-
JAMA Otolaryngology-- Head & Neck... Mar 2022Hearing loss (HL) and dual sensory loss (DSL) are prevalent, disabling, and associated with numerous age-related health conditions, including dementia and frailty. To... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Associations of Hearing Loss and Dual Sensory Loss With Mortality: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression of 26 Observational Studies With 1 213 756 Participants.
IMPORTANCE
Hearing loss (HL) and dual sensory loss (DSL) are prevalent, disabling, and associated with numerous age-related health conditions, including dementia and frailty. To date, no evidence-based summary of their mortality risk is available.
OBJECTIVE
To clarify the epidemiological associations between HL/DSL and mortality.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, from inception until June 18, 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Two blinded reviewers selected observational or interventional studies, published as full-length English articles in peer-reviewed journals, that reported the presence or severity of HL or DSL (ie, comorbid HL and vision loss), whether objectively measured or self-reported, in association with any mortality estimate, among adults 18 years and older.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers extracted data and evaluated study bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)/Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines and a PROSPERO-registered protocol. The analysis pooled maximally adjusted estimates using mixed-effects models, measured heterogeneity using I2, investigated sources of heterogeneity using meta-regression and subgroup meta-analyses, examined and adjusted for publication bias, performed influence and cumulative meta-analyses, and assessed evidence quality using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause, cardiovascular, or other mortality estimates.
RESULTS
This review included 14 retrospective and 12 prospective observational studies (1 213 756 participants) from 3220 records. Risk of bias was low to moderate; exclusion of 3 high-risk studies did not alter conclusions. Hearing loss was associated with excess all-cause mortality (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.07-1.19; I2 = 77%; n = 21; 95% prediction interval [PI], 0.93-1.37) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.10-1.50; I2 = 60%; n = 6; 95% PI, 0.84-1.96), while DSL was associated with larger excess risks (all-cause: HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.30-1.51; I2 = 34%; n = 10; 95% PI, 1.18-1.66; cardiovascular: HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.31-2.65; I2 = 0%; n = 2), after adjustment for demographics and comorbidities. Prespecified meta-regression sufficiently explained heterogeneity, with longer follow-up duration weakening the pooled association, leaving low (29%) residual heterogeneity. Meta-regression among audiometric studies showed a dose-response association (doubling of HR per 30-dB increase in HL). Self-reported and audiometric effect sizes were similar, with lower heterogeneity in the latter. Associations were robust to trim-and-fill adjustment for publication bias and single-study influence and cumulative meta-analyses. Associations with accident/injury, cancer, and stroke mortality were inconclusive, with only 1 to 3 studies. Overall evidence quality was moderate.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, HL and DSL were associated with excess all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Physicians caring for patients with HL should consider its relevance to general health and longevity.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Comorbidity; Deafness; Disease Progression; Hearing Loss; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 34967895
DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2021.3767 -
Neural Plasticity 2019One of the most significant effects of neural plasticity manifests in the case of sensory deprivation when cortical areas that were originally specialized for the...
The Cross-Modal Effects of Sensory Deprivation on Spatial and Temporal Processes in Vision and Audition: A Systematic Review on Behavioral and Neuroimaging Research since 2000.
One of the most significant effects of neural plasticity manifests in the case of sensory deprivation when cortical areas that were originally specialized for the functions of the deprived sense take over the processing of another modality. Vision and audition represent two important senses needed to navigate through space and time. Therefore, the current systematic review discusses the cross-modal behavioral and neural consequences of deafness and blindness by focusing on spatial and temporal processing abilities, respectively. In addition, movement processing is evaluated as compiling both spatial and temporal information. We examine whether the sense that is not primarily affected changes in its own properties or in the properties of the deprived modality (i.e., temporal processing as the main specialization of audition and spatial processing as the main specialization of vision). References to the , , and the are made to address global brain organization and plasticity principles. Generally, according to the reviewed studies, behavioral performance is enhanced in those aspects for which both the deprived and the overtaking senses provide adequate processing resources. Furthermore, the behavioral enhancements observed in the overtaking sense (i.e., vision in the case of deafness and audition in the case of blindness) are clearly limited by the processing resources of the overtaking modality. Thus, the brain regions that were previously recruited during the behavioral performance of the deprived sense now support a similar behavioral performance for the overtaking sense. This finding suggests a more input-unspecific and processing principle-based organization of the brain. Finally, we highlight the importance of controlling for and stating factors that might impact neural plasticity and the need for further research into visual temporal processing in deaf subjects.
Topics: Acoustic Stimulation; Auditory Perception; Biomedical Research; Brain; Humans; Neuroimaging; Photic Stimulation; Sensory Deprivation; Space Perception; Time Perception; Visual Perception
PubMed: 31885540
DOI: 10.1155/2019/9603469 -
Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Apr 2012The technological advances in cochlear implants and processing strategies have enabled subjects affected by severe to profound hearing loss to hear sounds and recognize... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
UNLABELLED
The technological advances in cochlear implants and processing strategies have enabled subjects affected by severe to profound hearing loss to hear sounds and recognize speech in various different degrees. The variability of hearing outcomes in subjects with post-lingual deafness has been significant and cochlear implant indications have been extended to include an ever larger population.
OBJECTIVE
This paper aims to look into the groups of post-lingual deafness patients to find where cochlear implants have yielded better outcomes than conventional hearing aids.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Review the literature available on databases SciELO, Cochrane, MEDLINE, and LILACS-BIREME. The publications selected for review were rated as A or B on evidence strength on the day of the review. Their authors analyzed and compared hearing aids and cochlear implants in populations of post-lingually deaf patients.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review.
RESULTS
Eleven out of the 2,169 papers searched were found to be pertinent to the topic and were rated B for evidence strength. Six studies were prospective cohort trials, four were cross-sectional studies and one was a clinical trial.
CONCLUSION
The assessment done on the benefits yielded by post-lingually deaf subjects from cochlear implants showed that they are effective and provide for better results than conventional hearing aids.
Topics: Cochlear Implantation; Deafness; Hearing Aids; Hearing Loss, Sensorineural; Humans; Speech Perception
PubMed: 22499380
DOI: 10.1590/S1808-86942012000200019 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2018Ear wax (cerumen) is a normal bodily secretion that can become a problem when it obstructs the ear canal. Symptoms attributed to wax (such as deafness and pain) are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ear wax (cerumen) is a normal bodily secretion that can become a problem when it obstructs the ear canal. Symptoms attributed to wax (such as deafness and pain) are among the commonest reasons for patients to present to primary care with ear trouble.Wax is part of the ear's self-cleaning mechanism and is usually naturally expelled from the ear canal without causing problems. When this mechanism fails, wax is retained in the canal and may become impacted; interventions to encourage its removal may then be needed. Application of ear drops is one of these methods. Liquids used to remove and soften wax are of several kinds: oil-based compounds (e.g. olive or almond oil); water-based compounds (e.g. sodium bicarbonate or water itself); a combination of the above or non-water, non-oil-based solutions, such as carbamide peroxide (a hydrogen peroxide-urea compound) and glycerol.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of ear drops (or sprays) to remove or aid the removal of ear wax in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane ENT Trials Register; Cochrane Register of Studies; PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 23 March 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which a 'cerumenolytic' was compared with no treatment, water or saline, an alternative liquid treatment (oil or almond oil) or another 'cerumenolytic' in adults or children with obstructing or impacted ear wax.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were 1) the proportion of patients (or ears) with complete clearance of ear wax and 2) adverse effects (discomfort, irritation or pain). Secondary outcomes were: extent of wax clearance; proportion of people (or ears) with relief of symptoms due to wax; proportion of people (or ears) requiring further intervention to remove wax; success of mechanical removal of residual wax following treatment; any other adverse effects recorded and cost. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 studies, with 623 participants (900 ears). Interventions included: oil-based treatments (triethanolamine polypeptide, almond oil, benzocaine, chlorobutanol), water-based treatments (docusate sodium, carbamide peroxide, phenazone, choline salicylate, urea peroxide, potassium carbonate), other active comparators (e.g. saline or water alone) and no treatment. Nine of the studies were more than 15 years old.The overall risk of bias across the 10 included studies was low or unclear.
PRIMARY OUTCOME
proportion of patients (or ears) with complete clearance of ear waxSix studies (360 participants; 491 ears) contributed quantitative data and were included in our meta-analyses.Active treatment versus no treatmentOnly one study addressed this comparison. The proportion of ears with complete clearance of ear wax was higher in the active treatment group (22%) compared with the no treatment group (5%) after five days of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 4.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 16.80); one study; 117 ears; NNTB = 8) (low-quality evidence).Active treatment versus water or salineWe found no evidence of a difference in the proportion of patients (or ears) with complete clearance of ear wax when the active treatment group was compared to the water or saline group (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.75; three studies; 213 participants; 257 ears) (low-quality evidence). Two studies applied drops for five days, but one study only applied the drops for 15 minutes. When we excluded this study in a sensitivity analysis it did not change the result.Water or saline versus no treatmentThis comparison was only addressed in the single study cited above (active versus no treatment) and there was no evidence of a difference in the proportion of ears with complete wax clearance when comparing water or saline with no treatment after five days of treatment (RR 4.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 17.62; one study; 76 ears) (low-quality evidence).Active treatment A versus active treatment BSeveral single studies evaluated 'head-to-head' comparisons between two active treatments. We found no evidence to show that one was superior to any other.Subgroup analysis of oil-based active treatments versus non-oil based active treatmentsWe found no evidence of a difference in this outcome when oil-based treatments were compared with non-oil-based active treatments.
PRIMARY OUTCOME
adverse effects: discomfort, irritation or painOnly seven studies planned to measure and did report this outcome. Only two (141 participants;176 ears) provided useable data. There was no evidence of a significant difference in the number of adverse effects between the types of ear drops in these two studies. We summarised the remaining five studies narratively. All events were mild and reported in fewer than 30 participants across the seven studies (low-quality evidence).Secondary outcomesThree studies reported 'other' adverse effects (how many studies planned to report these is unclear). The available information was limited and included occasional reports of dizziness, unpleasant smell, tinnitus and hearing loss. No significant differences between groups were reported. There were no emergencies or serious adverse effects reported in any of the 10 studies.There was very limited or no information available on our remaining secondary outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although a number of studies aimed to evaluate whether or not one type of cerumenolytic is more effective than another, there is no high-quality evidence to allow a firm conclusion to be drawn and the answer remains uncertain.A single study suggests that applying ear drops for five days may result in a greater likelihood of complete wax clearance than no treatment at all. However, we cannot conclude whether one type of active treatment is more effective than another and there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy between oil-based and water-based active treatments.There is no evidence to show that using saline or water alone is better or worse than commercially produced cerumenolytics. Equally, there is also no evidence to show that using saline or water alone is better than no treatment.
Topics: Adult; Antipyrine; Benzocaine; Carbamide Peroxide; Carbonates; Cerumen; Child; Chlorobutanol; Choline; Dioctyl Sulfosuccinic Acid; Drug Combinations; Ear Canal; Ethanolamines; Humans; Hygiene; Peroxides; Pharmaceutical Solutions; Plant Oils; Potassium; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Salicylates; Sodium Chloride; Surface-Active Agents; Urea; Water
PubMed: 30043448
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012171.pub2 -
PloS One 2019In July 2018 the active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implant received FDA approval in the US (for patients 12 years and older with conductive and/or mixed... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In July 2018 the active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing implant received FDA approval in the US (for patients 12 years and older with conductive and/or mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness), reflecting the current trend of moving away from percutaneous hearing solutions towards intact skin systems.
OBJECTIVES
To critically assess the current literature on safety, efficacy and subjective benefit after implantation with an active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing device.
DATA SOURCES
Literature investigation was performed by electronic database search including PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and manual search of relevant journals and reference lists of included studies.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials, clinical controlled trials and cohort studies, case series and case reports investigating subjective and objective outcomes.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Retrieved literature was screened and extracted by two reviewers independently. Subgroup analysis of indications (conductive and/or mixed hearing loss, single-sided deafness) and participant ages (pediatric vs. adults) was conducted on patients with active transcutaneous bone conduction devices. Sensitivity analysis was performed to test the stability of the results in meta-analysis.
RESULTS
39 citations reporting on pre- and postoperative audiological results, speech performance in quiet and in noise, localization testing as well as subjective outcomes were included in this systematic review. Functional gain as well as word recognition score outcomes could be further investigated via meta-analysis. All outcomes reported and summarized here reflect beneficial audiological performance and high patient satisfaction, accompanied with a low complications rate (minor event incidence rate: 9.9 person-years; major incidence rate: 148.9 person-years) for the indications of conductive and mixed hearing loss as well as in individuals suffering from single-sided deafness for all age groups of subjects who underwent active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing device implantation.
LIMITATIONS
A limiting factor of this systematic review was the Level of Evidence of the reviewed literature, comprising 2a/3a studies (cohort studies and case-control studies). Furthermore, the reporting standards, especially in outcomes such as word recognition scores in quiet and in noise, vary across study cites from various countries, which impedes comparisons. Last but not least, no other comparable other device was retrieved as the active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing device is the only available at the moment.
CONCLUSION
The device's transcutaneous technology results in a minor event incidence rate of one in 9.9 person-years and a major incidence rate of one in 148.9 person-years. Based on the audiological outcomes, high patient satisfaction as well as the low complication rate, the authors recommend the active transcutaneous bone conduction hearing device as a safe and effective treatment for patients suffering from hearing loss within the device's indication criteria (conductive and/or mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness).
Topics: Bone Conduction; Cochlear Implants; Humans; Patient Satisfaction; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31525208
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221484 -
Otolaryngology--head and Neck Surgery :... Aug 2016To determine the breadth of outcome domains used in the reporting of adult cochlear implant surgery for the purpose of registry and quality measure development. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To determine the breadth of outcome domains used in the reporting of adult cochlear implant surgery for the purpose of registry and quality measure development.
DATA SOURCES
Systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
REVIEW METHODS
In consultation with a medical librarian, search strategies were constructed to identify randomized controlled trials studying adults undergoing cochlear implantation. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched from database inception to July 2015. Studies were evaluated for level of evidence and risk of bias with the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool, and outcome domains were extracted from each study.
RESULTS
Of 4473 unique citations found, 8 studies were included in this review. All 8 trials were evidence level 1B. Risk of bias was low in 2 trials and high in the other 6. Reported outcome domains included speech perception in quiet and noise, speech tracking, quality of life, timbre perception, hearing preservation, vestibular function, electrode insertion technique, functional measures, functional imaging, fitting time, and tinnitus.
CONCLUSIONS
An analysis of randomized controlled trials studying cochlear implantation in adults yielded a wide spectrum of outcome domains. This is the first study to comprehensively describe the breadth of outcome domains in adult cochlear implantation. Validated instruments from these domains could be considered for potential inclusion as quality measures and registry use.
Topics: Adult; Cochlear Implantation; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27048664
DOI: 10.1177/0194599816641382 -
Scientific Reports Oct 2022About 70% of people with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) experience hearing loss. There is no cure for OI, and therapies to ameliorate hearing loss rely on conventional... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
About 70% of people with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) experience hearing loss. There is no cure for OI, and therapies to ameliorate hearing loss rely on conventional treatments for auditory impairments in the general population. The success rate of these treatments in the OI population with poor collagenous tissues is still unclear. Here, we conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy of treatments addressing hearing loss in OI. This study conforms to the reporting standards of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA). Data sources include published articles in Medline via PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase, from their inception to November 2020. Studies included individuals with OI undergoing a hearing loss treatment, having pre- and postoperative objective assessment of hearing function at a specified follow-up length. Our search identified 1144 articles, of which 67 were reviewed at full-text screening. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted on the selected articles (n = 12) of people with OI that underwent stapes surgery. Success was assessed as the proportion of ears with a postoperative Air-Bone Gap (ABG) ≤ 10 dB. A systematic review was conducted on the remaining articles (n = 13) reporting on other treatments. No meta-analysis was conducted on the latter due to the low number of articles on the topic and the nature of single case studies. The meta-analysis shows that stapes surgeries have a low success rate of 59.08 (95% CI 45.87 to 71.66) in the OI population. The systematic review revealed that cochlear implants, bone-anchored hearing aids, and other implantable hearing aids proved to be feasible, although challenging, in the OI population, with only 2 unsuccessful cases among the 16 reviewed single cases. This analysis of published data on OI shows poor clinical outcomes for the procedures addressing hearing loss. Further studies on hearing loss treatments for OI people are needed. Notably, the mechanisms of hearing loss in OI need to be determined to develop successful and possibly non-invasive treatment strategies.
Topics: Cochlear Implantation; Deafness; Hearing Loss; Humans; Osteogenesis Imperfecta; Stapes Surgery
PubMed: 36224204
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-20169-9 -
Asian Journal of Neurosurgery 2017This systematic review wasdesigned to compare the complications of acoustic neuroma surgery via the suboccipital retrosigmoid approach in the sitting versus lateral... (Review)
Review
This systematic review wasdesigned to compare the complications of acoustic neuroma surgery via the suboccipital retrosigmoid approach in the sitting versus lateral positions. Searches for randomized trials and observational studies about the complications of acoustic neuroma surgery were performed in five medical databases (though October 2015) including PubMed, MEDLINE (In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and PsycINFO. Primary outcomes in this study were venous air emboli, neuropsychological defects, CSF leak, facial and abducens nerves palsy, postoperative deafness, hydrocephalus and mortality. Secondary outcomes were total tumor removal, facial and cochlear nerves preservation and ataxia. 843 abstracts and titles were reviewed and 10 studies (two non-randomized comparative studies and 8 non-comparative case series) were included for data extraction. Because of the heterogeneity of the studies, small number of participants and methodological shortcomings, findings were evaluated qualitatively. No impressive advantage was found in surgical or neurological outcomes for use of the sitting or lateral positions in patients with acoustic neuroma surgery. According to the available evidence, it seems that both sitting and lateral positions can be used with an equivalent safety for acoustic neuroma surgery via the retrosigmoid suboccipital approach. There seems a clear need for comparative studies to compare harms and other outcomes for these two positions.
PubMed: 28761510
DOI: 10.4103/1793-5482.185069 -
International Journal of Pediatric... Jun 2019The causative genes associated with autosomal recessive non-syndromic hearing loss (ARNSHL) have been identified, in order of prevalence are GJB2, SLC26A4, MYO15A, OTOF,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The causative genes associated with autosomal recessive non-syndromic hearing loss (ARNSHL) have been identified, in order of prevalence are GJB2, SLC26A4, MYO15A, OTOF, CDH23, and TMC1. To evaluate the prevalence of deafness-associated mutations in neonates and the clinical value of screening, we performed a meta-analysis of clinical trials.
METHODS
The main criteria used to select articles was that the studies were designed to detect deafness genetic mutations in Chinese's neonates, and the screening kits were designed to detect 9 or 20 sites in four deafness-causative genes. The combined effect of genetic screening was measured by the pooled prevalence of mutations with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The Random Model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of mutations.
RESULTS
We included 18 studies (a total of 261766 neonates) from studies using 9-mutation screening kit, and 15 studies (a total of 131158 neonates) from studies using the 20-mutation screening kit to conduct meta-analysis. The Random Model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of mutations due to large heterogeneity (9 sites: I = 89.1%, P = 0.0000; 20 sites: I = 97.3%, P = 0.0002). The pooled prevalence of mutations in 9 sites group was 0.043 (95%CI:0.039-0.047, Z = 21.49, P = 0.000)and 20 sites group was 0.047(95%CI:0.041-0.053, Z = 15.84, P = 0.000).
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of deafness-associated mutations in neonates in China is 4.7%; Based on the current detection technology and deafness genetics knowledge, it may be more reasonable to offer 1494C > T and 1555A > G mutation screening to pregnant women. Decision makers should think about how to use the current deafness genetic screening to amplify the effectiveness of hearing screening.
Topics: Asian People; China; Clinical Trials as Topic; Deafness; Female; Genetic Testing; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Male; Mutation; Pregnancy; Prevalence
PubMed: 30878560
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2019.01.012 -
BMJ Open Sep 2020Most of the Chinese occupational population are becoming at risk of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). However, there is a limited number of literature reviews on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Most of the Chinese occupational population are becoming at risk of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). However, there is a limited number of literature reviews on occupational NIHL in China. This study aimed to analyse the prevalence and characteristics of occupational NIHL in the Chinese population using data from relevant studies.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
From December 2019 to February 2020, we searched the literature through databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, the China National Knowledge Internet, Chinese Sci-Tech Journal Database (weip.com), WanFang Database and China United Library Database, for studies on NIHL in China published in 1993-2019 and analysed the correlation between NIHL and occupational exposure to noise, including exposure to complex noise and coexposure to noise and chemicals.
RESULTS
A total of 71 865 workers aged 33.5±8.7 years were occupationally exposed to 98.6±7.2 dB(A) (A-weighted decibels) noise for a duration of 9.9±8.4 years in the transportation, mining and typical manufacturing industries. The prevalence of occupational NIHL in China was 21.3%, of which 30.2% was related to high-frequency NIHL (HFNIHL), 9.0% to speech-frequency NIHL and 5.8% to noise-induced deafness. Among manufacturing workers, complex noise contributed to greater HFNIHL than Gaussian noise (overall weighted OR (OR)=1.95). Coexposure to noise and chemicals such as organic solvents, welding fumes, carbon monoxide and hydrogen sulfide led to greater HFNIHL than noise exposure alone (overall weighted OR=2.36). Male workers were more likely to experience HFNIHL than female workers (overall weighted OR=2.26). Age, noise level and exposure duration were also risk factors for HFNIHL (overall weighted OR=1.35, 5.63 and 1.75, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
The high prevalence of occupational NIHL in China was related to the wide distribution of noise in different industries as well as high-level and long-term noise exposure. The prevalence was further aggravated by exposure to complex noise or coexposure to noise and specific chemicals. Additional efforts are needed to reduce occupational noise exposure in China.
Topics: Adult; China; Female; Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced; Humans; Male; Manufacturing Industry; Noise, Occupational; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Young Adult
PubMed: 32988950
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039576