hair cell

damage after acoustic
trauma

Normal sensory
epithelium

Figure-2: Scanning electron images illustrating normal cochlear hair cells (left)
and immediately after noise trauma (right). The lower left diagram shows the
normal linkages between stereocilia that are disrupted or broken in noise induced
hearing loss (Source: Harrison, 2008).

Noise induced hearing loss –hair cells dying

Hair cells degenerating after

damage by noise trauma

Page 10 of 15
 Normal cochlear
hair cells

Figure-3: The stereocilia of healthy cochlear hair cells (left) compared with cells
after acoustic trauma, and in the process of complete degeneration (right). There is
no natural regeneration of hair cells in the mammalian cochlea (Source: Harrison,
2008).

Table 5 summarized the analysis of Noise induced hearing loss of the respondent, in the
shabug area of Dhaka city for 50 respondents. The survey showed people exposing to
noise of that area are highly suffered from Mild type of hearing loss in the right ear with a
number of 55%. People while suffer from the least problem of Moderate type of hearing
loss in the left ear with the percentage of 24 of that particular area. It also can be said that
the second highest percentage of peoples suffering is from mild of hearing loss in left ear
with the value of 45. Other then these 28% people of the area suffer from Moderate type
of hearing loss in right ear, 30% suffer from moderate type of hearing loss in both ear,
25% suffer from sever type of hearing loss in left ear and 27% suffer from severe type of
hearing loss in right ear. Form the study it can emphasized on the fact that, people
adjacent the area use to suffer from various level of hearing loss in both ears which varies
from mild to severe level.

Table 5: Noise induced hearing loss of the respondent

Noise Induced hearing loss Percentage

Mild type of hearing loss in left ear 45
Mild type of hearing loss in right ear 55
Moderate type of hearing loss in left ear 24
Moderate type of hearing loss in right ear 28
Moderate type of hearing loss in both ear 30
Severe type of hearing loss in left ear 25
Severe type of hearing loss in right ear 27

Page 11 of 15
The noise perception survey carried out by a questionnaire administered to 100
individuals in Sahabug area indicated that most of the people including vehicle drivers
were aware about noise pollution but their health significance was not fully realized. 60%
respondents were not satisfied about the noise level in their place. Headache, bad temper,
hearing problem, loss of concentration were some of the significant effects manifested by
noise pollution. Weighted complaints of the respondents intended to different
psychological and physical effects induced by the noise are shown in the table 6. The
foremost health effect tempted by the noise pollution was observed as Headache.
Irritation, Hard hearing and Lack of Concentration were also other major health effects
caused by noise pollution. Chest pain and nausea were the slightest health effects
perceived conferring to the respondents. The general public strongly supported actions
from the government to reduce noise pollution, many supporting the ban the hydraulic
horn, improved traffic control, banning very old vehicles, banning high-noise creating
industries such as stone crushing machines right inside urban areas, zoning according to
noise ranges, and banning usage of public audios line sound amplifying mikes for
processions, advertising, and election campaigns.
Table 6: Respondent’s weighted complaints on health effects related to noise.

Respondents complaints related to Noise Percentage

Lack of Concentration (decreased performance) 49
Dizziness 27
Chest Pain 14
Nausea 12
Sleep Disturbance 37
Headache 55
Speech Disturbance 24
Hard hearing 43
Fatigue 30
Irritation 46

CONCLUSION
Noise pollution is an interfering air-pollutant which possesses both auditory and a host of
nan-auditory effects on the exposed population. Since there is no medicine to cure hearing
loss prevention to overt exposure is the only alternative left. The hawkers and shopkeepers
were considered for this study on the basis of some selecting criteria. Again to know
about the citizen’s perception towards traffic noise pollution in Dhaka City perception
study has carried out by a questionnaire administered to 100 individuals including vehicle

Page 12 of 15
drivers, hawkers and shopkeepers in Shahbag Area. It is being observed from the study
that, the sound level is minimum for the third Monday during the day time and maximum
at the first Monday of that month at the day time which was 68 dB (A) and 85 dB (A)
respectively. The survey showed people exposing to noise of that area are highly suffered
from Mild type of hearing loss in the right ear with a number of 55%. People while suffer
from the least problem of Moderate type of hearing loss in the left ear with the percentage
of 24 of that particular area. The perception survey indicate high prevalence of headaches,
lack of concentration, sleep. Since levels lie much above the prescribed limits there is an
imminent health risk to the exposed population and the study suggests control measures
to be instituted on a priority.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are thankful to the Department of Environmental Science and administration of
Stamford University Bangladesh for their support to carry out this study.

REFERRENCES
1. Banerjee, D. and Chakraborty, S.K. (2006). Monthly variation in Night time noise
levels at residential areas of Asansol city (India). J. Environ. Sci. Engg., 48(1), 39-44.

2. Chakraborty,D.,Santra,S.C.,Mukherjee,AL.,Roy,B.and Das, P.(2002).Road Traffic

Noise in Calcutta Metropolis, India.Indian1.Enviroo.Health,44(3),173-180.

3. Chung, J. H., Roches, C. M. D., Meunier, J., and Eavey, R. D. (2005). Evaluation of
Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in Young People Using a Web-Based Survey Technique.
Pediatrics. http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/115/4/861 (Last accessed on 30th
July, 2010).

4. Dix, H. M. (1981). Environmental Pollution. The Institute of Environmental Science

Series, Wiley International Edition. John Chichester, New York, Brisbane, Toronto:
Wiley and Sons.

5. Harrison, R. V. (2008). Noise-induced hearing loss in children: A ‘less than silent’

environmental danger. Paediatr Child Health, 13(5): 377–382.

6. Humes, L. E. (1984). Noise-induced hearing loss as influenced by other agents and by

some physical characteristics of the individual, Division of Hearing and speech
science, Vanderbilt University of School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee.

7. Joshi, S.K., Devkota, S., Chamling, S., Shrestha, S. (2003). Environmental noise
induced hearing loss in Nepal. Kathmandu University Medical Journal,1(3), 177-183.

Page 13 of 15
8. King, P.G., Coles, R. R., Lutman, M. E., Robinson, D.W. (1992). Assessment of
Hearing Disability. Guidelines for Medico legal Practice. London: Whurr Publishers.
9. Majumder, A.K., Bhochhibhoya, S (2007). Noise pollution in Kavre, Nepal, The
Kathmandu Post, (National Daily, page 4), 5th August, 2007, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=118153(Last accessed on 10
August, 2010).

10. Majumder, A.K., Rauniyar, R., Carter. W. S., Khanal, S. N., Bajracharya, R. M. and
Joshi, S. K. (2010). “Noise Induced Hearing Loss of Kathmandu Valley Traffic
Police: A Self-Reported Occupational Health Study” Bangladesh J. Environ. Sci.2010
(in press)

11. Mathur, N. N. and Roland, P. S. (2009). Inner Ear, Noise-Induced Hearing Loss.
eMedicine, http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/857813-overview (Last accessed
on 30th July, 2010).

12. Murthy,V. K., Majumder, A. K., Khanal, S. N. And Subedi, D. P. (2007).

Assessment of Traffic Noise Pollution in Banepa, A Semi Urban Town of Nepal.
Kathmandu University Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology, 1 (IV): 1-9.

13. Nelson, D. I., Nelson, R. Y. Barrientos, M. C. And Fingerhut, M. (2005). The Global
Burden of Occupational Noise-Induced Hearing Loss. American Journal of Industrial
Medicine, 48:446–458.

14. NiIjar, RS., Jain,S.S., Parida,M., Katiyar,V.S. and Mittal, N. (2003).A Study of
Transport Related noise pollution in Delhi. IE Journal, 84, 6-15.

15. Smith, A. (2004). The fifteenth most serious health problem in the WHO perspective.
Presentation to IFHOH World Congress, Helsinki, July 2004. Available at
http://www.kuulonhuoltoliitto.fi/tiedoston_katsominen.php?dok_id¼150 (Last
th
accessed on 30 June. 2010).

16. Thakur, G.S. (2006). A study of noise around an Educational Institutional area. J.
Environ. Science & Engg.,48(1):35-38.

17. WHO. (1999). Guidelines for community noise. Edited by Berglund B, Lindvall T,
and Schwela DH. Available at
http://www.who.int/docstore/peh/noise/guidelines2.html. (Last accessed on 30th June.
2010).

18. WHO. (2001). Occupational and community noise. Fact sheet Number 258. Revised
February 2001. Geneva. Available at http://www.who.int.html. (Last accessed on 30th
June. 2010).

19. WHO. (2002). The World Health Report: Reducing Risks, Promoting Healthy Life.
Geneva. Available at http://www.who.int.html. (Last accessed on 30th June. 2010).

Page 14 of 15
20. WHO. (2004). Occupational Noise: Assessing the burden of disease from work-
related hearing impairment at national and local levels. Environmental Burden of
Disease Series, Number 9. Geneva. Available at http://www.who.int.html. (Last
accessed on 30th June. 2010).

Page 15 of 15