Does the short-term exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic field originating from mobile phone affect auditory functions as measured by Acoustic Admittance and Evoked Otoacoustic Emission tests?

Electromagnetic biology and medicine · 2020 · No effect · Low evidence

← Research stream

No effectLow evidencePaper 2081

In 23 healthy volunteers, no statistically significant differences were found in TEOAE or AAT measures before vs immediately after a 15-minute simulated mobile phone call, in either the exposed or non-exposed ear. Results were comparable between self-reported…

Study snapshot

PublicationElectromagnetic biology and medicine · 2020

Study typeother

Reported directionNo effect

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Does the short-term exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic field originating from mobile phone affect auditory functions as measured by Acoustic Admittance and Evoked Otoacoustic Emission tests? Artur Kacprzyk, Sebastian Kocoń, Jacek Składzień, Eugeniusz Rokita, Rafał Pawlak, Jakub Kwiecień, Grzegorz Tatoń. Does the short-term exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic field originating from mobile phone affect auditory functions as measured by Acoustic Admittance and Evoked Otoacoustic Emission tests? Electromagn Biol Med. 2020 Sep 30;1-8. doi: 10.1080/15368378.2020.1826960. Abstract Background: Mobile phones constitute an important source of radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) for humans. Taking into account high sensitivity of sensory hair cells of the inner ear to endogenous and exogenous agents, the potential impact of mobile phone usage on auditory organs is of particular interest. Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of short-term exposure to RF-EMF generated by a mobile phone during 15-minute simulated phone call on human hearing as measured by Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission (TEOAE) and Acoustic Admittance Testing (AAT). Material and methods: Within-subject study was performed on 23 healthy volunteers. All of the participants underwent TEOAE and AAT before and immediately after 15-minute simulated phone call with the use of a standard, modern smartphone. Analyzed parameters included: static compliance of tympanic membrane, middle ear pressure, ipsi- and contralateral acoustic reflex thresholds and percentage of signal reproducibility in TEOAE for exposed and non-exposed ear. Additionally, the results were compared in subgroups distinguished basing on self-reported sensitivity to RF-EMF originating from mobile phones. Results: No statistically significant differences were identified between results of TEOAE and AAT before and after exposure, both in exposed and non-exposed ear. The results of EMF sensitive and non-sensitive subjects were comparable in all performed tests. Conclusions: Short-term exposure to mobile phone electromagnetic field did not influence auditory functions as measured by Evoked Otoacoustic Emission test and Acoustic Admittance Testing. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov Limitations Study sample was relatively small and consisted only of males. Such a sample may not be representative for the entire population, thus the conclusions drawn from the research cannot be simply generalized. Furthermore, only single signal frequency band (2100 MHz) was used in our study protocol. Keeping in mind that new generations of cellular telecommunication are currently being implemented it is important to conduct further studies to assess their potential hazards.

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeother

Effect directionno_effect

Population23 healthy volunteers (males)

Sample size23

ExposureRF · 2100 MHz · 15-minute simulated phone call

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Outcomes measured

Auditory function via Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission (TEOAE)
Acoustic Admittance Testing (AAT): static compliance of tympanic membrane
AAT: middle ear pressure
AAT: ipsi- and contralateral acoustic reflex thresholds
TEOAE: percentage of signal reproducibility
Comparison by self-reported RF-EMF sensitivity

Limitations

Small sample size (n=23)
Participants consisted only of males; may not be representative/generalizable
Only a single frequency band was used (2100 MHz)

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "other",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "mobile phone",
    "frequency_mhz": 2100,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "15-minute simulated phone call"
  },
  "population": "23 healthy volunteers (males)",
  "sample_size": 23,
  "outcomes": [
    "Auditory function via Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission (TEOAE)",
    "Acoustic Admittance Testing (AAT): static compliance of tympanic membrane",
    "AAT: middle ear pressure",
    "AAT: ipsi- and contralateral acoustic reflex thresholds",
    "TEOAE: percentage of signal reproducibility",
    "Comparison by self-reported RF-EMF sensitivity"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In 23 healthy volunteers, no statistically significant differences were found in TEOAE or AAT measures before vs immediately after a 15-minute simulated mobile phone call, in either the exposed or non-exposed ear. Results were comparable between self-reported EMF-sensitive and non-sensitive participants.",
  "effect_direction": "no_effect",
  "limitations": [
    "Small sample size (n=23)",
    "Participants consisted only of males; may not be representative/generalizable",
    "Only a single frequency band was used (2100 MHz)"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "RF-EMF",
    "mobile phone",
    "2100 MHz",
    "short-term exposure",
    "hearing",
    "auditory function",
    "TEOAE",
    "Acoustic Admittance Testing",
    "acoustic reflex",
    "EMF sensitivity"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "who-icnirp",
      "weight": 0.2,
      "reason": "Human study of RF-EMF exposure from mobile phones; relevant to general RF health evidence discussions."
    }
  ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1080/15368378.2020.1826960
PubMed: 32993394

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library