Xu Z M, Van Cauwenberge P, Vinck B, De Vel E
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Ghent, Belgium.
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg. 1998;52(1):19-24.
Thirty-eight males (76 ears) exposed to occupational noise were investigated using transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions. Based upon the hearing loss at 4 kHz, they were classified into four described groups. Ten normally hearing subjects (20 ears) without exposure to occupational noise were used as controls. Significant changes in response amplitude, reproducibility, and signal to noise ratio (SNR) in broadband and frequency-bands (1, 2, 3, 4 kHz) were revealed between control subjects and the patients of group I exposed to noise with normal pure-tone audiometric thresholds. The changes of response amplitudes, reproducibility (%), and SNR were not significant between the group I and the patients of group II with mild hearing loss (< or = 40 dB) at 4 kHz. When the patients suffered from hearing loss beyond 40 dB HL at 4 kHz, emission amplitude, reproducibility, and SNR showed significant changes, whereas the percentage of absent emissions also showed significant changes. From these data, we conclude that TEOAE testing is more sensitive than pure-tone audiometry in the detection of early noise-induced damage. The test could be proposed as a hearing screen for monitoring employees with early noise-induced hearing loss.
采用瞬态诱发耳声发射对38名暴露于职业噪声的男性（76耳）进行了研究。根据4kHz时的听力损失情况，将他们分为所述的四组。选取10名未暴露于职业噪声的听力正常受试者（20耳）作为对照。在对照组与纯音听力阈值正常但暴露于噪声的I组患者之间，发现宽带及1、2、3、4kHz频带的反应幅度、重复性和信噪比（SNR）有显著变化。I组与4kHz时轻度听力损失（≤40dB）的II组患者之间，反应幅度、重复性（%）和SNR的变化不显著。当患者4kHz听力损失超过40dB HL时，耳声发射幅度、重复性和SNR出现显著变化，而耳声发射缺失的百分比也出现显著变化。根据这些数据，我们得出结论，在检测早期噪声性损伤方面，TEOAE测试比纯音听力测试更敏感。该测试可作为一种听力筛查方法，用于监测早期噪声性听力损失的员工。
