| Voice problems are common, and they matter. Its prevalence rate in general population is about 3~9%, but estimates are much larger for some sectors of the population, especially those in which the voice is a critical aspect of professional functioning. A corollary is that voice disorders are not a "cosmetic" . They can have a significant impact on quality of life and reported job functioning. With the advent of the information age, voice has assumed an increasingly role in job functioning. A cogent argument can be made the loss of voice or speech currently constitutes the occupational limitation for otherwise high-functioning individuals.Vocal attrition and occupational voice disorders are also a result of the combined effects of vocational, personality (lifelong speech habits), and biological factors. Vocation factors include vocal loading or the vocal demands of the job,background noise, room acoustics, and equipment design. Speech-related personality factors include the tendency of a person to habitually speak loudly, excessively, and rapidly. Biological factors include all of the factor that may affect the vocal mucosa or the respiratory ability to support speech, such as smoking, intake of caffeinated beverages, medications,respiratory illness, chronic allergic rhinitis, sinusitis, gastroesophageal reflux, and general physical condition.In vocally demanding job, teachers should be cared mostly. In this research, occupational risk for voice problem in teacher was studied. Through the investigation of 574 teachers and studies on the relating factors of voice problem, and health measures are proposed for teachers to prevent voice problem.Methods: A table including profession, occupational experience, and working condition was designed to estimate the voice problem in 574 teachers in Xuchang with fibroptic laryngoscpe examinational results. To test our hypothesis, 400 staffs of the local government with the corresponed age, sex, educational degree and smoking was chosed as a control group. All the informants were asked to fulfill the investigational table and the information were checked by appointed otolaryngologist then analyzed by SPSS.Teacher group: there were 574 teachers who taught subjects including all subjects. There were 330 males and 244 females. The eldest was sixty. The youngest was twenty-one. The average age was thirty-seven. Their age of school range from one year to thirty -eight years. The average was sixteen years.Control group: 400 staffs of the local government with the same consistence of age, sex, smoking and educational degree. Results1 The voice problems in teachers were higher than that in control group (x2=41. 211, p=0. 001). The disorders of the examination found in teachers were higher than that in control group ( x2=40.911, p =0. 001) . There was a significant difference between teacher and control group.2 Teaching history was consanguineous to voice problem. The longer of teaching history was, the higher prevalence rate would be in teacher group. According to statistical analysis, theresults were as follows: there was a significant difference between 10-year teaching history group and 10 to 20-year teaching history group ( x =46.679, p =0.001); there was a significant difference between less than 10-year teaching history and over 20 -year group ( x 2=25. 812, p =0.001); there was a significant difference between 10 to 20-year teaching history and over 20-year group (x '=1.645, p =0. 18).3 Teaching hour per week was consanguineous to voice problem. The teachers who tought longer hour per week, the prevalence rate would more higher. According to statistical analysis, the results were as follows: there was a significant difference between less than 10-hour a week and 10 to 20-hour a week group ( x2=1. 668, p =0. 25); there was a significant difference between less than 10 -hour a week against over 20-hour a week group ( x2=12.812, p=0. 001) ; there was no significant difference between 10 to 20-hour a week and over 20-hour a week group ( x2=2. 545, p =0...
|
PDF Full Text Request