Home Your basket
• Vision preference in dyna...
   Price 10.50 €
• Advantages of combined th...
   Price 10.50 €
• Failure to regain full fu...
   Price 10.50 €
• Partial allotransplantati...
   Price 10.50 €
• Botulinum toxin in the lo...
   Price 14.00 €
• Temporary loss of visual ...
   Price 8.50 €
• Results of alginate and h...
   Price 10.50 €
• Pleomorphic adenoma of th...
   Price 8.50 €
• Airbag and hearing loss: ...
   Price 8.50 €
• Induction chemotherapy an...
   Price 10.50 €
• Resorption of cartilage g...
   Price 10.50 €
• Mandibular reconstruction...
   Price 8.50 €
• Different clinical approa...
   Price 5.50 €
• Inferior turbinate hypert...
   Price 10.50 €
• Cholesteatoma by osteoma ...
   Price 8.50 €
• Chyle leak after cervical...
   Price 15.00 €
• Allergic rhinitis...
   Price 8.50 €
• Otoplasty for prominent e...
   Price 8.50 €
• Assessment of migraine re...
   Price 8.50 €
• Bronchoscopic findings in...
   Price 10.50 €
• A specific plain X-ray in...
   Price 8.50 €
• Use of a laryngeal mask d...
   Price 8.50 €
• Total ossicular reconstru...
   Price 10.50 €
• Tuberculous otomastoiditi...
   Price 5.50 €
• A new case of osseointegr...
   Price 12.50 €
• Partial hearing recovery ...
   Price 5.50 €
• Thyroid oncocytomas....
   Price 10.50 €
• Which face lift for which...
   Price 14.00 €
• Recurrent mandibular amel...
   Price 12.50 €
• The eye movement autophon...
   Price 14.00 €
• Subacute tuberculous otit...
   Price 8.50 €
• Sentinel lymph node biops...
   Price 15.00 €
• Abscess tonsillectomy for...
   Price 10.50 €
• Mucus physiopathology, up...
   Price 12.50 €
• Endoscopic dacryocystorhi...
   Price 5.50 €
• Sentinel lymph node biops...
   Price 10.50 €
• Cochlear implants in chil...
   Price 10.50 €
• Evaluation of the use of ...
   Price 8.50 €
• Vertigo and pathology of ...
   Price 10.50 €
• Lateral fixation of the v...
   Price 8.50 €
• Vertical extended hemi cr...
   Price 5.50 €

Total Order 405.00 €

contents
2019
   N# 1 |
2018
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2017
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2016
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2015
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2014
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2013
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2012
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2011
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2010
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2009
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2008
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2007
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2006
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2005
   N# | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2004
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2003
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2002
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2001
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2000
   N# | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1999
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1998
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
1997
   N# 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1996
   N# 4 | 5 |

Click on the number of the review to see the content
Teaching bulletin CME
List of all teaching bulletins CME.
Editor reading committee
Editor reading committee.
To publish...
Instructions for authors
Archives Press and Books
Select of books and press articles.
Mailing list
News information letter.
Subscription prices


If you wish to adjust the size of the displayed characters, click in the high menu on "Your account" and choose the desired size.



  Contents > Previous page > Article detail print Order
o Issue N# 4 - 2002 o

AUDIOLOGY

Usefulness and limitations of speech audiometric testing in the detection of professional nose-induced hearing loss: a comparative study in two groups in the hospital setting.


Authors : E. Babin, A. Bequignon, M. Goullet de Rugy, E. Edy, S. Moreau, J. P. Izard, A. Valdazo (Caen)

Ref. : Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol. 2002;123,4:213-217.

Article published in french
Downloadable PDF document french



Summary : Objective: the objective of this study is the evaluation of the calculation of 100% intelligibility threshold and noise resistance index as a monitoring test in populations exposed to noise in their work environment. Method: this is a retrospective exposed-unexposed study as the exposure to the risk factors took place before the survey. The exposed subjects were chosen in principle on sonometric criteria and the unexposed subjects among employees whom we believe were not exposed. The exploration method included history taking, clinical examination, free field audiometry and speech audiometry with background noise. Results: the exposed population has a 100% intelligibility threshold on average equal to 29.69 dB, significantly higher than in the unexposed population where it is calculated at 25.30 dB (p=0.07). The noise resistance index varies with age (p=0.04). Conclusion: our study shows the existence of a significant hearing difference between two populations with different noise exposure. It demonstrates a relationship between a hearing loss risk factor such as noise and the occurrence of the "professional hearing loss" disorder. The calculation of the 100% intelligibility index and the noise resistance index advantageously complements tonal audiometry. These procedures provide a better approach to the social impact of hearing loss but were not useful in the detection of hearing loss.

Price : 10.50 €      order
|


Subscribe online - Pay by credit card!


© Copyright 1999-2024 - Revue de Laryngologie   Réalisation - Hébergement ELIDEE