2014Iranian Red Crescent Medical JournalOpen access

Conventional Audiometry, Extended High-Frequency Audiometry, and DPOAE for Early Diagnosis of NIHL

Amir Houshang Mehrparvar, Seyyed Jalil Mirmohammadi, Mohammad Hossein Davari, Mehrdad Mostaghaci, Abolfazl Mollasadeghi, Maryam Bahaloo, Seyyed Hesam Hashemi

Open full text 74 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Noise most frequently affects hearing system, as it may typically cause a bilateral, progressive sensorineural hearing loss at high frequencies. OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare three different methods to evaluate noise-induced hearing loss (conventional audiometry, high-frequency audiometry, and distortion product otoacoustic emission). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Data was analyzed by SPSS (ver. 19) using chi square, T test and repeated measures analysis. Study samples were workers from tile and ceramic industry. RESULTS: We found that conventional audiometry, extended high-frequency audiometry, low-tone distortion product otoacoustic emission and high-tone distortion product otoacoustic emission had abnormal findings in 29 %, 69 %, 22 %, and 52 % of participants. Most frequently affected frequencies were 4000 and 6000Hz in conventional audiometry, and 14000 and 16000 in extended high-frequency audiometry. CONCLUSIONS: Extended high-frequency audiometry was the most sensitive test for detection of hearing loss in workers exposed to hazardous noise compared with conventional audiometry and distortion product otoacoustic.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND: Noise most frequently affects hearing system, as it may typically cause a bilateral, progressive sensorineural hearing loss at high frequencies. OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare three different methods to evaluate noise-induced hearing loss (conventional audiometry, high-frequency audiometry, and distortion product otoacoustic emission). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Data was analyzed by SPSS (ver. 19) using chi square, T test and repeated measures analysis. Study samples were workers from tile and ceramic industry. RESULTS: We found that conventional audiometry, extended high-frequency audiometry, low-tone distortion product otoacoustic emission and high-tone distortion product otoacoustic emission had abnormal findings in 29 %, 69 %, 22 %, and 52 % of participants. Most frequently affected frequencies were 4000 and 6000Hz in conventional audiometry, and 14000 and 16000 in extended high-frequency audiometry. CONCLUSIONS: Extended high-frequency audiometry was the most sensitive test for detection of hearing loss in workers exposed to hazardous noise compared with conventional audiometry and distortion product otoacoustic.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 74 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND: Noise most frequently affects hearing system, as it may typically cause a bilateral, progressive sensorineural hearing loss at high frequencies. OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare three different methods to evaluate noise-induced hearing loss (conventional audiometry, high-frequency audiometry, and distortion product otoacoustic emission). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Data was analyzed by SPSS (ver. 19) using chi square, T test and repeated measures analysis. Study samples were workers from tile and ceramic industry. RESULTS: We found that conventional audiometry, extended high-frequency audiometry, low-tone distortion product otoacoustic emission and high-tone distortion product otoacoustic emission had abnormal findings in 29 %, 69 %, 22 %, and 52 % of participants. Most frequently affected frequencies were 4000 and 6000Hz in conventional audiometry, and 14000 and 16000 in extended high-frequency audiometry. CONCLUSIONS: Extended high-frequency audiometry was the most sensitive test for detection of hearing loss in workers exposed to hazardous noise compared with conventional audiometry and distortion product otoacoustic.

Key concepts: Medicine, Audiometry, Audiology, Kowsar, Hearing loss, Surgery

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Conventional Audiometry, Extended High-Frequency Audiometry, and DPOAE for Early Diagnosis of NIHL — Research Paper | ScholarLens