MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: [Investigation of occupational noise exposure and hearing loss among automobile manufacturing workers].
Author: Wu J, Wang F, Wang DM, Dai XY, Yi GL, Chen ZL.
Journal: Zhonghua Lao Dong Wei Sheng Zhi Ye Bing Za Zhi; 2021 Aug 20; 39(8):593-597. PubMed ID: 34488268.
Abstract:
Objective: To investigation the situation of occupational noise exposure and hearing loss among workers in automobile manufacturing enterprise during 2017-2019 in Wuhan. Methods: Workers in automobile manufacturing who underwent physical examination in Wuhan Hospital for the Prevention and Treatment of Occupational Diseases from 2017 to 2019 were included as subjects in the cross-sectional survey. Questionnaire survey, noise detection and pure tone threshold test were used. Excluding individuals with working time less than 3 years and information deficiency, 3 948 individuals were finally included in the study. Results: Among 3 948 workers, 128 workers had hearing loss and the rate of hearing loss was 3.24%, among which 101 workers had high-frequency hearing loss and 27 workers were diagnosed as occupational noise deafness. The prevalence of hearing loss among workers previously exposed to noise was significantly higher than that without prior exposure (12.10%, 0.96%, P<0.05) . The prevalence of hearing loss among workers with occupational noise exposure <80 dB (A) , 80~<85 dB (A) and ≥85 dB (A) was 1.83%, 2.69% and 5.09%, respectively. The prevalence of high frequency hearing loss was 1.60%, 2.05% and 3.71%, respectively. The prevalence of occupational noise deafness was 0.23%, 0.64% and 1.38%, respectively. The prevalence of hearing loss and high frequency hearing loss among workers exposed to different occupational noise was statistically significant (P<0.05) , while the prevalence of occupational noise deafness was not statistically significant (P>0.05) . There were statistically significant differences in the prevalence of hearing loss (2.88%, 4.45%) and occupational noise deafness (0.46%, 1.41%) between those who used protective equipment and those who did not (P<0.05) . Compared with workers exposed to occupational noise <80 dB (A) , workers exposed to occupational noise ≥85 dB (A) had A 3.16-fold increased risk of hearing loss (OR=3.16, 95%CI: 1.44~6.95, P<0.05) . Compared to workers using hearing protective equipment, the risk of hearing loss (OR=1.96, 95%CI: 1.25~3.06, P<0.05) and occupational noise deafness (OR=3.46, 95%CI: 1.51-7.96, P<0.05) significantly increased among those without using hearing protective equipment. Conclusion: The risk of hearing loss in automobile manufacturing workers is significantly associated with occupational noise exposure and the use of hearing protective equipment. Good hearing protection may reduce the risk of occupational noise-induced hearing loss and occupational noise deafness. 目的： 探讨2017至2019年武汉市部分汽车制造业工人职业噪声接触及其听力损失情况。 方法： 于2020年5月，采用横断面方法选择2017至2019年在武汉市职业病防治院体检的部分汽车制造业工人3 948人为研究对象，采用问卷调查，并进行噪声检测和纯音听阈测试，而后进行统计学分析。 结果： 调查对象中听力损失率为3.24%（128/3 948），其中高频听力损失有101人，诊断为职业性噪声聋有27人。既往有接触噪声工人听力损失患病率明显高于无既往接触噪声工人（12.10%、0.96%，P<0.05）。职业性噪声接触为<80 dB（A）、80~<85 dB（A）和≥85 dB（A）的工人听力损失率分别为1.83%、2.69%和5.09%；高频听力损失率分别为1.60%、2.05%和3.71%；职业性噪声聋患病率分别为0.23%、0.64%和1.38%；不同职业噪声接触工人的高频听力损失和噪声聋发病率差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05），职业性噪声聋患病率差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。使用防护用品与不使用防护用品汽车制造业工人听力损失率（2.88%、4.45%）和职业性噪声聋患病率（0.46%、1.41%）差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。与职业噪声接触<80 dB（A）的工人比较，职业噪声接触≥85 dB（A）工人发生听力损失的风险增加3.16倍（OR=3.16，95%CI：1.44~6.95，P<0.05）。与使用听力防护用品的工人比较，不使用听力防护用品的工人听力损失（OR=1.96，95%CI：1.25~3.06，P<0.05）和职业性噪声聋（OR=3.46，95%CI：1.51~7.96，P<0.05）的发病风险明显增加。 结论： 汽车制造业工人听力损失发病风险与职业噪声接触和个体听力防护用品使用密切相关。良好的听力防护可以降低职业性噪声诱导听力损失和职业性噪声聋的风险。.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]