Analyzing the re-evaluation results for occupational medical examination conclusions in noise-exposed workers
10.20001/j.issn.2095-2619.20260211
- VernacularTitle:噪声作业人员职业健康检查结论复核结果分析
- Author:
Yang WANG
1
;
Hong XIANG
;
Yating LI
Author Information
1. Shijiazhuang Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Shijiazhuang, Hebei 050011, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Occupational medical examination;
Pure-tone audiometry;
Noise;
Target disease
- From:
China Occupational Medicine
2026;53(1):69-73
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To analyze the occupational medical examination (OME) conclusions for noise-exposed workers issued by OME institutions in Shijiazhuang City. Methods A total of 1 111 noise-exposed workers, whose OME reports were issued by 32 OME institutions in Shijiazhuang City from 2022 to 2024, were selected as the study subjects using the convenience sample method. Expert review was conducted to re-evaluate the initial OME conclusions for noise-exposed workers, and reasons for inconsistencies between the initial and reviewed conclusions were analyzed. Results Initial OME conclusions included occupational contraindications, re-examination, other diseases or abnormalities, and no abnormal findings, with 109, 286, 378, and 338 cases, respectively. After expert review, the consistency rate for occupational contraindication conclusions was 91.7%, with two suspected cases of occupational noise-induced deafness (ONID) and seven cases of other diseases or abnormalities identified. For other diseases or abnormalities, the consistency rate was 95.5%, with one cases of suspected ONID and 16 occupational contraindications detected. In terms of no abnormal findings, the consistency rate was 70.4%, with 100 cases reclassified as other diseases or abnormalities. Regarding the 286 re-examination cases, experts identified 72 cases of suspected occupational diseases, 99 cases of occupational contraindications, and 115 cases of other diseases or abnormalities. Conclusion The chief physicians of OME institutions demonstrate insufficient rigor in determining noise-related target diseases, ambiguous understanding of OME conclusions, and inadequate follow-up on cases recommended for re-examination.
