Advertisement

High-frequency hearing risk of operators of industrial ultrasonic devices

  • J. Grzesik
  • E. Pluta
Original Papers

Summary

Sound and ultrasound emitted by industrial ultrasonic (Uls) devices exceed the known proposed hygienic limits, especially for frequencies 10–20 kHz. The consequence of this may be a negative influence of this energy on the auditory function in the high-frequency hearing range. To determine the hearing risk to Uls operators, an adequate method for testing the hearing threshold from 10-20 kHz has been developed. In order to get reference values, 189 non-exposed persons were tested. On this basis, the hearing thresholds of 55 operators for frequencies 500–20,000 Hz were evaluated. In addition to threshold elevations in the range 10–20 kHz, a decreasing number of subjects responding to stimuli at the highest audible frequencies was observed. The threshold shift at 10–20 kHz of subjects exposed to sound and ultrasound emitted by Uls-devices depends upon the physical parameters of the sound spectrum, time on the job and daily exposure time. No abnormalities were found in the hearing range 500–8000 Hz.

Key words

High-frequency hearing High-frequency audiometry Hearing loss High-frequency noise 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Acton WI (1968) A criterion for the prediction of auditory and subjective effects due to air-borne noise from ultrasonic sources. Ann Occup Hyg 11:227–234Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Acton WI (1976) Exposure criteria for industrial ultrasound. Ultrasonics 14:42Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dieroff HG (1976) Erfahrungen mit der Hochfrequenzaudiometrie und ihre Einsatzmöglichkeit. Laryng Rhinol 55:739–743Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Erickson DA, Fausti SA, Frey RH, Rappaport BZ (1980) Effects of steady-state noise upon human hearing sensitivity from 8,000–20,000 Hz. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 41:427–432Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    Fausti SA, Frey RH, Erickson DA, Rappaport BZ, Cleary EJ (1979) A system for evaluation auditory function from 8,000–20,000 Hz. J Acoust Soc Am 66:1713–1718Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fletcher JL (1973) High-frequency hearing and noise exposure. Proc. Intern. Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem. Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia, May 13–18, 1973. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC 20460, pp 271–280Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    GOST 12.1.001-75 Ultrazvuk Obszczije triebovanija biezopasnostiGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grzesik J, Pluta E (1980) Noise and airborne ultrasound exposure in the industrial environment. Proc Third Intern. Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem. Freyburg, West Germany, September 25–29, 1978, ASHA Reports 10. The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Rockville, Maryland, April 1980, pp 657–661Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harris JD, Meyers CK (1971) Tentative audiometric threshold-level standards from 8 through 18 kHz. J Accoust Soc Am 49:600–601Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nothern JL, Downs MP, Rudmose W, Glorig A, Fletcher JL (1972) Recommended high frequency audiometric threshold levels (8,000–18,000Hz). J Acoust Soc Am 52:585–595Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Parrack HO (1972) Occupational exposure to noise. US Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Health Services and Mental Health Administration NIOSHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosen S, Plaster D, El-Mofty A, Rosen H (1964) High frequency audiometry in presbycusis. Otolaryngol 79:18–32Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sagalovich BN, Simbirceva OI (1971) Audiometrija v razsziriennom diapazonie czastot. Viestnik Otorinolaryngol 5:25–30Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brüel and Kjaer (1977) Microphones used as sound sources. Technical Review No 3Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Grzesik
    • 1
  • E. Pluta
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Occupational Medicine in the Mining and Mettalurgical IndustrySosnowiecPoland

Personalised recommendations