RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Twenty-two million workers are exposed to hazardous noise in the United States. The purpose of this study is to estimate the prevalence of hearing loss among U.S. industries. METHODS: We examined 2000-2008 audiograms for male and female workers ages 18-65, who had higher occupational noise exposures than the general population. Prevalence and adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) for hearing loss were estimated and compared across industries. RESULTS: In our sample, 18% of workers had hearing loss. When compared with the Couriers and Messengers industry sub-sector, workers employed in Mining (PR = 1.65, CI = 1.57-1.73), Wood Product Manufacturing (PR = 1.65, CL = 1.61-1.70), Construction of Buildings (PR = 1.52, CI = 1.45-1.59), and Real Estate and Rental and Leasing (PR = 1.61, CL = 1.51-1.71) [corrected] had higher risks for hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS: Workers in the Mining, Manufacturing, and Construction industries need better engineering controls for noise and stronger hearing conservation strategies. More hearing loss research is also needed within traditional "low-risk" industries like Real Estate.
Asunto(s)
Pérdida Auditiva Provocada por Ruido/epidemiología , Industrias , Ruido en el Ambiente de Trabajo/efectos adversos , Adolescente , Adulto , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Audiometría , Estudios de Cohortes , Intervalos de Confianza , Femenino , Pérdida Auditiva Provocada por Ruido/diagnóstico , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prevalencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Distribución por Sexo , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the prevalence of workers with National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health significant threshold shifts (NSTS), Occupational Safety and Health Administration standard threshold shifts (OSTS), and with OSTS with age correction (OSTS-A), by industry using North American Industry Classification System codes. METHODS: From 2001 to 2010, worker audiograms were examined. Prevalence and adjusted prevalence ratios for NSTS were estimated by industry. NSTS, OSTS, and OSTS-A prevalences were compared by industry. RESULTS: Twenty percent of workers had an NSTS, 14% had an OSTS, and 6% had an OSTS-A. For most industries, the OSTS and OSTS-A criteria identified 28% to 36% and 66% to 74% fewer workers than the NSTS criteria, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Use of NSTS criteria allowing for earlier detection of shifts in hearing is recommended for improved prevention of occupational hearing loss.