IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v19y2010i17-18p2463-2470.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decibel levels and noise generators on four medical/surgical nursing units

Author

Listed:
  • Diana Pope

Abstract

Aims and objectives. The study was designed to determine daytime decibel levels on the hospital’s four medical/surgical nursing units, daytime decibel levels in patient rooms in corresponding nursing units, whether the nursing unit noise levels differed and to identify what generated noise on those units. Background. Nurses are responsible for components of patients’ physical environments, particularly those that promote patient safety and well‐being. Numerous studies have linked hospital noise to negative physiological outcomes for both patients and staff. However, decisions related to managing patient acoustic environments continue to rely on nursing judgment, rather than objective evidence. Design. Non‐human subject, observational/descriptive design. Method. Using noise dosimeters, weekday day shift decibel levels were measured on four nursing units, sequentially. Measures were made continuously over 12 hours, in three patient rooms and over five minutes every 45 minutes, at the corresponding nurses’ station. Noise generators were documented at the nurses’ station. Results. Nursing units had average measured sound levels of 62·2, 63·3, 61·7 and 64·6 decibels, respectively, and were not significantly different from one another (p = 0·07). Nurses’ designation of ‘quiet’, ‘typical’ and ‘noisy’ patient rooms was not consistently confirmed by the measured decibel levels. The range of minimum to maximum decibel levels was significantly greater in patient rooms than the nurses’ station (54·4 versus 27·7 decibels, p

Suggested Citation

  • Diana Pope, 2010. "Decibel levels and noise generators on four medical/surgical nursing units," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(17‐18), pages 2463-2470, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:17-18:p:2463-2470
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03263.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03263.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03263.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Loredana Sasso & Annamaria Bagnasco & Giuseppe Aleo & Gianluca Catania & Damiana Dell'Agnello & Kay Currie & Fiona Timmins, 2016. "Editorial: Noise on hospital wards – what have we learned?," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(7-8), pages 891-893, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:17-18:p:2463-2470. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.