Supervisors info:
Αθανάσιος Μπίμπας, Καθηγητής, Ιατρική Σχολή, ΕΚΠΑ, Επιβλέπων
Κωνσταντίνος Παστιάδης, Καθηγητής, Τμήμα Μουσικών Σπουδών, ΑΠΘ
Δημήτριος Κικίδης, Ακαδημαϊκός Υπότροφος, Α΄Πανεπιστημιακή ΩΡΛ Κλινική, ΕΚΠΑ
Original Title:
Απώλεια ακοής, εμβοές και υπερακουσία σε επαγγελματίες διερμηνείς ΙΙ Hearing loss, tinnitus and hyperacusis in professional interpreters II
Summary:
INTRODUCTION
During the Covid-19 pandemic, professional interpreters increasingly began working through
remote simultaneous interpretation (RSI) and teleconferences. In recent years, they have frequently
encountered various symptoms, primarily tinnitus, hyperacusis, and hearing disorders, which affect
their daily lives. At the same time, while working, they experience unwanted "auditory events" and
poor-quality compressed sound. Similar episodes (acoustic shock) have been described in the
literature for workers in call centers. The AIIC is working to manage the situation by taking
measures to protect its members and encouraging research into the phenomenon.
MATERIAL – METHOD
Interpreters were subjected to acoustic reflex test (ipsi) and Word in Babble (WiB) test for different
Signal-to-Noise Ratios (SNR) values (-9, -6, -3, +0, +3) in both ears, using 4 lists in the Greek
language, each consisting of 50 phonologically balanced bisyllable words. Exclusion criteria for the
study included pathology of the middle ear, previous or current pathology of the inner ear,
asymmetry in pure tone thresholds > 15dB in any of the tested frequencies, radiotherapy, use of
ototoxic substances in the last 12 months, or exposure to hazardous noise within the last 72 hours.
The aim of the study is to describe the hearing level, as assessed through the tests, in interpreters
who use RSI.
The data were analyzed using a combination of Excel and descriptive statistics.
RESULTS
The acoustic reflex is elicited in the majority of the examined interpreters. Those with hearing
impairment show poorer results in Word in Babble (WiB) test for all SNR values, and no
significant difference was observed between the right and left ear. The percentage of RSI (Remote
Simultaneous Interpretation) usage is limited.
DISCUSSION
In most interpreters, the acoustic reflex appears to function adequately, suggesting a reduced
likelihood of acoustic shock. In Greece, speech audiometry in noise is not used diagnostically, and
therefore, there is limited literature on the Word in Babble (WiB) test in the Greek language.
Comparing the results with existing literature, no significant differences were found.
CONCLUSION
Audiological symptoms faced by interpreters today should be minimized. The AIIC plays a crucial
role in this effort and must ensure the health of its members. This study did not demonstrate any
obvious negative impact of RSI on the measured audiological tests, although this does not
completely exclude the possibility.
Keywords:
Professional interpreters, Acoustic reflex, Speech audiometry in noise, WiB, RSI
