Chemicals, noise and occupational hearing health in South Africa: A mapping study.
Mershen Pillay
PMID 32242439WHAT IT FOUND
South African occupational hearing loss is treated as a noise-only problem, ignoring chemical ototoxicity.
Policies and research focus on mining, leaving informal workers exposed to solvents and medications without protection or specific guidelines.
Key findings
01South African policies define occupational hearing loss exclusively as noise-induced, failing to link chemical ototoxicity to any government policy.
02Research and clinical services focus heavily on the mining sector and formal industries, with a specific gap in managing chemical exposures for informal sector workers like street traders.
03Combined exposure to noise and chemicals, such as solvents or ototoxic medications for TB and HIV, synergistically increases the risk of hearing loss, yet this interaction is rarely documented or managed in South African workplaces.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study is a mapping of literature, not a systematic review, so it does not evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. The search was limited to three databases and specific South African contexts, potentially missing relevant global or local grey literature. The author notes inherent limitations in using Scopus rankings to identify journals, which may bias the selection toward indexed publications. No critical appraisal of the included items was performed, meaning the findings reflect the state of the literature rather than the strength of evidence within it.
Declared interests
The author declares that this research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. The author is an audiologist who has worked in the field and conducted some of the studies mapped, which may introduce bias in the interpretation of the literature.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret this mapping as evidence that chemical ototoxicity is well-understood or managed in South African workplaces. The study highlights a lack of policy and research coverage, not a resolution of the problem. The findings are descriptive of the literature's gaps, not clinical guidelines for treatment.