Back
 JBM  Vol.6 No.12 , December 2018
The Effect of a High-Frequency-Hearing-Threshold Weighted Value on the Diagnosis of Occupational-Noise-Induced Deafness
Abstract:
Objective: In order to provide a theoretical basis for the revision of the current diagnostic criteria for occupational noise-induced deafness (ONID), we evaluated the degree of ONID by analyzing different high-frequency-hearing- threshold-weighted values (HFTWVs). Methods: A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the diagnosis of patients with ONID from January 2016 to January 2017 in Guangdong province, China. Based on 3 hearing tests (each interval between the tests was greater than 3 days), the minimum threshold value of each frequency was obtained using the 2007 edition’s diagnostic criteria for ONID. The speech frequency and the HFTWVs were analyzed based on age, noise exposure, and diagnostic classi-fication using SPSS21.0. Results: 168 patients in total were involved in this study, 154 males and 14 females, and the average age was 41.18 ± 6.07. The diagnosis rate was increased by the weighted value of the high frequencies and was more than the mean value of the pure speech frequency (MVPSF). The diagnosis rate for the weighted 4 kHz frequency level increased by 13.69% (χ2 = 9.880, P = 0.002), the weighted 6 kHz level increased by 15.47% (χ2 = 9.985, P = 0.002), and the weighted 4 kHz + 6 kHz level increased by 15.47% (χ2 = 9.985, P = 0.002). The differences were all statistically significant. The diagnostic rate of the different thresholds showed no obvious difference between the genders. The age groups were divided into less than or equal to 40 years old (group A) and 40 - 50 years old (group B). There were several groups with a high frequency: high frequency weighted 4 kHz ( group A χ2 = 3.380, P = 0.050; group B χ2 = 4.054, P = 0.032), high frequency weighted 6 kHz (group A χ2 = 6.362, P = 0.012; group B χ2 = 4.054, P = 0.032), weighted 4 kHz + 6 kHz (group A χ2 = 6.362 P = 0.012; B χ2 = 4.054, P = 0.032) than those of MVPSF in the same group on ONID diagnosis rate. The differences between the groups were statistically significant. There was no significant difference between the age groups (χ2 = 2.265, P = 0.944). The better ear’s (the smaller hearing threshold weighted value) MVPSF and the weighted values for the different high frequencies were examined in light of the number of working years; the group that was exposed to noise for more than 10 years had significantly higher values than those of the average thresholds of each frequency band in the groups with 3 - 5 years of exposure (F = 2.271, P = 0.001) and 6 - 10 years of exposure (F = 1.563, P = 0.046). The differences were statistically significant. The different HFTWVs were higher than those of the MVPSF values, and the high frequency weighted 4 kHz + 6 kHz level showed the greatest difference, with an average increase of 2.83 dB. The diagnostic rate that included the weighted high frequency values was higher for the mild, moderate, and severe cases than those patients who were only screened with the pure frequency tests. The results of the comparisons of the diagnosis rates for mild ONID were as follows: the weighted 3 kHz high frequency level (χ2 = 3.117, P = 0.077) had no significant difference, but the weighted 4 kHz level (χ2 = 10.835, P = 0.001), 6 kHz level (χ2 = 9.985, P = 0.002), 3 kHz + 4 kHz level (χ2 = 6.315, P = 0.012), 3 kHz + 6 kHz level (χ2 = 6.315, P = 0.012), 4 kHz + 6 kHz level (χ2 = 9.985, P = 0.002), and 3 kHz + 4 kHz + 6 kHz level (χ2 = 7.667, P = 0.002) were significantly higher than the diagnosis rate of the mean value of the PSF. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups for the moderate and severe grades (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Different HFTWVs increase the diagnostic rate of ONID. The weighted 4 kHz, 6 kHz, and 4 kHz + 6 kHz high frequency values greatly affected the diagnostic results, and the weighted 4 kHz + 6 kHz high frequency hearing threshold value has the maximum the effect on the ONID diagnosis results.
Cite this paper: Xue, L. , Zhang, Y. and Yang, A. (2018) The Effect of a High-Frequency-Hearing-Threshold Weighted Value on the Diagnosis of Occupational-Noise-Induced Deafness. Journal of Biosciences and Medicines, 6, 88-99. doi: 10.4236/jbm.2018.612009.
References

[1]   Antonioli, C.A., Momensohn-Santos, T.M. and Benaglia, T.A. (2016) High-Frequency Audiometry Hearing on Monitoring of Individuals Exposed to Occupational Noise: A Systematic Review. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 20, 281-289.

[2]   Mehrparvar, A.H., Mirmohammadi, S.J., Davari, M.H., Mostaghaci, M., Mollasadeghi, A., Bahaloo, M., et al. (2014) Conventional Audiometry, Extended High-Frequency Audiometry, and DPOAE for Early Diagnosis of NIHL. Iran Red Crescent Med J, 16, e9628. https://doi.org/10.5812/ircmj.9628

[3]   Sha, S.H. and Schacht, J. (2017) Emerging Therapeutic Interventions against Noise-Induced Hearing Loss. Expert Opin Investig Drugs, 26, 85-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/13543784.2017.1269171

[4]   Adams, K.L., Langley, A. and Brazile, W. (2016) Noise Exposure and Temporary Hearing Loss of Indoor Hockey Officials: A Pilot Study. Journal of Environmental Health, 79, 22-26.

[5]   Mutai, H., Watabe, T., Kosaki, K., Ogawa, K. and Matsunaga, T. (2017) Mitochondrial Mutations in Maternally Inherited Hearing Loss. BMC Med Genet, 18, 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12881-017-0389-4

[6]   Ministry of Health of the PRC (1996) Diagnostic Criteria and Management of Occupational Noise-Induced Deafness: GB16152-1996. People's Medical Publishing House, Beijing.

[7]   National Health and Family Planning Commission of the PRC (2014) Diagnosis of Occupational Noise-Induced Deafness: GBZ49-2014. People’s Medical Publishing House, Beijing.

[8]   ISO1999 (2013) Acollstics, Estimation of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.

[9]   Miyakita, T. and Miura, H. (1986) A Tentative Proposal for Classification of Audiograms in Noise-Induced Deafness: Relationship between Audiogram and Subjective Complaints in Noise-Exposed Workers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health, 57, 173-183. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00405786

[10]   Murphy, W.J. and Franks, J.R. (2002) NIOSH Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupational Noise Exposure, Revised Criteria 1998. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 111, 2397. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4778162

[11]   Ministry of Health of the PRC (2007) Diagnostic Criteria of Occupational Noise-Induced Deafness: GBZ49-2007. People's Medical Publishing House, Beijing.

[12]   Ministry of Health of the PRC (2007) Measurement of Noise in the Workplace. GBZ/T189.8 -2007. People's Medical Publishing House, Beijing.

[13]   Mehrparvar, A.H., Mirmohammadi, S.J., Ghoreyshi, A., Mollasadeghi, A. and Loukzadeh, Z. (2011) High-Frequency Audiometry: A Means for Early Diagnosis of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss. Noise & Health, 13, 402-406. https://doi.org/10.4103/1463-1741.90295

[14]   Xu, X.R., Wang, J.J., Yang, Q.Y., Jiao, J., He, L.H., Yu, S.F., et al. (2017) The Effect of PCDH15 Gene Variations on the Risk of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in a Chinese Population. Biomedical and Environmental Sciences, 30, 143-146.

[15]   Li, Y., Yu, S., Gu, G., Chen, G., Zheng, Y., Jiao, J., et al. (2017) Polymorphisms of Heat Shock Protein 70 Genes (HSPA1A, HSPA1B and HSPA1L) and Susceptibility Of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in a Chinese Population: A Case-Control Study. PLoS One, 12, e0171722. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171722

[16]   Heinonen-Guzejev, M., Vuorinen, H.S., Mussalo-Rauhamaa, H., Heikkilä, K., Koskenvuo, M. and Kaprio, J. (2005) Genetic Component of Noise Sensitivity. Twin Res HumGenet, 8, 245-249. https://doi.org/10.1375/twin.8.3.245

[17]   Mehrparvar, A.H., Mirmohammadi, S.J., Ghoreyshi, A., Mollasadeghi, A. and Loukzadeh, Z. (2011) High-Frequency Audiometry: A Means for Early Diagnosis of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss. Noise Health, 13, 402-406. https://doi.org/10.4103/1463-1741.90295

[18]   Dobie, R.A. (2008) The Burdens of Age-Related and Occupational Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in the United States. Ear Hear, 29, 565-577. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e31817349ec

[19]   Martins, R.H.G., Tavares, E.L.M., Neto, A.C.L. and Fioravanti, M.P. (2007) Occupational Hearing Loss in Teachers: A Probable Diagnosis. Rev Bras Otorrinolaringol, 73, 239-244. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-72992007000200015

[20]   Dobie, R.A. (2008) The Burdens of Age-Related and Occupational Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in the United States. Ear Hear, 29, 565-577. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e31817349ec

[21]   Yu, S.F., Chen, G.S., Jiao, J., Gu, G.Z., Zhang, H.L., Wang, X.M., et al. (2017) A Cohort Study on Occupational Noise Induced Hearing Loss in Workers at an Iron and Steel Plant. Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi XueZaZhi, 51, 13-19.

[22]   Sriopas, A., Chapman, R.S., Sutammasa, S. and Siriwong, W. (2017) Occupational Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in Auto Part Factory Workers in Welding Units in Thailand. J Occup Health, 59, 55-62. https://doi.org/10.1539/joh.15-0291-OA

[23]   Attias, J., Horovitz, G., El-Hatib, N. and Nageris, B. (2001) Detection and Clinical Diagnosis of Noise-Induced Hearing, Loss by Otoacoustic Emissions. Noise Health, 3, 19-31.

 
 
Top