49 research outputs found

    A systematic review on the impact of auditory functioning and language proficiency on psychosocial difficulties in children and adolescents with hearing loss

    Get PDF
    Objective: Approximately 20% to 40% of children with hearing loss encounter psychosocial difficulties. This prevalence may be outdated, given the advancements in hearing technology and rehabilitation efforts to enhance the psychosocial well-being of these children. A systematic review of up-to-date literature can help to identify factors that may contribute to the children’s psychosocial well-being. Design/Study sample: A systematic review was conducted. Original articles were identified through systematic searches in Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection. The quality of the papers was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale and custom Reviewers’ Criteria. Results: A search was performed on 20 October 2022. A total of 1561 articles were identified, and 36 were included for review. Critical appraisal led to 24 good to fair quality articles, and 12 poor quality articles. Conclusion: Children with hearing loss have a twofold risk of experiencing psychosocial difficulties compared to normal hearing peers. Estimates for functioning in social interactions, like speech perception (in noise) or language proficiency, have proven to be more adequate predictors for psychosocial difficulties than the degree of hearing loss. Our findings can be useful for identifying children at risk for difficulties and offering them earlier and more elaborate psychological interventions.</p

    Communicating Emotion:Vocal Expression of Linguistic and Emotional Prosody in Children With Mild to Profound Hearing Loss Compared With That of Normal Hearing Peers

    Get PDF
    Objectives: Emotional prosody is known to play an important role in social communication. Research has shown that children with cochlear implants (CCIs) may face challenges in their ability to express prosody, as their expressions may have less distinct acoustic contrasts and therefore may be judged less accurately. The prosody of children with milder degrees of hearing loss, wearing hearing aids, has sparsely been investigated. More understanding of the prosodic expression by children with hearing loss, hearing aid users in particular, could create more awareness among healthcare professionals and parents on limitations in social communication, which awareness may lead to more targeted rehabilitation. This study aimed to compare the prosodic expression potential of children wearing hearing aids (CHA) with that of CCIs and children with normal hearing (CNH). Design: In this prospective experimental study, utterances of pediatric hearing aid users, cochlear implant users, and CNH containing emotional expressions (happy, sad, and angry) were recorded during a reading task. Of the utterances, three acoustic properties were calculated: fundamental frequency (F0), variance in fundamental frequency (SD of F0), and intensity. Acoustic properties of the utterances were compared within subjects and between groups. Results: A total of 75 children were included (CHA: 26, CCI: 23, and CNH: 26). Participants were between 7 and 13 years of age. The 15 CCI with congenital hearing loss had received the cochlear implant at median age of 8 months. The acoustic patterns of emotions uttered by CHA were similar to those of CCI and CNH. Only in CCI, we found no difference in F0 variation between happiness and anger, although an intensity difference was present. In addition, CCI and CHA produced poorer happy-sad contrasts than did CNH. Conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that on a fundamental, acoustic level, both CHA and CCI have a prosodic expression potential that is almost on par with normal hearing peers. However, there were some minor limitations observed in the prosodic expression of these children, it is important to determine whether these differences are perceptible to listeners and could affect social communication. This study sets the groundwork for more research that will help us fully understand the implications of these findings and how they may affect the communication abilities of these children. With a clearer understanding of these factors, we can develop effective ways to help improve their communication skills.</p

    Nasal gene expression differentiates COPD from controls and overlaps bronchial gene expression

    Full text link
    © 2017 The Author(s). Background: Nasal gene expression profiling is a promising method to characterize COPD non-invasively. We aimed to identify a nasal gene expression profile to distinguish COPD patients from healthy controls. We investigated whether this COPD-associated gene expression profile in nasal epithelium is comparable with the profile observed in bronchial epithelium. Methods: Genome wide gene expression analysis was performed on nasal epithelial brushes of 31 severe COPD patients and 22 controls, all current smokers, using Affymetrix Human Gene 1.0 ST Arrays. We repeated the gene expression analysis on bronchial epithelial brushes in 2 independent cohorts of mild-to-moderate COPD patients and controls. Results: In nasal epithelium, 135 genes were significantly differentially expressed between severe COPD patients and controls, 21 being up- and 114 downregulated in COPD (false discovery rate < 0.01). Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) showed significant concordant enrichment of COPD-associated nasal and bronchial gene expression in both independent cohorts (FDRGSEA < 0.001). Conclusion: We identified a nasal gene expression profile that differentiates severe COPD patients from controls. Of interest, part of the nasal gene expression changes in COPD mimics differentially expressed genes in the bronchus. These findings indicate that nasal gene expression profiling is potentially useful as a non-invasive biomarker in COPD. Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.govregistration number NCT01351792(registration date May 10, 2011), ClinicalTrials.govregistration number NCT00848406(registration date February 19, 2009), ClinicalTrials.govregistration number NCT00807469(registration date December 11, 2008)

    Associations of AMP and adenosine induced dyspnea sensation to large and small airways dysfunction in asthma

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Bronchial provocation is often used to confirm asthma. Dyspnea sensation, however, associates poorly with the evoked drop in FEV1. Provocation tests only use the large airways parameter FEV1, although dyspnea is associated with both large- and small airways dysfunction. Aim of this study was to explore if adenosine 5′-monophosphate (AMP) and adenosine evoke an equal dyspnea sensation and if dyspnea associates better with large or small airways dysfunction. Methods We targeted large airways with AMP and small airways with dry powder adenosine in 59 asthmatic (ex)-smokers with ≥5 packyears, 14 ± 7 days apart. All subjects performed spirometry, impulse oscillometry (IOS), and Borg dyspnea score. In 36 subjects multiple breath nitrogen washout (MBNW) was additionally performed. We analyzed the association of the change (Δ) in Borg score with the change in large and small airways parameters, using univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses. MBNW was analyzed separately. Results Provocation with AMP and adenosine evoked similar levels of dyspnea. ΔFEV1 was not significantly associated with ΔBorg after either AMP or adenosine provocation, in both univariate and multivariate analyses. In multivariate linear regression, a decrease in FEF25–75 during adenosine provocation was independently associated with an increase in Borg. In the multivariate analyses for AMP provocation, no significant associations were found between ΔBorg and any large or small airways parameters. Conclusion AMP and adenosine induce equally severe dyspnea sensations. Our results suggest that dyspnea induced with dry powder adenosine is related to small airways involvement, while neither large nor small airways dysfunction was associated with AMP-induced dyspnea. Trail registration NCT01741285 at www.clinicaltrials.gov, first registered Dec 4th, 2012
    corecore