BACKGROUND: Noise most frequently affects hearing system, as it may typically cause a bilateral, progressive sensorineural hearing loss at high frequencies. OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare three different methods to evaluate noise-induced hearing loss (conventional audiometry, high-frequency audiometry, and distortion product otoacoustic emission). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Data was analyzed by SPSS (ver. 19) using chi square, T test and repeated measures analysis. Study samples were workers from tile and ceramic industry. RESULTS: We found that conventional audiometry, extended high-frequency audiometry, low-tone distortion product otoacoustic emission and high-tone distortion product otoacoustic emission had abnormal findings in 29 %, 69 %, 22 %, and 52 % of participants. Most frequently affected frequencies were 4000 and 6000Hz in conventional audiometry, and 14000 and 16000 in extended high-frequency audiometry. CONCLUSIONS: Extended high-frequency audiometry was the most sensitive test for detection of hearing loss in workers exposed to hazardous noise compared with conventional audiometry and distortion product otoacoustic.
BACKGROUND: Noise most frequently affects hearing system, as it may typically cause a bilateral, progressive sensorineural hearing loss at high frequencies. OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare three different methods to evaluate noise-induced hearing loss (conventional audiometry, high-frequency audiometry, and distortion product otoacoustic emission). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Data was analyzed by SPSS (ver. 19) using chi square, T test and repeated measures analysis. Study samples were workers from tile and ceramic industry. RESULTS: We found that conventional audiometry, extended high-frequency audiometry, low-tone distortion product otoacoustic emission and high-tone distortion product otoacoustic emission had abnormal findings in 29 %, 69 %, 22 %, and 52 % of participants. Most frequently affected frequencies were 4000 and 6000Hz in conventional audiometry, and 14000 and 16000 in extended high-frequency audiometry. CONCLUSIONS: Extended high-frequency audiometry was the most sensitive test for detection of hearing loss in workers exposed to hazardous noise compared with conventional audiometry and distortion product otoacoustic.
Authors: Maria Angélica de Almeida Porto; Dáphine Luciana Costa Gahyva; José Roberto Pereira Lauris; Andréa Cintra Lopes Journal: Pro Fono Date: 2004 Sep-Dec
Authors: George S Korres; Dimitrios G Balatsouras; Antonis Tzagaroulakis; Dimitris Kandiloros; Elisabeth Ferekidou; Stavros Korres Journal: Noise Health Date: 2009 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 0.867
Authors: Giuseppina Somma; Antonio Pietroiusti; Andrea Magrini; Luca Coppeta; Carla Ancona; Stefano Gardi; Marco Messina; Antonio Bergamaschi Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: Dionicio Angel Galarza-Delgado; Mario Jesus Villegas Gonzalez; Janett Riega Torres; German A Soto-Galindo; Lidia Mendoza Flores; José Luis Treviño González Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2017-12-22 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Christi M Barbee; Jessica A James; Jin Hyung Park; Emily M Smith; Carole E Johnson; Shari Clifton; Jeffrey L Danhauer Journal: Semin Hear Date: 2018-06-15