Occupational stress and burnout among staff were appraised by carrying out a systematic review. There has been an increased prevalence of work-related stress and burnout worldwide. This occupational disorder brings a total of 19-30% among common working population. The increased prevalence of burnout was seen predominantly among the staff of healthcare. Around 25-75% of burnout was noted particularly among the physicians. Around 10% of occupational diseases constituted burnout. The stress levels are measured among the staff of different groups to battle stress and burnout by executing appropriate strategies and hence, their performances are improved to attain the anticipated results.The search was carried out from 3 major databases, i.e., PubMed, EBSCOhost: Academic Search Complete and ProQuest: Education Database for studies issued from 1 st January 2007 until 1 st December 2017 without language limits, but omitted dissertation and thesis, newspapers and magazines. Different research designs were comprised in this review. The studies were recognized and regained by two separate authors.There were eight papers that satisfied the necessities of this systematic review from 812 titles scanned initially. The healthcare workers in the hospital displayed mild stress in most of the studies. The main sources of stress among the staff were heavy workload and resource scarcity.Continuous stress exposure at workplace can cause burnout among healthcare workers. Stress and subsequently burnout may lead to various diseases. To alleviate their burnout effectively, the top management should focus on resources needed and to conduct regular assessment among the staff for burnout.

There were more threshold shifts in subjects adopting 90 dBA compared with 85 dBA. These temporary threshold shifts may progress to permanent shifts over time. Action curtailing noise exposure among employees would be taken earlier on adoption of 85 dBA as the permissible exposure limit, and hence prevalence of noise-induced hearing loss may be reduced.

Background:Development of noise-induced hearing loss is reliant on a few factors such as frequency, intensity, and duration of noise exposure. The occurrence of this occupational malady has doubled from 120 million to 250 million in a decade. Countries such as Malaysia, India, and the US have adopted 90 dBA as the permissible exposure limit. According to the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the exposure limit for noise is 90 dBA, while that of the US National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is 85 dBA for 8 hours of noise exposure.Objectives:This study aimed to assess the development of hearing threshold levels beyond 25 dBA on adoption of 85 dBA as the permissible exposure limit compared to 90 dBA.Patients and Methods:This is an intervention study done on two automobile factories. There were 203 employees exposed to noise levels beyond the action level. Hearing protection devices were distributed to reduce noise levels to a level between the permissible exposure limit and action level. The permissible exposure limits were 90 and 85 dBA in factories 1 and 2, respectively, while the action levels were 85 and 80 dBA, respectively. The hearing threshold levels of participants were measured at baseline and at first month of postshift exposure of noise. The outcome was measured by a manual audiometer. McNemar and chi-square tests were used in the statistical analysis.Results:We found that hearing threshold levels of more than 25 dBA has changed significantly from pre-intervention to post-intervention among participants from both factories (3000 Hz for the right ear and 2000 Hz for the left ear). There was a statistically significant association between participants at 3000 Hz on the right ear at ‘deteriorated’ level ( χ² (1) = 4.08, φ = - 0.142, P = 0.043), whereas there was worsening of hearing threshold beyond 25 dBA among those embraced 90 dBA.Conclusions:The adoption of 85 dBA as the permissible exposure limit has preserved hearing threshold level among participants at 3000 Hz compared to those who embraced 90 dBA.

OBJECTIVE: Countries such as Malaysia, India, and the US are still adopting 90 dBA as the permissible exposure limit for noise. Purpose of the article is to assess the development of hearing threshold levels above 25 dBA on adoption of an 85 dBA permissible exposure limit compared with a 90 dBA limit. STUDY DESIGN:Intervention study done in two factories. MATERIALS and METHODS:The minimum sample size required was 43 in both factories.Hearing protection devices were distributed to reduce noise levels between the permissible exposure limit and action level. The permissible exposure limits were 90 and 85 dBA, while action levels were 85 and 80 dBA for Factory 1 and Factory 2, respectively. Hearing threshold levels were measured at the outset (baseline) and in the sixth month using a manual audiometer. McNemar's and Chi-square tests were used in the statistical analysis. RESULTS:There were statistically significant associations between participants of both factories at 4000 Hz (right ear), with a continuing level of 'deterioration'; χ² (1)=4.27, φ=-0.145, p=0.039 in Factory 1 and at 6000 Hz (right ear) with a 'preserved' hearing level, χ² (1)=9.84, φ=0.220, p=0.002 in Factory 2. CONCLUSION:The findings suggest that the adoption of 85 dBA as the permissible exposure limit preserves hearing threshold level more at 4000 and 6000 Hz compared with an exposure limit of 90 dBA. This study suggests that the countries should review their permissible exposure limit policy.

The diagnosis of occupational noise-induced hearing loss is rarely made in a video editor, although there is a high prevalence of hearing loss. A 37-year-old woman experienced gradual hearing loss associated with tinnitus for the past 3 years. Audiometry showed mild-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss in the right ear and mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss in the left ear. There is a dip at 2 kHz, which is more pronounced in the right ear with recovery at 8 kHz. The portable listening devices risk causing hearing loss from high-output noise damaging the cochlear structures. The amplitudes on otoacoustic emission levels are decreased by using these devices, especially among long-time users. Incessant tinnitus may cause adverse effects on the quality of life. Sound therapy devices such as digital signal processing devices through hearing aids may assist this group of patients by distracting their attention from tinnitus.