Study on Quality Evaluation of Noise Testing Records Archived by Guangdong Occupational Health Technical Service Organizations

Objective To evaluate the quality via integrity and normalization of noise testing records from occupational health technical service organizations, and to provide reference for improving the quality of noise monitoring records.

Methods We collected original noise monitoring record sheets from 55 occupational health technical service organizations in Guangdong Province. The integrity was examined through 20 items including quality control(effective date of record, table number, relevant standard, sample number/spot number, representative of tested company, and inspector), general information(name of tested company, contact, and testing date), on-site situation(production running status, test spot, and weather conditions), equipment(asset number, model, and calibration), and noise testing results instantaneous/equivalent noise level, equivalent noise level(L_{Aeq, T}), exposure duration, eight hour equivalent sound level/weekly average exposure level(L_{EX, 8 h}/L_{EX, W}), and formula. The normalization was examined through 5 items from completeness, inspector's signature, representative's signature, and handling of blank areas & corrections). We calculated an integrity score and a normalization score for each record on the basis of relevant standards and analyzed by categories.

Results The missing rate of any noise monitoring result item was 83.7%(70.9%, 56.4%, and 34.5% for formula, L_{EX, 8 h}/L_{EX, W}, and L_{Aeq, T}, respectively), that of equipment was 78.2%(76.4% for calibration), that of quality control was 78.2%(72.7% for effective date of record), and that of on-site situation was 58.2%(58.2% for production running status). Besides, 65.5% of the records was not filled completely, 59.2% did not have representative's signature, and 34.5% did not treated the blanks appropriately. Of the 55 organizations, 15(27.3%) and 26(47.3%) were qualified in integrity and normalization respectively. Grade A organizations presented better in integrity and normalization than Grade B organizations(P < 0.05).

Conclusion High missing rates of on-site situation, equipment, and formula and a low rate of representative's signature are identified in the study, which requires further strengthening the management of quality control on noise monitoring records and training on record normalization for persons of interest, so as to improve the quality of noise monitoring records.