深圳龙岗区职业性噪声与听力损失的流行病学研究

目的 对调查深圳市龙岗区噪声企业工人听力损失的评价指标进行探讨。方法 采用横断面流行病学调查方法，对深圳市龙岗区6家企业的稳态噪声作业环境进行调查，对386名接触噪声人员进行职业卫生学调查和听力测定，听力测定参照《职业性听力损伤诊断标准》（GBZ49—2002），并计算累积噪声暴露量（CNE）。结果 386名噪声作业人员高频听力损伤发生率为74．09％，语频听力损伤发生率为50．52％；随CNE增加，听力损伤发生率有增高趋势（P〈0．05）；Logistic回归分析表明，高频、语频听损发生率与CNE呈显著相关，而与工龄的相关性不明显。结论 在特区经济模式下CNE作为听力健康的评价指标比工龄史敏感。     

听力损伤的累积噪声暴露阈值研究

目的根据不同累积噪声暴露量与工人语频听力损伤发生率间的关系,探讨和评价引起职业性听力损失的临界累积噪声暴露阈值.方法应用Logistic回归模型分析1 435名不同累积噪声暴露强度的听阈数据.结果语频损伤和高频损失发生率随暴露水平而增高;累积噪声暴露量与语频损伤发生率的Logistic回归分析显示,听阈水平随累积噪声暴露量增高而上升并有明显相关性;预测模型显示语频损伤的临界累积噪声暴露阈值为100dB(A).结论听力损伤的临界累积噪声暴露阈值100dB(A)与我国现执行的噪声卫生标准具有一致性,可探讨作为对个体职业噪声暴露危害程度警告的阈值指标.     

稳态噪声与非稳态噪声所致工人听力损害的对比研究

目的评价两种不同性质的噪声对工人听力损害的差异方法对35家企业的稳态噪声接触1年以上工人共1421人,非稳态噪声(除脉冲噪声之外)接触1年以上冲压工人共957人进行纯音听力测试,并对35家接触噪声企业进行职业卫生学调查。结果在1421名稳态噪声组检出观察对象131例,患病率为9.2%,职业性噪声聋98人,患病率为6.8%;在957名非稳态噪声组检出观察对象74例,患病率为7.7%,职业性噪声聋60人,患病率为6.3%。两组比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。两组高频和语频听力损失的患病率随累积噪声暴露量的增大而增大,呈剂量-反应关系。结论在累积噪声暴露量接触水平一致的情况下,稳态噪声与非稳态噪声(除脉冲噪声之外)对引起的听力损失差异无统计学意义。     

某城市中小企业职业性噪声聋与累积噪声暴露剂量的相关性研究

目的分析累积噪声暴露剂量(CNE)与职业性噪声聋的发生及发展规律的关系。方法对作业环境噪声进行监测,对调查对象进行纯音听阈测定;进行相关指标分析并计算CNE。结果听阈提高与基础听阈相关(P<0.01);当CNE由(96.9±5.9)dB(A)年提高到(102.1±3.4)dB(A)年时,语频损失与高频损失的发生率分别由8.4%和7.3%上升到21.1%;职业性噪声聋的发生率及严重程度与CNE相关,并以100dB(A)年为阈值;各频率听阈特别是高频听阈提高且具统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论早期发现听阈异常特别是早期高频听阈改变者,控制职业噪声暴露者CNE;并按规定调离噪声作业。     

水力发电工人职业性噪声聋与累积噪声暴露剂量的关系

目的 分析职业性噪声聋的发生、发展规律及与累积噪声暴露剂量(CNE)的关系.方法 对调查对象进行纯音听阈测定,对作业环境噪声进行监测;计算CNE并进行相关指标分析.结果 当CNE由(97.5±5.4)dB(A)年提高到(102.4±2.9)dB(A)年时,语频损伤及高频损失的发生率分别由4.6%和11.5%上升到10....     

某纺织厂噪声作业工人听力损失调查

目的:通过对某纺织厂噪声强度监测和对作业人员的听力检测,掌握噪声强度及听力损失的发生情况,为采取积极有效的防护措施提供依据。方法:用HS6288系列噪声分析仪监测作业场所噪声强度,并进行频谱分析,计算累积噪声暴露量(CNE);对某纺织厂接触噪声作业的无耳疾患的931人进行听力检测;用EpiData建立数据库,SAS软件8.0统计包进行统计分析。结果:该厂噪声车间的连续等效A声级均超过了85db(A),主要为中高频噪声;噪声作业人员有高频听力损失264人,检出率为28.36%,语频听力损失9人,检出率为0.97%;高频和语频听力损失的发生率均随累积接触噪声剂量的增加而升高;听力损失发生率及程度与工龄密切相关;织一车间和织二车间噪声平均>100dB(A),高频听损率分别为43.68%和42.62%,在强噪声车间作业戴耳塞者高频听损检出率低于不戴耳塞者,但高频听力损失的检出率仍然明显高于其他车间;听力损失曲线以高频凹陷谷点为3kHz及4 kHz的“V”字型为主,占高频听力损失的73.0%。结论:该厂噪声污染较严重,对作业人员听力已经产生了明显影响,应采取积极的综合预防性措施来控制噪声对作业人员健康的影响。     

使用听力保护用品的噪声作业劳动者听力损失特征研究

目的研究使用听力保护用品的劳动者在噪声环境下作业对听力损失的影响。方法对某汽车制造企业从事噪声作业并佩戴听力保护用品的531名工人进行职业卫生调查和纯音听力测试。结果自觉听力差的9人(1.7%),经常耳鸣14人(2.6%),高频听力损失20人(3.8%),语频听力损失8人(1.5%),轻度噪声聋2人(0.4%),自觉听力损失和耳鸣的发生率与累积噪声暴露量、工龄均存在剂量-反应关系(P<0.01),高频听力损失发生率与工龄存在剂量-反应关系(P<0.05)。结论噪声暴露工人佩戴听力保护用品后仍会发生高频和语频的听力损失,需进一步提高工人的听力保护意识。     

冲床噪声与稳态噪声致工人高频听力损害的对比研究

目的 了解冲床噪声对工人高频率段听力的影响,并与稳态噪声进行对比.方法 接触冲床噪声的38名锻压车间工人为冲床噪声接触组,62名接触稳态噪声的拉丝、磨粉等工人为稳态噪声组.用个人声暴露计采集工作期间噪声暴露数据,计算40h等效声级(LEX,W)和累积噪声暴露量(CNE).按GBZ 49-2007《职业性噪声聋诊断标准》对工人测试听力并计算和判定结果.结果 冲床噪声接触组CNE[(97.0±6.4) dB (A)·年]与稳态噪声接触组CNE [(97.6±5.7)dB(A)·年]比较,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).冲床噪声接触组高频听力损失率(55.3％)明显高于稳态噪声(32.3％),差异有统计学意义(CMHX2=6.928,P=0.0085);冲床噪声接触组于CNE 95～104 dB(A)·年内损失率(13/19,68.4％)明显高于稳态噪声组( 13/37,35.1％),差异有统计学意义(P=0.018).logistic回归模型显示,冲床噪声组、稳态噪声组CNE与高频听力损失率均呈剂量-反应关系(P＜0.01).结论 应用个体噪声暴露数据计算时,在能量相同的情况下,冲床噪声所致高频听力损失的危害大于稳态噪声.     

用个体暴露评价脉冲噪声与稳态噪声所致高频听力损失的关系

目的用个体噪声暴露测量数据比较工业脉冲噪声与稳态噪声所致高频听力损失剂量反应关系的异同。方法1998至1999年,以32名接触脉冲噪声的机械制造工人和163名接触稳态噪声的纺织工人为观察对象,用噪声剂量计采集8h工作期间的噪声暴露数据,计算8h等效声级(LAeq.8h),并按等能量原理将LAeq.8h和噪声作业工龄合并为累积噪声暴露量(CNE)。用常规方法测量工人左右耳气导听阈,按GBZ492002对听阈做年龄性别校正,并诊断是否为高频听力损失。结果脉冲噪声组的CNE[(103.2±4.2)dB(A)·年]明显低于稳态噪声组[(110.6±6.0)dB(A)·年],脉冲噪声组高频听力损失患病率(68.8%)与稳态噪声组(65.0%)相似,分层分析和趋势卡方检验证实,两组CNE与高频听力损失患病率间均存在典型的剂量反应关系,差异有统计学意义;脉冲噪声100～104和105～109dB(A)·年两组的高频听力损失患病率(76.9%和90.9%)高出稳态噪声组(30.4%和50.0%)约1倍。logistic回归模型显示,脉冲噪声组CNE与高频听力损失患病率的剂量反应关系曲线与稳态噪声组相比出现曲线左移,斜率增大。结论采用个体噪声暴露数据计算时,在能量相同的情况下,脉冲噪声所致高频听力损失的危害大于稳态噪声。     

累积噪声暴露量与噪声性听力损失关系的探讨

目的 进一步探讨累积噪声暴露量(CNE)与噪声性听力损失之间的关系.方法 采用横断面调查方法,以深圳市7家企业噪声作业工龄1年以上的512名工人作为研究对象,进行职业卫生学调查及听力测定.结果 听力损失发生率81.25%,CNE与听力损失发生率存在暴露量一反应关系,听力损失发生率^=0.205+4.780 CNE;通过对听力损失多个相关因素的Logistic回归分析,CNE、噪声强度与听力损失发生具有相关性(P<0.05),而CNE的相关性最强(P<0.001,r=1.148),年龄、性别、工龄与听力损失无相关性(P>0.05).结论 CNE与听力损失发生率存在暴露量-反应关系,在噪声危害评价中具有很好的科学性.     

Noise and hearing loss: a review

BACKGROUND: Noise-induced hearing loss is a major cause of deafness and hearing impairment in the United States. Though genetics and advanced age are major risk factors, temporary and permanent hearing impairments are becoming more common among young adults and children especially with the increased exposure to portable music players. Though treatment options are limited for most people with noise-related hearing loss, several modifiable health behaviors that should begin in childhood might prevent or delay the onset of hearing impairment. The purpose of this article is to review modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors, comorbidity, and the role of health education in the prevention of noise-induced hearing loss. METHODS: Review of current literature in the etiology, prevention, and treatment of noise-induced hearing loss as well as the role of health education. RESULTS: Non-modifiable risk factors related to noise-related hearing loss include increasing age, genetics, male gender, and race. Modifiable risk factors are voluntary exposure to loud noise, nonuse of hearing protection, smoking, lack of exercise, poor diet, tooth loss, and the presence of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS: As hearing impairment among children and teenagers rises due to mostly voluntary exposure to loud noise, there are many implications for health education. Health educators need to address barriers to the use of hearing protection, deliberate exposure to loud music, and other modifiable risk factors, which cause and exacerbate hearing loss among those exposed to loud noise.     

Evaluation of noise-induced hearing loss by reference to the upper limit of hearing

We have defined the upper limit of hearing as the maximum audible frequency measured with fixed intensity and changing frequency. We have previously established the standard upper limit ageing curves from the normal age variation in the upper limit of hearing. In the present study, we sought to clarify the effects of occupational noise on the upper limit of hearing. We measured the upper limit of hearing in 239 healthy male workers (478 ears) exposed to intensive occupational noise. Their age variation in the upper limit of hearing was compared with the standard upper limit ageing curves in males. There were statistically significant deteriorations. Even if the ears that had normal hearing levels (35 dB or less) were selected, deterioration in the upper limit of hearing was noticeable. The upper limit of hearing may serve as clinically useful information on the hearing impairment that precedes noticeable hearing impairment in conventional audiometry for workers exposed to intensive occupational noise.     

深圳市新生儿听力筛查情况及影响因素分析

目的了解深圳市新生儿听力筛查情况及先天性听力障碍发病情况。方法2004-2008年,用耳声发射(OAE)与快速听性脑干反应(AABR)技术对深圳市出生的13652名新生儿进行听力筛查。对其中4732名新生儿进行先天性听力障碍危险因素调查。结果新生儿听力筛查初筛通过率为87.7%,复筛率为59.6%,复筛通过率为83.6%;生后3d筛查组(A组)初筛的通过率为82%,低于生后30d组(B组)的94%,生后30d组复筛通过率为63%,低于生后3d组的85%(P0.001);高胆红素血症、先天性耳廓及外耳道畸形、先兆流产史是先天性听力障碍的危险因素。结论对新生儿应常规进行听力筛查,将有高危因素的患儿列为重点筛查对象,作到早发现、早治疗。     

Predictors of hearing loss in New York farmers.

BACKGROUND: Data from the telephone interview portion of the New York Farm Family Health and Hazard Surveillance were used to study self-reported hearing loss in New York farmers. METHODS: One thousand six hundred and twenty-two persons completed the hearing loss and noise exposure interview. Hearing loss was defined as at least some trouble hearing in one or both ears. Predictors of hearing loss were determined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Twenty-two percent of participants reported hearing loss. From the logistic regression, significant confounders are age (P = 0.0001), gender (P = 0.0001), being from a livestock farm (P = 0.012), and loss of consciousness due to head trauma (P = 0.04). Significant noise exposures are more hours of lifetime exposure to noisy farm equipment (P = 0.001) and having had a noisy non-farm job (with some hearing protection P = 0.002, without any hearing protection P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Farm noise exposure is a serious risk to the hearing of this population. Although use of hearing protection should be encouraged, replacing and modifying farm equipment to decrease noise at the source should be the first priority.     

多种听力方法组合在婴幼儿听力诊断中的应用

目的:探讨多种联合检查方法在婴幼儿听力诊断中的临床应用。方法:选择2004年5月～2008年5月住院出生3～7天,经耳声发射(otoacoustic emissions,OAE)听力筛查(初筛、复筛)均未通过的180例婴幼儿,分别在3月龄～6月龄进行听力测试,方法如下:①畸变产物耳声发射(distortion product otoacoustic emissions,DPOAE)+听性脑干反应(Auditorybrainstem response,ABR)+声导抗(acoustic immittance measurement,AIM);②畸变产物耳声发射(DPOAE)+听性脑干反应(ABR)+多频稳态听觉诱发反应(auditory steady-state responses,ASSR)+声导抗(AIM);③听性脑干反应(ABR)。结果:180例新生儿3～6月龄两次全部完成ABR测试,其中360耳中299耳正常,占83.06%,38例(61耳)异常,占16.94%(61/360耳)。听力损失程度:轻度2耳、中度15耳、重度20耳和极重度24耳,重度和极重度占总听力障碍72.13%(44/61耳)。ASSR测试结果60例(120耳),0.5～4kHz平均反应阈,听力损失程度基本与ABR相符,异常12例(22耳),占18.33%;120例(240耳)DPOAE测试,其中189耳通过,占78.75%(189/240耳),51耳未通过,占21.25%。声导抗(AIM)测试120例,鼓室曲线为A型104例,为B型或C型55耳,异常39例,异常率23.00%。结论:在婴幼儿听力诊断评估中,以ABR v波反应阈作为听力损失指标,但不能作为听力损失诊断唯一工具;只有多种联合听力检测才能有效的提高准确率,确保整个筛查诊断过程中不出现假阴性及听神经病的漏诊;同时有助于确诊婴幼儿听力损失的性质和程度,提高干预效果。     

新生儿听力筛查832例回顾性分析

目的：总结新生儿听力筛查资料,探讨早期发现先天性耳聋患儿的临床体会。方法选择2012年3至12月在湖北省中山医院阳逻院区出生的832例新生儿为研究对象,采用瞬态诱发耳声发射( TEOAE)初筛-TEOAE复筛-听性脑干诱发电位( ABR)再筛的三步法开展新生儿听力筛查,复筛阳性者按武汉市新生儿疾病筛查管理要求转诊到武汉市新生儿疾病筛查中心做进一步检查,并对结果进行分析。结果在832例新生儿中,听力筛查初筛通过率为90.50%,其中正常足月新生儿和高危儿初筛通过率分别为91.15%和86.67%,两组比较有显著性差异(χ2=12.734,P<0.05)。剖宫产的新生儿初筛通过率为90.13%,复筛通过率为91.04%;顺产的新生儿初筛通过率为92.16%,复筛通过率为91.67%。在采用了三步法开展新生儿听力筛查后,新生儿转诊率为0.84%。结论开展新生儿听力筛查能够更早的发现新生儿听力缺陷,及时开展相关干预手段,促使其听力及语言功能的恢复。     

Newborn hearing screening programme outcomes in a research hospital from Turkey

Background Universal neonatal hearing screening programmes are encouraged to define and manage hearing loss in early ages of life. The aim of this study is to introduce our 14‐month three‐step hearing screening programme results with 16 975 births in Turkey. Methods In healthy neonates, Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission (TEOAE) is served as the initial screening in the first day of life. In newborns that did not meet pass criteria TEOAE was repeated in 10‐day period. If the second test was ‘refer’ again, the screening was completed with auditory brainstem response (ABR). Additionally, ABR was performed for the neonates with neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) requirement and at high audiologic risk. Neonates who failed the screening test with ABR were referred for further evaluation. Results A total of 15 323 newborns and 1652 NICU infants were tested. The screening coverage was 94.4%; 14 521 neonates (94.7%) passed the first screening step (TEOAE), while 802 (5.2%) neonate failed. In total, 322 (40.1%) of the neonates out of 802 was subjected to the second TEOAE after 10 days have failed and ABR was applied. From the neonates participated the third step (ABR) totalling 1974, 43 (2.17%) of neonates obtained a ‘refer’ response. Out of these 43 neonates, 17 neonates were (39.5%) NICU infants. From the 43 neonates, 38 cases (88.4%) were found to have hearing impairment. The false‐positive rate for first step screening with TEOAE was 4.9%; second step with TEOAE was 1.85% and for ABR was 0.25%. Conclusions It is apparent that three step national hearing screening programme which has been applied for the latest years in Turkey is an accurate and non‐invasive method to determine the congenital hearing loss. In the future, screening programmes could be rearranged with two steps as initial with TEOAE and retest with ABR and the coverage of the screening programme can be extended.     

噪声性听力损伤的治疗观察

对具有不同程度听力损伤患者（共２０例耳）,在不脱产情况下,口服赛鲨力补氧胶囊２５天（１１．２ｇ／ｄ）观察治疗前后其听力和静脉血中的铜蓝蛋白酶、超氧化物珐化酶（ＳＯＤ）活性及过氧化脂质（ＬＰＯ）含量的变化,结果表明,口服赛鲨力补氧胶囊后,患者静脉血中的铜蓝蛋白酶、超氧化物歧化酶活性显著升高：语频段听力恢复的有效率为７１．４％,高频有效率为７８．９％。因此,鲨烯不仅可以改善体内的代谢物清除水平,而且能     

2018年北京市海淀区新生儿听力筛查现况分析

目的 了解北京市海淀区2018年助产机构新生儿听力筛查现况.方法 对海淀区2018年助产机构上报的产科听力筛查报表和新生儿危重病房(NICU)上报的听力筛查的资料进行统计学分析.结果 2018年海淀区活产总数35 432人,完成听力初筛人数34 710人,听力筛查初筛率为97.96％,初筛未通过率为7.25％.复筛率为...