Opportunistic assessment of hearing in elderly inpatients

Objective: To determine the prevalence of occult hearing loss in elderly inpatients, to evaluate feasibility of opportunistic hearing screening and to determine subsequent provision of hearing aids. Materials and methods: Subjects (>65 years) were recruited from five elderly care wards. Hearing loss was detected by a ward-based hearing screen comprising patient-reported assessment of hearing disability and a whisper test. Subjects failing the whisper test or reporting hearing difficulties were offered formal audiological assessment. Results: Screening was performed on 51 patients aged between 70 and 95 years. Of the patients, 21 (41%) reported hearing loss and 16 (31%) failed the whisper test. A total of 37 patients (73%) were referred for audiological assessment with 17 (33%) found to have aidable hearing loss and 11 were fitted with hearing aids (22%). Discussion: This study highlights the high prevalence of occult hearing loss in elderly inpatients. Easy two-step screening can accurately identify patients with undiagnosed deafness resulting in significant proportions receiving hearing aids

Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions testing for screening of sensorineural deafness in puppies

<p><b>Background:</b> Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) are widely used for human neonatal deafness screening, but have not been reported for clinical use in dogs.</p> <p><b>Hypothesis/Objectives:</b> To investigate the feasibility of TEOAE testing in conscious puppies and the ability of TEOAE testing to correctly identify deaf and hearing ears, as defined by brainstem auditory evoked response (BAER).</p> <p><b>Animals:</b> Forty puppies from 10 litters.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> Prospective study on puppies presented for hearing assessment as part of a congenital deafness BAER screening program. Hearing status was determined using BAER. TEOAE testing was performed after the BAER assessment and the results of the TEOAE testing were compared with the hearing status for each ear. Parameters were tested for normality using the D'Agostino Pearson test and comparisons between the deaf and hearing ears were made using Mann-Whitney tests.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> TEOAE testing was readily performed in puppies presented for congenital deafness screening. Using analysis parameters based on those used in human neonatal hearing screening, TEOAE testing correctly identified all deaf ears, as defined by BAER testing, with a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 56-100%) for diagnosing deafness and specificity of 78% (95% CI: 66-87%).</p> <p><b>Conclusions and Clinical Importance:</b> TEOAE testing is an effective screening modality for identifying congenital sensorineural deafness in dogs. In light of the simpler and less expensive equipment, TEOAE testing has the potential to improve access to hearing screening and through this reduce the prevalence of congenital deafness in the dog.</p&gt

The Death Knell For the Death Penalty and the Significance of Global Realism to its Abolition from Glossip v. Gross to Brumfield v. Cain

Objectives For the last decade a host of different projects have been launched to allow persons who are concerned about their hearing status to quickly and at a low cost test their hearing ability. Most often, this is carried out without collecting complementary information that could be correlated with hearing impairment. In this two-part study we first, present the development and validation of a novel Internet-based hearing test, and second, report on the associations between this test and phonological representation, quality of life and self-reported hearing difficulties. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting An opportunity sample of participants was recruited at the Stockholm central station for the first study. All parts of the second study were conducted via the Internet, with testing and self-report forms adapted for online use. Participants The first part of the study was carried out in direct contact with the participants, and participants from the second study were recruited by means of advertisements in newspapers and on webpages. The only exclusion criterion was that participants had to be over 18 years old. Most participants were between 60 and 69 years old. There were almost an equal number of men and women (total n=316). Outcome measures 48 participants failed the Internet-based hearing screening test. The group failing the test reported more problems on the Amsterdam Inventory of Auditory Disability. In addition, they were found to have diminished phonological representational skills. However, no difference in quality of life was found. Conclusions Almost one in five participants was in need of contacting their local hearing clinic. This group had more complaints regarding tinnitus and hyperacusis, rated their own hearing as worse than those who passed, and had a poorer capability of generating accurate phonological representations. This study suggests that it is feasible to screen for hearing status online, and obtain valid data

Essential of audiology: screening and postscreening

Newborn hearing screening is a type of screening test for the early detection of hearing loss. It can recognize with good accuracy newborns affected by hearing impairment allowing an early diagnosis and intervention and avoiding cognitive and linguistic deficits [1-6]. The incidence of bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) in Sicily is 2.35 cases per 1000 newborns; this value increases to 2.95 if we consider also unilateral SNHL [2,3] and to 10 cases per 1000 births among infants at risk [7-9]. A correct newborn hearing screening programme is based on different protocols depending on the presence/ absence of audiologic risk factor

Int J Audiol

ObjectiveWe assessed the reliability of a hearing risk factor screening survey used by hearing conservation programs for noise-exposed workers.DesignWe compared workers\u2019 answers from the screening survey to their answers to a confidential research questionnaire regarding hearing loss risk factors. We calculated kappa statistics to test the correlation between yes/no questions in the research questionnaire compared to answers from one and five years of screening surveys.Study SampleWe compared the screening survey and research questionnaire answers of 274 aluminum plant workers.ResultsMost of the questions in the in-company screening survey showed fair to moderate agreement with the research questionnaire (kappa range: 120.02, 0.57). Workers\u2019 answers to the screening survey had better correlation with the research questionnaire when we compared five years of screening answers. For nearly all questions, workers were more likely to respond affirmatively on the research questionnaire than the screening survey.ConclusionsHearing conservation programs should be aware that workers may underreport hearing loss risk factors and functional hearing status on an audiometric screening survey. Validating company screening tools could help provide more accurate information on hearing loss and risk factors.R01 OH008641/OH/NIOSH CDC HHS/United States2017-12-06T00:00:00Z27609310PMC571884

Otoacoustic emissions in hearing screening in children

Background/Aim. Prevention of the consequences of hearing loss can be accomplished by early hearing screening of the cochlear function in newborus, but also with continuous hearing screening in the early childhood. The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability and feasibility of otoacoustic emissions (OAE) in hearing screening in children, evaluate the frequency and type of hearing loss and determine etiological factors of these losses. Methods. In the study, 133 children, aged 2 to 7.5 years, were tested on both ears with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and distortionproduct otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE). Before screening tests all children had undergone otoscopic examination. If children had not passed either or both hearing screening tests and/or abnormal otoscopic findings in at least one ear, audiological evaluation was scheduled to confirm or exclude hearing loss. Results. Eighty-five percent of children passed the hearing and otoscopic screening bilaterally. For additional audiologic tests 15% of children were referred. Agreement between otoscopic examination and screening tests was very good (agreement for TEOAE 95%, for DPOAE 93%). The results showed that normal tympanograms were very likely to be associated with normal screening tests. Sensitivity of TEOAE test was 94.12%, specificity 78.95%, while DPOAE sensitivity was 87.50% and specificity 75%. Hearing loss was found in 6.76% of the cases, conductive in 6.01% and sensorineural in 0.75%. Conductive hearing loss was a consequence of chronic otitis media with effusion in 25% of the cases, and a consequence of adhesive process in the middle ear in 8.33% of cases. Sensorineural hearing loss was a consequence of using ototoxic medications. Conclusion. TEOAE and/or DPOAE tests are reliable, noninvasive, and feasible methods for hearing screening in childhood

於香港一所大學醫院推行以畸變產物耳聲發射檢查為新生兒進行聽覺普查計劃之可行性

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of implementing a universal neonatal hearing screening programme using distortion product otoacoustic emission detection at a major teaching hospital in Hong Kong. DESIGN: Descriptive study and questionnaire. SETTING. Teaching hospital, Hong Kong. METHODS: A total of 1064 infants, together with their mothers, were successfully recruited for the study. The participation rate was 99.3%. A three-stage hearing screening protocol using distortion product otoacoustic emission detection was adopted. Each of the participating infants was screened on three separate occasions (day 1-4, day 5-14, and day 21-30 after birth), irrespective of the test results. A questionnaire was administered to 364 randomly selected mothers to determine whether as consumers of the hearing screening service, mothers would find screening desirable. RESULTS: Results of the screening demonstrated an incidence of permanent bilateral hearing loss (>or=40 dB in the better ear) of 0.28%. The results also showed that 3.5% of the screened infants were referred for subsequent diagnostic audiological assessment, including those suspected with unilateral as well as bilateral hearing loss. Data obtained were comparable to other reported results obtained using multi-stage screening protocols. Taking both the false positive rate and the default rate into consideration, the most appropriate time for screening in this hospital setting appeared to be around day 5 to 14 when infants returned to the hospital's day centre as out-patients for routine medical follow-up. Since this day centre service is not generally provided by all maternity hospitals in Hong Kong, an alternative time for screening would be around day 21 to 30 when infants could return as out-patients solely for the hearing test. The results of the questionnaire suggested that most mothers thought a neonatal hearing screening would be desirable (91.35%). The majority (81.70%) indicated a preference for screening either within a few days of birth at the maternity ward prior to discharge from the hospital, or between 5 and 30 days when returning to the hospital as an out-patient. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that a universal neonatal hearing screening programme could be readily implemented in a maternity hospital setting in Hong Kong.published_or_final_versio

Evaluation of universal newborn hearing screening in Switzerland 2012 and follow-up data for Zurich

BACKGROUND: The European Consensus Statement of Neonatal Hearing recommended universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) in 1998. UNHS was introduced in Switzerland in 1999 under the auspices of a "Swiss Working Group Hearing Screening in Newborns". The aim of this study was to evaluate the number of newborns being screened and consequently followed-up in Switzerland for the year 2012. METHODS: Postal questionnaires were sent to all registered maternity clinics and birth-centres in Switzerland. To evaluate follow-up of newborns failing the screening process, a retrospective consecutive cohort analysis of newborns failing screening at the University Hospital Zurich between 2005 and 2010 was performed. RESULTS: A total of 102/110 (92.7%) maternity clinics and 1/14 (7.1%) birth-centres routinely performed UNHS. When weighted according to the number of births in the varying locations, 97.9% of all newborn received hearing screening. At the University Hospital of Zurich, 253/12,080 (2.1%) newborns failed the screening test and in 15/253 (6%) a relevant bilateral hearing impairment was found. This makes an overall incidence of congenitally relevant hearing loss of 0.12%. Unfortunately, 33/253 (13%) of newborns with failed screening were lost to follow-up. CONCLUSION: UNHS is well-established in Switzerland and the vast majority of newborns are screened. However, follow-up of failed screens is disappointing. Further measures need to be taken to improve follow up