检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:祖爱华[1] 崔晨[1] 王欣[1] 李红梅[1] 莫民帅[1] 赖洪飘[1]
出 处:《国际医药卫生导报》2012年第3期429-433,共5页International Medicine and Health Guidance News
摘 要:目的研究工业脉冲噪声对冲压工听力的影响。方法选择442名冲压工、128名研磨工分别为脉冲噪声组和稳态噪声接触组,另选择208名非噪声作业的装配工为对照组;对其纯音气导听阈测试结果进行统计分析。结果44.3%冲压工被检出高频听力损失,4.1%冲压工被检出观察对象,2.0%冲压丁被检出疑似噪声聋,脉冲噪声对听力损害高于稳态噪声组(P〈0.01)。冲压工累积噪声暴露量(CNE)每增加1dB(A)·年,出现听力损失的风险相应增加12.3%(P〈0.01);研磨工累积噪声暴露量(CNE)每增加1dB(A)·年,听力损失的风险相应增加9.3%(P〈0.05)。结论工业脉冲噪声对听力的损害大于稳态噪声。Objective To explore the effect of industrial impulse noise on hearing in workers for punching. Methods 442 workers for punching and 128 workers for grinding were assigned to impulse noise group and steady-state noise group 208 assembly workers without noise exposure were selected as control group. The results of pure-tone air conduction threshold audiometry were analyze. Results High-frequency hearing loss was detectable in 44.3% of the workers for punching observed objects was in 4.1%; and noise-induced deafness was in 2.0%. Rate of hearing loss was higher in the impulse noise group than in the steady-state noise group ( P 〈 0.01 ). With an elevation in CNE of ldB ( A ) year, the risk of hearing loss in the workers for punching increased 12.3% ( P〈 0.01 ) and the risk in those for grinding increased 9.3% ( P 〈 0.05 ). Conclusions Industrial impulse noise is worse than steady-state noise in damage to hearing.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.68