Environmental noise level analysis of call
center station
The telemarketing operator is exposed to noise from various sources, that may be inside the work environment or in times of
leisure. The noise at work can be originated not only by the movement of persons, or from the movement of furniture, or
from the sound competition of several employees speaking at the same time, but also of the headset. In addition to the
hearing disorders where the noise is involved, other pathologies are shown especially within the call centers as, for
example: stress, depression, Bournout syndrome, dysphonia, repetitive stress injury (read/DORT), irritability, and even
noise induced hearing loss due to the noise generated in Call Center, either by individuals and/or head seat ...
It also must be considered that the noise in the Call Center worsens the speech perception of operators, and this may turn
difficult to understand consumers information and to monitor the operator own voice.
It is important to highlight that although the call center does not configure as a non-healthy environment, we must always
prioritize sensations that noise brings to telemarketers, respecting the uniqueness of each contributor.
Objective: The aim of this research was to measure the noise of a Call Center station in order to know the telemarketing
operator exposition.
Method: For the characterization of the noise, the following measures have been taken – minimum noise, Leq, L 90-maximum
noise with the sound pressure level meter, Bruel & Kajäer, type 2236 serial number 1827599, calibrated in 13/07/2005.
The tripod with the sound pressure level meter was placed 1,20 mt at the operator
hearing zone, in 69 operator
preselected points of call center. Each selected point has been measured by a minute in alternating shifts, i.e. first the
measurement was held in the morning shift and then the same points were measured in the afternoon shift.
Results: The measurement results have shown that in most of the time, both in the morning and the afternoon, the sound
pressure levels exceeded the limits prescribed by NR15 (85 dBA), however, the values were higher when compared to
ABNT standards for offices ranging from 30-60 dB(A).
Discussion: The Leq in dB (A) found during all measurements exceeded noise levels indicated for acoustic comfort in service
locations, according to NBR 10152, which is 40-50 dB (A). Hodgson (1986) commented that the background noise limit
ideal for promote a good speech perception must not exceed 30 dB SPL. Above this, even if the spoken message is
sufficiently amplified, there will not be a proper understanding. Losso (2003) said that, even if the Leq present values
within the standards recommended changes in sound pressure level over the period, can be quite disturbing. Even
momentarily, these spikes in SPL can impair the concentration.
Conclusion: The worker is a key element when discussing the work environment noise, since noise is not only a result of bad
planning and/or inappropriate materials usage, among others. Each individual is responsible for the noise around. Thus,
the lack of guidance and awareness can be a serious complication of noise.
This way, the noise on the working
environment and its impact on workers must be constantly investigated, in order to propose viable solutions. Small
changes can lead to great results in a sound work environment. Discover what will make a difference, is a responsibility of
the professionals involved in the work environment as they are worried to improve quality of life of human beings. Thus,
improving the acoustic environment depends not only on of an engineer, but all the people who attend the location.
IEAA – Institute of Hearing Studies,
São Paulo, Brasil
www.ieaa.edu.br
Momensohn-Santos,TM; Gimenes,MIMM; Moura,VRC
[email protected]
TABLE 1. Results obtained from the noise level
environment mapping during the morning shift at 4th.Floor.
TABLE 2. Results obtained from the noise level environment
mapping during the afternoon shift at 4th.Floor
Leq
Leq
L90
Máx
L90
Máx
Min.
Min.
Mode
67,4 dB(A) 66,5 dB(A) 76,7 dB(A) 62,1 dB(A)
Mode
Median
69,0 dB(A) 65,0 dB(A) 78,5 dB(A) 62,0 dB(A)
Median
72,1 dB(A) 67,5 dB(A) 75,9 dB(A) 64,4 dB(A)
71,5 dB(A) 68,5 dB(A) 77,0 dB(A) 67,0 dB(A)
Maximum 71,6 dB(A) 67,0 dB(A) 85,8 dB(A) 64,9 dB(A)
Maximum 77,6dB(A) 74,0 dB(A) 84,0 dB(A) 69,9 dB(A)
Mínimum 65,5 dB(A) 61,0 dB(A) 73,8 dB(A) 59,1 dB(A)
Mínimum 67,8 dB(A) 64,5 dB(A) 64,5 dB(A) 62,4 dB(A)
TABLE 3. Results obtained from the noise level
environment mapping during the morning shift at
5th.Floor
TABLE 4 Results obtained from the noise level
environment mapping during the afternoon shift at
5th.Floor.
Leq
L90
Máx
Min.
Leq
L90
Máx
Min.
Mode
70,5 dB(A) 62,5 dB(A) 80,8 dB(A) 56,6 dB(A)
Mode
70,0 dB(A) 58,5 dB(A) 80,0 dB(A) 53,9 dB(A)
Median
68,0 dB(A) 61,5 dB(A) 82,0 dB(A) 58,0 dB(A)
Median
67,0 dB(A) 60,5 dB(A) 80,0 dB(A) 56,0 dB(A)
Maximum 79,4 dB(A) 66,0 dB(A) 97,1 dB(A) 61,3 dB(A)
Maximum 74,9 dB(A) 75,5 dB(A) 90,8 dB(A) 62,0 dB(A)
Mínimum 60,0 dB(A) 57,0 dB(A) 73,0 dB(A) 54,1 dB(A)
Mínimum 60,5 dB(A) 56,0 dB(A) 72,9 dB(A) 52,6 dB(A)
Dreossi RF, Momensohn- Santos TM.A Investigação sobre o ruído na Inteligibilidade na fala de crianças de 4ª série do ensino fundamental.Revista Sociedade Brasileira de
Fonoaudiologia 2004;9 (3):46-136
Ejisman AC & Bardelli FE: Considerações Sobre Audição em Call Center: In: ALLOZA RG & SALZSTEIN RBW (2002): Fonoaudiologia na Empresa: Atuação no Call Center.São Paulo:
Editora Revinter
Fernandes, J.C (1998) :O Ruído Ambiental: Seus Efeitos e Seu Controle. Bauru: Apostila Departamento de Engrnharia e Tecnologia Mecânica da Universidade Estadual Paulista –
Unesp- Campus Bauru.
Fernandes, J.C (1993): Conforto Acústico e Comportamento. In: ENCONTRO ANUAL DE ETIOLOGIA, vol I, 1993, Bauru, Anais Bauru, p74-84,
Gerges SNY(1992): Ruído Fundamentos e Controle.Florianópolis:Universidade Estadual de Santa Catarina, 1992.
Hodgson WR Hearing Aid (1986): Assessment and Use in Audiologi Habilitation. 3ª ed. Baltimore:Singular Publishing Group.
Losso MAF (2003).Qualidade Acústica de Edificações Escolares em Santa Catarina: Avaliação e Elaboração de Diretrizes para Projeto e Implantação (dissertação) Santa Catarina:
Universidade Estadual de Santa Catarina.
Ribeiro AS, Braga internet.
Sanches RG (2003): A problemática do ruído urbano: descrição e análise da literatura. Mestrado em Fonoaudiologia, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, 2003
Santos UP(1996):Ruído: Riscos e Prevenção. São Paulo: Hucitec, 1994.
Silva AM (2004): Os Novos Adoecimentos e o Papel da Medicina do Trabalho: Revista Brasileira de Medicina e Trabalho. Belo Horizonte, vol 2, p90-93.
Vilela lVO & Assunção AA (2004): Os Mecanismos de Controle da Atividade no Setor de Teleatendimento e As Queixas de Cansaço e Esgotamento dos Trabalhadores: Cadernos de
Saúde Publica, Rio de Janeiro, vol 20, n 4 .
Zamperline HBL (1996): Ruído Urbano (dissertação). São Paulo. Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, 1996
IEAA – Institute of Hearing Studies,
São Paulo, Brasil
www.ieaa.edu.br