Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Abstract
Raynauds phenomenon is characterized by constriction in blood supply to the fingers causing finger blanching, of white
fingers(WF) and is triggered by cold. Earlier studies found that workers using vibrating handheld tools and who had
vibrationinduced white fingers(VWF) had an increased risk for hearing loss compared with workers without VWF.
This study examined the occurrence of Raynauds phenomenon among men and women with noiseinduced hearing
loss in relation to vibration exposure. All 342 participants had a confirmed noiseinduced hearing loss medico legally
accepted as workrelated by AFA Insurance . Each subject answered a questionnaire concerning their health status
and the kinds of exposures they had at the time when their hearing loss was first discovered. The questionnaire covered
types of exposures, discomforts in the hands or fingers, diseases and medications affecting the blood circulation, the use
of alcohol and tobacco and for women, the use of hormones and whether they had been pregnant. The participation
rate was 41%(n=133) with 38%(n=94) for men and 50%(n=39) for women. 84 men and 36 women specified if
they had Raynauds phenomenon and also if they had used handheld vibrating machines. Nearly 41% of them had
used handheld vibrating machines and 18% had used vibrating machines at least 2h each workday. There were 23
men/6 women with Raynauds phenomenon. 37% reported WF among those participants who were exposed to handarm
vibration(HAV) and 15% among those not exposed to HAV. Among the participants with hearing loss with daily use of
vibrating handheld tools more than twice as many reports WF compared with participants that did not use vibrating
handheld tools. This could be interpreted as Raynauds phenomenon could be associated with an increased risk for
noiseinduced hearing loss. However, the low participation rate limits the generalization of the results from this study.
Keywords: Handarm vibration, hearing loss, noise, Raynauds phenomenon, white fingers
Introduction
Hearing loss relates to age and the rate at which hearing is lost
increases with exposure to noise. The risk of noiseinduced
hearing loss can be modified by genetic, chemical, or medical
factors.[1,4]Another interacting factor for the risk of noiseinduced
hearing loss might be exposure to vibrations. Workers using
vibrating handheld tools are exposed to hazardous levels of
noise and to handarm vibrations(HAV). Longterm exposure
to HAV could cause workers to develop white fingers(WF).
WF or Raynauds phenomenon is characterized by episodic
constriction in the blood supply to the fingers causing finger
blanching. When the vasospasm is believed to be secondary to
Access this article online
Quick Response Code:
Website:
www.noiseandhealth.org
DOI:
10.4103/1463-1741.132087
PubMed ID:
***
89
Methods
Exposures
Participants
The study sample consisted of men and women who had
a confirmed noiseinduced hearing loss accepted by the
insurance company AFA Insurance as workrelated and as
such had received financial benefits from AFA Insurance in
Sweden between 1995 and 2004. AFA Insurance is owned
by Swedens labour market parties and they insure employees
within the private sector, municipalities and county councils
in Sweden. The participants noiseinduced hearing loss had
been graded from 1% to 15% disability depending on the
severity of the noiseinduced hearing loss. The definition of
1% disability is a combined mean hearing threshold level
at 2000 and 3000 Hz that is equal to or more than 35 dB
and also that the combined mean hearing level at 4000 and
6000Hz is equal to or more than 45dB. The worker must
also have been exposed to noise for at least 10years at noise
exposure levels of more than 8590 dB (A). For shorter
noise exposure durations the noise exposure must have been
above 90dB(A). Hearing loss from impulse noise exposures
must have been from noise exposures above 135dB(C) or
115dB(A). For 15% disability the hearing threshold is more
than 40dB at 1000Hz and above 60dB at 2000Hz. Also,
the combined mean hearing threshold level at 3000, 4000 and
5000 must be above 50dB. The noise exposure criteria are
the same as for 1% disability.
The men and women had to be between the ages of 18 and 55
when their noiseinduced hearing loss was confirmed to be
included in the study. The men were randomly chosen and 86
men were from the northern region of Sweden, 85 men were
from the middle region and 90 men were from the southern
region. Because there were only a few women who had a
confirmed workrelated noiseinduced hearing loss, we chose
to invite all such women to participate in the study. The study
sample consisted of 261 men and 81 women. After excluding
participants for whom a current address was unavailable,
the final sample consisted of 246 men and 78 women who
received the questionnaire. Areminder was sent if the
participants had not responded the 1sttime. The questionnaire
study was approved by the Regional Board of Ethics for
Medical Research in Ume, Sweden(Dnr 08151 M).
Questionnaire
The men and women in the study sample were invited to
answer a questionnaire covering their health status and
the kinds of exposures they had at the time when their
noiseinduced hearing loss was first discovered. The
questionnaire included types of exposures, discomforts in
Noise & Health, March-April 2014, Volume 16
Statistics
All statistical analysis was performed with IBM SPSS Statistics
version20(IBM Corporation. Software Group. Somer. NY.
USA) The prevalence of use of handheld vibrating machines,
WF and WFPR and VWFSR were calculated. The noise
exposure duration in hours was calculated by multiplying the
number of years at the current occupation multiplied by 220
workdays/year and then by the number of minutes per day
in a noisy environment. The HAV exposure was calculated
by multiplying the number of minutes per day working with
handheld vibrating machines by 220 workdays/year and
then by the total number of years working with handheld
vibrating machines. The mean(standard deviation[SD]) ages
for all participants who answered the questionnaire were
calculated at the time when the participants noiseinduced
hearing loss was confirmed. The relative risk(RR) and 95%
confidence intervals(95% CI) was calculated for WF among
participants who were exposed to HAV were compared with
a reference group of participants who were not exposed to
HAV. Also, the RR with 95% CI of WF was calculated as
the prevalence of WF among those exposed to HAV divided
by the prevalence of WF among those not exposed to HAV.
The RR of WF among participants in the Northern Region
compared with WF in the southern region.
Results
The participation rate was 41%(n=133) with 38%(n=94)
for men and 50% (n = 39) for women with noiseinduced
hearing loss. In the northern, middle and southern regions
of Sweden, the participation rates for men were 42%, 39%
and 35%, respectively. The mean(SD) age of the participants
who answered the questionnaire was 41 (9) years [39 (10)
for men and 46 (8) for women] and for those who did not
answer the mean age(SD) was 41(9) years[40 (9) for men
and 44 (7) for women]. The average age was almost the
same for those men and women who answered or did not
answer the questionnaire. The most common occupations
among the participants were teachers(n = 15), military
personnel(n=13) and welders(n=4).
Totally 84 men and 36 women reported information on
WF and also specified if they had used handheld vibrating
machines. The most commonly used handheld vibrating
machines were grinders, drillers and screwdrivers. Nearly
41% (n = 49) of the 84 men and 36 women had used
handheld vibrating machines and 18% (n = 21) had used
vibrating machines for at least 2 h each workday. Nearly
37% had reported WF among participants exposed to HAV
compared with 15% among those who were not exposed to
HAV[Table1].
In our study, there were a total of 23 men and six women
who had cases of WF. The mean age, average noise exposure
duration and the use of tobacco and alcohol were about
91
Yes
No
Age
WF
WF
Tobacco Alcohol Noise
years no. (%) duration no. (%) no. (%) duration
mean
mean
mean
(SD)
(SD)*
(SD)**
49 41(10) 18(37)
6(8)
31(63) 40(82) 10(13)
71 41(9) 11(15) 12(14) 21(30) 54(76) 10(11)
38(42) 72(79)
9.4(11)
*In years, **In 1000 h. WF = White fingers, SD = Standard deviation
Total no.
44
5
49
Men
Women
Both
44
5
49
HAV exposure
WF no.(%)
WF duration mean(SD)*
15(34)
7.5(9.0)
3(60)
8()
18(37)
7.5(8.5)
Only secondary
Secondary Raynaud
8(20)
4.3(3.9)
1(20)
9(18)
4.3(3.9)
No HAV exposure
Total no.
WF no.(%)
40
8(20)
31
3(10)
71
11(15)
Only primary
40
5(13)
31
2(6)
71
7(10)
WF duration
mean(SD)*
15(15)
20()
16(13)
Primary Raynaud
19(17)
20()
19(15)
Yes
No
Hearing
protection
mean
(range)
74(0100)
88(30100)
62(0100)
83(0100)
75(30100)
85(0)
76(30100)
72(0100)
30(1050)
69(0100)
46(0100)
38(0100)
33(0100)
37(0100)
91(0100)
0(0)
61(0100)
58(0100)
35(0100)
47(0100)
HAV
duration
mean
(SD)*
9.9(14)
4.4()
9.5(13)
6.9(6.0)
6.9(6.0)
7.5(9.7)
15()
7.8(9.6)
Discussion
The low participant rate limits the possibilities for
generalization of the results from this study. Furthermore, all
the participants answered a questionnaire about their working
conditions and health status. However, the classification of
suffering from WF or not was based on information from
the questionnaire and this selfreported symptoms has not
been verified by medical investigations and could, therefore,
include both primary and secondary Raynauds phenomenon.
Noise & Health, March-April 2014, Volume 16
was 20% and 13% of the men had WFPR. Among Swedish
male office workers not exposed to HAV prevalence of 8.4%
for WF has been reported.[14] An earlier crosssectional study
on finger blanching found that there was an increased risk
of hearing loss for men and women with finger blanching
who were not extensively exposed to HAV or noise.[11] One
could therefore speculate if WF is a trigger for noiseinduced
hearing loss. In the present study men with WF and no
exposure to HAV had shorter noise exposure durations until
the discovery of hearing loss compared to men without WF
and no HAV exposure and to men with or without WF who
were exposed to HAV.
Participating women who were both exposed and not
exposed to HAV had prevalence of WF of 17%. An earlier
crosssectional study among women in Sweden reported a
similar prevalence of Raynauds phenomenon of 16%.[15]
Pyykk etal. suggested that the same mechanism that causes
restriction of the blood supply to the fingers could also restrict
blood supply to the cochlea. HAV could possibly trigger an
overactivation of the sympathetic nervous system(SNS)
causing a restriction in blood supply to the fingers and cochlea
that would lead to finger blanching and ischemia in the
cochlea.[5,16] HAV might reduce the blood supply in the fingers
by stimulating the SNS in the fingers causing VWF.[1719] Noise
exposure might reduce the blood supply to the cochlea.[2023]
If HAV also reduce the blood circulation in the cochlea then
combined noise and HAV exposure might increase the blood
circulation in the cochlea and increase the risk for hair cell loss
and hearing loss. The function of the SNS in the cochlea is not
fully understood. It is believed that the SNS controlled the blood
supply to the cochlea.[20,22,24] During noise exposure the systolic
blood pressure will rise and also the cochlear blood flow, but
when the blood pressure is too high then the autonomic nervous
system could reduce the cochlear blood flow.[24] The SNS might
have a protective effect on the cochlea, but there are studies
that also suggest a harmful effect.[2528] Palmer et al.,[11] found
an increased risk of hearing loss among men and women not
extensively exposed to HAV or noise and further studies on the
mechanism causing a possible increased risk of hearing loss for
men and women with finger blanching are recommended.
Among those participant who were exposed to HAV there
were 37% who had WF and 63% stated that they used
tobacco. Smoking may increase the risk of noiseinduced
hearing loss and of VWF.[29]
Earlier crosssectional studies have found that workers
using handheld vibrating tools in tropical regions have a
lower prevalence of Raynauds phenomenon than those in
colder regions.[30,31] A cohort study found that HAVexposed
workers in the northern region of Sweden were at a higher
risk of WF than workers in the southern region.[14] The effect
of HAV on WF might be increased in cold environments.[14]
Among participants in our study there was no increased risk
93
Conclusion
Among the participants with hearing loss with daily use of
vibrating handheld tools more than twice as many reports
WF compared with participants that did not use vibrating
handheld tools. This could be interpreted as Raynauds
phenomenon could be associated with an increased risk for
noiseinduced hearing loss. However, the low participation
rate limits the generalization of the results from this study.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of AFA
Insurance (Project 20070104). We also thank Michel Normark,
Elisabeth Molander and Tezic Kerem for their support in selecting
participants and administering the questionnaire.
References
1. Pyykk I, Pekkarinen J, Starck J. Sensoryneural hearing loss during
combined noise and vibration exposure. An analysis of risk factors. Int
Arch Occup Environ Health 1987;59:43954.
2. Quaranta A, Portalatini P, Henderson D. Temporary and permanent
threshold shift: An overview. Scand Audiol Suppl1998;48:7586.
3. HodgkinsonL, PrasherD. Effects of industrial solvents on hearing and
balance: Areview. Noise Health 2006;8:11433.
4. LeeCA, MistryD, UppalS, CoatesworthAP. Otologic side effects of
drugs. JLaryngol Otol 2005;119:26771.
5. Pyykk I, StarckJ, Frkkil M, HoikkalaM, KorhonenO, NurminenM.
Handarm vibration in the aetiology of hearing loss in lumberjacks. Br J
Ind Med 1981;38:2819.
6. HouseRA, Sauv JT, JiangD. Noiseinduced hearing loss in construction
workers being assessed for handarm vibration syndrome. Can J Public
Health 2010;101:2269.
7. Iki M, Kurumatani N, Satoh M, Matsuura F, Arai T, Ogata A, etal.
Hearing of forest workers with vibrationinduced white finger:
Afiveyear followup. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1989;61:43742.
8. Miyakita T, Miura H, Futatsuka M. Noiseinduced hearing loss in
relation to vibrationinduced white finger in chainsaw workers. Br J
Ind Med 1987;13:326.
9. PetterssonH, Burstrm L, HagbergM, Lundstrm R, NilssonT. Noise
and handarm vibration exposure in relation to the risk of hearing loss.
Noise Health 2012;14:15965.
10. LawsonIJ, BurkeF, McGeochK, NilssonT, ProudG. Part threeDiseases
associated with physical agents. Vibrations. In: BaxterPJ, AdamsPH, AwTC,
Cockcroft A, Harrington JM, editors. Hunters Diseases of Occupations.
10thed. Sect. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010. p.489512.
94
Copyright of Noise & Health is the property of Medknow Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd. and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.