不同职业病危害因素与职业性噪声聋的关系

目的探讨不同职业危害因素与噪声在导致职业性噪声聋方面有无协同关系。方法对所有符合条件的工人按职业病危害因素分成噪声组、噪声＋粉尘组、噪声＋高温组、噪声＋化学品4组，分别统计各组听力异常和听力正常检出结果，比较不同组间听力异常检出率是否相同。结果噪声组听力异常检出率为33．5％、噪声＋粉尘组为34．7％、噪声＋高温组为38．1％、噪声＋化学品组为38．7％。经统计分析，总体有差别，进一步组内比较，噪声组、噪声＋粉尘组进行比较，x2=0．563，P〉0．05；将噪声组、噪声＋粉尘组两组合并与噪声＋高温组进行比较，x2=9．194，P〈0．01及x2=6．938，P〈0．01。结论粉尘在导致噪声聋方面与噪声无协同作用，而高温、化学品均与噪声有协同作用。

Relationship between different occupational hazard and occupational noise deaf

[ Objective] To investigate whether there is cooperative relation of different occupational hazard and noise in the aspect of causing occupational noise deaf. [ Methods] All the workers according with conditions were divided by 4 groups, which were noise group, noise and dust group, noise and hot environment group and noise and chemicals group. The number of normal ears and ab- normal ears of all groups were calculated, and the abnormal detection rates were compared among groups. [ Results ] The rate of ab- normal audition of noise group was 33.5%, that of noise and dust group, noise and hot environment group, noise and chemicals group was 34.7%, 38.1%, 38.7%, respectively. The statistical analysis showed there was difference between groups. With further analysis in groups, between noise group and noise and dust group X2 = 0.563 ,P 〉 0.05; combined noise group with noise and dust group, then compared with noise and hot environment group, X2 = 9. 194,P 〈 0. 01 and X2 = 6. 938, P 〈 0.01. [ Conclusion ] There is no cooperative relation of dust and noise in the aspect of causing occupational noise deaf. While there is cooperative relation between hot environment, chemicals and noise deaf.