Occupational noise-induced hearing loss in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

ObjectiveMost 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.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsFrom 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.ResultsA 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).ConclusionsThe 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.

Health Effects of Occupational Noise

“…It is considered the most prevalent work-related disease worldwide, affecting more than 10% of all workers in developed countries [18]. A recent systematic review from China estimated a prevalence of 21.3% for occupational NIHL in noise-exposed Chinese workers over the last 26 years [19]. A similar figure was calculated for workers in the USA: there, the prevalence of hearing loss in noise-exposed workers was about 20% between 1981 and 2010.…”

Noise Induced Hearing Loss: A Case Study from a Speech-Language Pathologist’s Perspective

“…Noise induced hearing loss is a common disorder that has many health consequences [1][2][3][4]. NIHL has many health consequences ranging from auditory processing deficits, attention and cognitive loss to social isolation.…”

“…Up to 7% of noise induced loss in Australia has been found to arise from occupational noise [3]. Zhou, Shi, Zhou, Hu, and Zhang [4] reported that the prevalence of NIHL in Hungary was 21.3%, with 30.2% was related to high frequency NIHL. Thus, NIHL occurs with regularity in many world societies.…”

“…The surrounding frequencies must be at minimum 10 Hz or less than the hearing level at 4,000 Hz [5]. Noise exposure hearing loss is likely to become permanent six months after noise exposure has ceased [4].…”

The Immediate and Long-Term Impact of Military Aircraft Noise on Hearing: A Cross-Sectional Comparison of Fighter Pilots and Ground Staff

“…One retrospective study that recruited 76 participants (34 helicopter pilots and 42 aircraft mechanics) from the Thai Army also reported that aircraft mechanics suffered from damage to the hearing frequencies involved in speech and high frequencies and a greater decibel loss than the aviators [ 31 ]. The difference of noise impact on hearing between ground staff and pilots may reflect several factors, such as the use of hearing protection [ 31 , 32 ], the participant’s smoking status [ 31 , 33 ], the duration of occupational noise exposure, and co-exposures to non-occupational noise or specific chemicals such as organic solvents, welding fumes, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen sulfide [ 34 , 35 , 36 ]. We also speculate that sonic booms (the sound associated with the shock waves) usually lag behind the aircraft; therefore, the most unbearably loud noise would be encountered by the ground staff, who may spend a further consecutive hour working in the hardened aircraft shelter, either close to or 7 m away from the aircraft, as they conduct the outside inspection and checks before the fighter aircraft leaves the shelter for the runway.…”