European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
The relationship between hearing status, listening effort, and the need for recovery in employees of a manufacturing company.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
van der Hoek-Snieders Hanneke E M, de Laat Jan A P M, Dreschler Wouter A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Hearing screening can be used to detect hearing loss, but its value for identifying employees with work functioning difficulties is unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the association between the hearing status measured with an occupational hearing-in-noise screening test, Listening Effort (LE), and Need For Recovery (NFR) in employees of a manufacturing company, and to examine whether these associations depend on the perceived noise level at the workplace.
METHODS: Employees of coatings and paints manufacturing company were included. Their hearing status was assessed with an occupational hearing-in-noise screening test. An online survey was used to assess their LE, NFR, and the perceived noise level at the workplace. Responses from 143 employees were analyzed (mean age = 53 years) using hierarchical multiple regression analysis with the outcomes LE and NFR.
RESULTS: Regression analysis-with adjustments for gender, age, educational level, health status, pace/amount of work, job variety, and work pleasure-revealed that hearing status was significantly associated with LE, but the interaction between hearing status and the perceived noise level was not. Hearing status nor the interaction between hearing status and the perceived noise level was significantly associated with NFR.
CONCLUSION: The results confirm that poorer hearing is associated with higher LE, but not with higher NFR. These associations were unrelated to the perceived noise level at the workplace. Therefore, the value of occupational hearing screening appears to be early identification of hearing loss in employees, but not identification of work functioning difficulties.
METHODS: Employees of coatings and paints manufacturing company were included. Their hearing status was assessed with an occupational hearing-in-noise screening test. An online survey was used to assess their LE, NFR, and the perceived noise level at the workplace. Responses from 143 employees were analyzed (mean age = 53 years) using hierarchical multiple regression analysis with the outcomes LE and NFR.
RESULTS: Regression analysis-with adjustments for gender, age, educational level, health status, pace/amount of work, job variety, and work pleasure-revealed that hearing status was significantly associated with LE, but the interaction between hearing status and the perceived noise level was not. Hearing status nor the interaction between hearing status and the perceived noise level was significantly associated with NFR.
CONCLUSION: The results confirm that poorer hearing is associated with higher LE, but not with higher NFR. These associations were unrelated to the perceived noise level at the workplace. Therefore, the value of occupational hearing screening appears to be early identification of hearing loss in employees, but not identification of work functioning difficulties.