Objective: To compare the protective efficacy and influencing factors of 1100 foam earplugs and 1270 preform earplugs, and to investigate the spectral characteristics of sound attenuation for these two types of earplugs. Methods: In January 2023, a cluster sampling method was employed to select 306 noise-exposed workers in the automotive manufacturing industry as study subjects. Basic worker information and hearing protection device usage were collected via questionnaire surveys. The 3M(TM) E-A-R fit(TM) dual-ear protection verification system was used to assess earplug suitability, with one-on-one training provided to workers who failed the baseline personal attenuation rating (PAR) test. The spectral characteristics of sound attenuation for both earplugs were analyzed using PAR(50) (with a protection rate of 50%). Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-square test/Fisher's exact probability method were used to compare the changes in PAR and pass rate of the two types of earplugs. Results: The baseline PAR values M (Q(1), Q(3)) for workers wearing 1100 foam earplugs and 1270 preform earplugs were 19 (14, 23) dB and 0.5 (0, 12) dB, respectively, and the baseline PAR pass rates were 84.8% (178/210) and 37.5% (36/96), respectively. The differences were statistically significant (P<0.001). Age, years of service, noise exposure intensity, and correct wearing training had statistically significant effects on the baseline PAR pass rate of 1100 foam earplugs (P<0.05), but had no statistically significant effects on the baseline PAR pass rate of 1270 preform earplugs (P>0.05). After the intervention, all workers passed the suitability test. There were differences in PAR(50) values at different frequency bands between the two types of earplugs. The measured values of 1100 foam earplugs at 125-250 Hz were lower than the nominal values, indicating poor protective effect; the measured values at 250-8000 Hz gradually approached the nominal values, indicating a better protective effect. The measured values of 1270 preform earplugs at 125-250 Hz were close to the nominal values, indicating a better protective effect; however, the measured values at 250-2000 Hz fluctuated greatly, and the measured value at 4000 Hz differed significantly from the nominal value, indicating a poorer protective effect. Conclusion: The overall noise reduction effect of 1100 foam earplugs is better than that of 1270 preform earplugs. Training on wearing methods is crucial for improving the wearing effect, 1100 foam earplugs require better wearing skills. 1100 foam earplugs have better protective effects in the mid-to-high frequency bands, while 1270 preform earplugs have better protective effects in the low frequency band. 目的: 比较1100泡棉型耳塞和1270预成型耳塞的防护效果及其影响因素,了解这两种耳塞声衰减的频谱特征。 方法: 于2023年1月,采用整群抽样的方法,抽取306名汽车制造业噪声作业工人作为研究对象。采用问卷调查收集工人基本信息及护听器的使用情况;使用3M(TM) E-A-R fit(TM)双耳防护验证系统对工人进行适合性检验,对个体声衰减值(PAR)未通过基线测试者进行一对一培训;PAR(50)(保护率为50%)分析两种耳塞衰减的频谱特征。采用Mann-Whitney U检验和χ(2)检验/Fisher确切概率法比较两种耳塞的PAR及通过率变化。 结果: 佩戴1100泡棉型耳塞和1270预成型耳塞的工人基线PAR值M(Q(1),Q(3))分别为19(14,23)和0.5(0,12)dB,基线PAR通过率分别为84.8%(178/210)和37.5%(36/96),差异均有统计学意义(P<0.001);年龄、工龄、接触噪声强度以及正确佩戴培训对1100泡棉型耳塞基线PAR通过率的影响均有统计学意义(P<0.05),但对1270预成型耳塞基线PAR通过率的影响均无统计学意义(P>0.05),干预后所有工人均通过适合性检验。两种耳塞PAR(50)在不同频段下有差异,1100泡棉型耳塞在125~250 Hz的实测值低于标称值,防护效果较差;在250~8 000 Hz的实测值逐渐接近标称值,防护效果较好。1270预成型耳塞在125~250 Hz的实测值与标称值接近,防护效果较好;但在250~2 000 Hz的实测值波动较大,4 000 Hz时的实测值与标称值差异明显,防护效果较差。 结论: 1100泡棉型耳塞的总体降噪效果优于1270预成型耳塞,佩戴方法培训对提升佩戴效果至关重要,1100泡棉型耳塞更需要佩戴技巧;1100泡棉型耳塞在中高频段防护效果较好,1270预成型耳塞在低频段防护效果较好。.