4.4 Article

Exposure to loud noise and risk of vestibular schwannoma: results from the INTERPHONE international case-control study

Journal

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF WORK ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH
Volume 45, Issue 2, Pages 183-193

Publisher

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL WORK ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH
DOI: 10.5271/sjweh.3781

Keywords

acoustic neuroma; epidemiology; noise exposure

Funding

  1. French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES) Programme national de recherche Environnement-Sante Travail [EST 11-74]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective Studies of loud noise exposure and vestibular schwannomas (VS) have shown conflicting results. The population-based INTERPHONE case-control study was conducted in 13 countries during 2000-2004. In this paper, we report the results of analyses on the association between VS and self-reported loud noise exposure. Methods Self-reported noise exposure was analyzed in 1024 VS cases and 1984 matched controls. Life-long noise exposure was estimated through detailed questions. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using adjusted conditional logistic regression for matched sets. Results The OR for total work and leisure noise exposure was 1.6 (95% CI 1.4-1.9). OR were 1.5 (95% CI 1.3-1.9) for only occupational noise, 1.9 (95% CI 1.4-2.6) for only leisure noise and 1.7 (95% CI 1.2-2.2) for exposure in both contexts. OR increased slightly with increasing lag-time. For occupational exposures, duration, time since exposure start and a metric combining lifetime duration and weekly exposure showed significant trends of increasing risk with increasing exposure. OR did not differ markedly by source or other characteristics of noise. Conclusion The consistent associations seen are likely to reflect either recall bias or a causal association, or potentially indicate a mixture of both.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available