Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

A tentative proposal for classification of audiograms in noise-induced deafness: relationship between audiogram and subjective complaints in noise-exposed workers

  • 62 Accesses

  • 3 Citations

Summary

Audiograms obtained from workers exposed to occupational noise were classified into six stages, namely, “normal” and stages I–V of noise-induced deafness, using the audiometric chart and the classification table designed by the authors. Close correlations were observed between the severity of the stage and the degree of hearing in daily life, which support our classification method. On the other hand, the prevalence rate of tinnitus also showed a linear increase in proportion to the severity of the stage, although the mechanism of tinnitus in noise-induced deafness has not yet been elucidated. From the viewpoint of protecting workers from hearing damage due to noise exposure, further investigation is required to make the best use of our classification method in noisy workplaces.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Abel SM, Alberti PW, Haythornthwaite C, Riko K (1982) Speech intelligibility in noise: effects of fluency and hearing protection type. J Acoust Soc Am 71:708–715

  2. Acton WI (1977) Problems associated with the use of hearing protection. Ann Occup Hyg 20:387–395

  3. Aniansson G (1974) Methods for assessing high frequency hearing loss in every-day listening situations. Acta Otolaryngol [Suppl] 320:7–50

  4. ANSI (1977) Criteria for permissible ambient noise during audiometric testing, Sect 3.1. American National Standards Institute, New York

  5. Arlinger S (1973) A hearing conversation programme for small industries in a Swedish county. Acta Otolaryngol 75:341–342

  6. Atherley G, Johnston N (1981) Audiometry — the ultimate test of success? Ann Occup Hyg 27:427–447

  7. Baily PJ (1983) Hearing for speech: the information transmitted in normal and impaired hearing. In: Lutman ME, Haggard MP (eds) Hearing science and hearing disorders. Academic Press, New York

  8. Davis AC (1983) Hearing disorders in the population: first phase findings of the MRC national study of hearing. In: Lutman ME, Haggard MP (eds) Hearing science and hearing disorders. Academic Press, New York

  9. Evans EF (1981) Chairman's introduction. In: Tinnitus (CIBA Symposium 85). Pitman Press, London

  10. IHR (1981) Epidemiology of tinnitus. IHR (Institute of Hearing Research). In: Tinnitus (CIBA Symposium 85). Pitman Press, London

  11. ISO (1975) Acoustic-standard reference zero for the calibration of pure-tone audiometers. International Organization for Standardization, p 389

  12. JIS (1963) Diagnostic audiometers. Japanese Industrial Standards, T1201

  13. JIS (1982) Diagnostic audiometers. Japanese Industrial Standards, T1201

  14. Klockhoff I, Drettner B, Hagelin KW, Lindholm L (1973) A method for computerized classification of pure tone screening audiometry results in noise-exposed groups. Acta Otolaryngol 75:339–340

  15. Kryter KD (1963a) Exposure to steady-state noise and impairment of hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 35:1234–1240

  16. Kryter KD (1963b) Hearing impairment for speech. Arch Otolaryngol 77:598–602

  17. Lempert BL, Edwards RG (1983) Field investigations of noise reduction afforded by inserttype hearing protectors. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 44:894–902

  18. Man L, Naggan L, Bergman M (1981) Classification of the severity of acoustic trauma based on pure tone threshold audiometry. Acta Otolaryngol 92:25–31

  19. Melnick W (1984) Evaluation of industrial hearing conservation programs: a review and analysis. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 45:459–467

  20. Ministry of Labor (1984) Guidebook to industrial hygiene. Japan Industrial Safety and Health Association, Tokyo

  21. Miyakita T, Miura H (1985a) Study on an evaluation index for noise susceptibility. I. Estimation of critical bandwidth (CBW) in acoustic reflex (AR). Int Arch Occup Environ Health 55:285–293

  22. Miyakita T, Miura H (1985b) Study on an evaluation index for noise susceptibility. II. Reduction of [ART1k-ARTWN] and critical bandwidth in acoustic reflex. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 55:295–303

  23. Miyakita T, Miura H, Yamamoto T (1983) Evaluation of noise susceptibility: effects of noise exposure on acoustic reflex. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 52:231–242

  24. Møller AR (1980) Noise as a health hazard. In: John ML (ed) Public health and preventive medicine. Appleton Century Crofts, New York

  25. Olsen WO, Noffsinger D, Kurdziel S (1975) Speech discrimination in quiet and in white noise by patients with peripheral and central lesions. Acta Otolaryngol 80:375–382

  26. OSHA (1983) Occupational noise exposure: hearing conservation amendment; final rule (29 CRF 1910). Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Federal Register 48:9738–9784

  27. Riko K, Alberti PW (1983) Hearing protectors: a review of recent observations. J Occup Med 25:523–526

  28. Yamamoto T, Hiramatsu K, Takagi K (1981) A study for the simplification of permissible criteria for noise exposure recommended by Japan Association of Industrial Health. Jpn J Ind Health 23:233–253

  29. WHO (1980) Environmental health criteria 12. Noise. World Health Organization, Geneva

Download references

Author information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Miyakita, T., Miura, H. 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 Heath 57, 173–183 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00405786

Download citation

Key words

  • Noise-induced deafness
  • Audiogram
  • Subjective complaint
  • Tinnitus