学科主题临床医学
Comparison of Two Dose-response Relationship of Noise Exposure Evaluation Results with High Frequency Hearing Loss
Zhang, Hua1; Li, Nan1; Yang, Qiu-Ling2; Qiu, Wei3; Zhu, Liang-Liang2; Tao, Li-Yuan1; Davis, Robert I.3; Heyer, Nicholas4; Zhao, Yi-Ming1
关键词Complex Noise Cumulative Noise Exposure Dose-response Relationship Noise Exposure Evaluation Workgroup
刊名CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL
2015-03-20
DOI10.4103/0366-6999.152659
128期:6页:816-821
收录类别SCI
文章类型Article
WOS标题词Science & Technology
类目[WOS]Medicine, General & Internal
研究领域[WOS]General & Internal Medicine
关键词[WOS]COMPLEX NOISE ; RISK ; THRESHOLDS ; WORKERS
英文摘要

Background: Complex noise and its relation to hearing loss are difficult to measure and evaluate. In complex noise measurement, individual exposure results may not accurately represent lifetime noise exposure. Thus, the mean L-Aeq,L-8h values of individuals in the same workgroup were also used to represent L-Aeq,L-8 h in our study. Our study aimed to explore whether the mean exposure levels of workers in the same workgroup represented real noise exposure better than individual exposure levels did.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted to establish a model for cumulative noise exposure (CNE) and hearing loss in 205 occupational noise-exposed workers who were recruited from two large automobile manufacturers in China. We used a personal noise dosimeter and a questionnaire to determine the workers′ occupational noise exposure levels and exposure times, respectively. A qualified audiologist used standardized audiometric procedures to assess hearing acuity after at least 16 h of noise avoidance.

Results: We observed that 88.3% of workers were exposed to more than 85 dB(A) of occupational noise (mean: 89.3 +/- 4.2 dB(A)). The personal CNE (CNEp) and workgroup CNE (CNEg) were 100.5 +/- 4.7 dB(A) and 100.5 +/- 2.9 dB(A), respectively. In the binary logistic regression analysis, we established a regression model with high-frequency hearing loss as the dependent variable and CNE as the independent variable. The Wald value was 5.014 with CNEp as the independent variable and 8.653 with CNEg as the independent variable. Furthermore, we found that the figure for CNEg was more similar to the stationary noise reference than CNEp was. The CNEg model was better than the CNEp model. In this circumstance, we can measure some subjects instead of the whole workgroup and save manpower.

Conclusions: In a complex noise environment, the measurements of average noise exposure level of the workgroup can improve the accuracy and save manpower.

语种英语
WOS记录号WOS:000351219700020
引用统计
文献类型期刊论文
条目标识符http://ir.bjmu.edu.cn/handle/400002259/54644
专题北京大学第三临床医学院_临床流行病学研究中心
作者单位1.SUNY Coll Plattsburgh, Auditory Res Lab, Plattsburgh, NY 12901 USA
2.Battelle Ctr Publ Hlth Res & Evaluat, Seattle, WA USA
3.Peking Univ, Hosp 3, Res Ctr Clin Epidemiol, Beijing 100191, Peoples R China
4.Dongfeng Inst Occupat Dis Prevent, Shi Yan 442001, Hubei, Peoples R China
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
Zhang, Hua,Li, Nan,Yang, Qiu-Ling,et al. Comparison of Two Dose-response Relationship of Noise Exposure Evaluation Results with High Frequency Hearing Loss[J]. CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL,2015,128(6):816-821.
APA Zhang, Hua.,Li, Nan.,Yang, Qiu-Ling.,Qiu, Wei.,Zhu, Liang-Liang.,...&Zhao, Yi-Ming.(2015).Comparison of Two Dose-response Relationship of Noise Exposure Evaluation Results with High Frequency Hearing Loss.CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL,128(6),816-821.
MLA Zhang, Hua,et al."Comparison of Two Dose-response Relationship of Noise Exposure Evaluation Results with High Frequency Hearing Loss".CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL 128.6(2015):816-821.
条目包含的文件
条目无相关文件。
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
查看访问统计
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Zhang, Hua]的文章
[Li, Nan]的文章
[Yang, Qiu-Ling]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Zhang, Hua]的文章
[Li, Nan]的文章
[Yang, Qiu-Ling]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Zhang, Hua]的文章
[Li, Nan]的文章
[Yang, Qiu-Ling]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
所有评论 (0)
暂无评论
 

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。