Model-Projected Cost-Effectiveness of Adult Hearing Screening in the USA.

BACKGROUND: While 60% of older adults have hearing loss (HL), the majority have never had their hearing tested. OBJECTIVE: We sought to estimate long-term clinical and economic effects of alternative adult hearing screening schedules in the USA. DESIGN: Model-based cost-effectiveness analysis simulating Current Detection (CD) and linkage of persons with HL to hearing healthcare, compared to alternative screening schedules varying by age at first screen (45 to 75 years) and screening frequency (every 1 or 5 years). Simulated persons experience yearly age- and sex-specific probabilities of acquiring HL, and subsequent hearing aid uptake (0.5-8%/year) and discontinuation (13-4%). Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated according to hearing level and treatment status. Costs from a health system perspective include screening ($30-120; 2020 USD), HL diagnosis ($300), and hearing aid devices ($3690 year 1, $910/subsequent year). Data sources were published estimates from NHANES and clinical trials of adult hearing screening. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-year-old persons in US primary care across their lifetime. INTERVENTION: Alternative screening schedules that increase baseline probabilities of hearing aid uptake (base-case 1.62-fold; range 1.05-2.25-fold). MAIN MEASURES: Lifetime undiscounted and discounted (3%/year) costs and QALYs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). KEY RESULTS: CD resulted in 1.20 average person-years of hearing aid use compared to 1.27-1.68 with the screening schedules. Lifetime total per-person undiscounted costs were $3300 for CD and ranged from $3630 for 5-yearly screening beginning at age 75 to $6490 for yearly screening beginning at age 45. In cost-effectiveness analysis, yearly screening beginning at ages 75, 65, and 55 years had ICERs of $39,100/QALY, $48,900/QALY, and $96,900/QALY, respectively. Results were most sensitive to variations in hearing aid utility benefit and screening effectiveness. LIMITATION: Input uncertainty around screening effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: We project that yearly hearing screening beginning at age 55+ is cost-effective by US standards.

The Impact of Hearing Loss and Its Treatment on Health-Related Quality of Life Utility: a Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hearing loss significantly impacts health-related quality of life (QoL), yet the effects of current treatments on QoL utility remain uncertain. Our objective was to describe the impact of untreated and treated hearing loss on QoL utility to inform hearing healthcare policy. METHODS: We searched databases for articles published through 02/01/2021. Two independent reviewers screened for articles that reported elicitation of general QoL utility values for untreated and treated hearing loss health states. We extracted data and quality indicators from 62 studies that met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Included studies predominately used observational pre/post designs (61%), evaluated unilateral cochlear implantation (65%), administered the Health Utilities Index 3 (HUI3; 71%), and were conducted in Europe and North America (84%). In general, treatment of hearing loss improved post-treatment QoL utility when measured by most methods except the Euro-QoL 5 dimension (EQ-5D). In meta-analysis, hearing aids for adult mild-to-moderate hearing loss compared to no treatment significantly improved HUI3-estimated QoL utility (3 studies; mean change=0.11; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.07 to 0.14) but did not impact EQ-5D-estimated QoL (3 studies; mean change=0.0; 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.04). Cochlear implants improved adult QoL utility 1-year post-implantation when measured by the HUI3 (7 studies; mean change=0.17; 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.23); however, pediatric VAS-estimated QoL utility was non-significant (4 studies; mean change=0.12; 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.25). The quality of included studies was limited by failure to report missingness of data and low survey response rates. Our study was limited by heterogeneous study populations and designs. FINDINGS: Treatment of hearing loss significantly improves QoL utility, and the HUI3 and VAS were most sensitive to improvements in hearing. Improved access to hearing healthcare should be prioritized. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42021253314.

Environmental Factors for Hearing Loss and Middle Ear Disease in Alaska Native Children and Adolescents: A Cross-Sectional Analysis from a Cluster Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Infection-related childhood hearing loss is one of the few preventable chronic health conditions that can affect a child's lifelong trajectory. This study sought to quantify relationships between infection-mediated hearing loss and middle ear disease and environmental factors, such as exposure to wood smoke, cigarette smoke, household crowding, and lack of access to plumbed (running) water, in a northwest region of rural Alaska. DESIGN: This study is a cross-sectional analysis to estimate environmental factors of infection-related hearing loss in children aged 3 to 21 years. School hearing screenings were performed as part of two cluster randomized trials in rural Alaska over two academic years (2017-2018 and 2018-2019). The first available screening for each child was used for this analysis. Sociodemographic questionnaires were completed by parents/guardians upon entry into the study. Multivariable regression was performed to estimate prevalence differences and prevalence ratios (PR). A priori knowledge about the prevalence of middle ear disease and the difficulty inherent in obtaining objective hearing loss data in younger children led to analysis of children by age (3 to 6 years versus 7 years and older) and a separate multiple imputation sensitivity analysis for pure-tone average (PTA)-based infection-related hearing loss measures. RESULTS: A total of 1634 children participated. Hearing loss was present in 11.1% of children sampled based on otoacoustic emission as the primary indicator of hearing loss and was not associated with exposure to cigarette smoke (PR = 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 2.38), use of a wood-burning stove (PR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.32), number of persons living in the household (PR = 1.06; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.16), or lack of access to running water (PR = 1.38; 95% CI, 0.80 to 2.39). Using PTA as a secondary indicator of hearing loss also showed no association with environmental factors. Middle ear disease was present in 17.4% of children. There was a higher prevalence of middle ear disease in homes without running water versus those with access to running water (PR = 1.53; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.27). There was little evidence to support any cumulative effects of environmental factors. Heterogeneity of effect models by age found sample prevalence of hearing loss higher for children aged 3 to 6 years (12.2%; 95% CI, 9.3 to 15.7) compared to children 7 years and older (10.6%; 95% CI, 8.9 to 2.6), as well as for sample prevalence of middle ear disease (22.7%; 95% CI, 18.9 to 26.9 and 15.3%; 95% CI, 13.3 to 17.5, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of access to running water in the home was associated with increased prevalence of middle ear disease in this rural, Alaska Native population, particularly among younger children (aged 3 to 6 years). There was little evidence in this study that cigarette smoke, wood-burning stoves, and greater numbers of persons in the household were associated with infection-mediated hearing loss or middle ear disease. Future research with larger sample sizes and more sensitive measures of environmental exposure is necessary to further evaluate these relationships. Children who live in homes without access to running water may benefit from earlier and more frequent hearing health visits.

Mobile Health School Screening and Telemedicine Referral to Improve Access to Specialty Care in Rural Alaska: Integrating Mixed Methods Data to Contextualize Trial Outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: To understand factors associated with outcomes in a cluster-randomized controlled trial that evaluated a telemedicine specialty referral intervention for school hearing screenings in 15 rural Alaskan communities. DESIGN: Hearing Norton Sound was a mixed methods cluster-randomized controlled trial that compared a telemedicine specialty referral pathway (intervention) to a standard primary care referral pathway (control) for school hearing screenings. As a mixed methods trial, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected, analyzed, and integrated. Main trial results are published elsewhere, but integration of community-specific quantitative outcomes and qualitative results have not yet been reported. The constant comparative method was used to analyze qualitative data from semistructured interviews with six stakeholder groups across all 15 communities. Descriptive statistics were used to describe community-specific proportions of follow-up in both trial years. Qualitative and quantitative results were integrated to reveal relationships between contextual factors and follow-up outcomes across communities. RESULTS: The Hearing Norton Sound trial enrolled 1481 children from October 2017 to March 2019, with a total of 790 children requiring referral. Of the children who referred in the telemedicine specialty referral pathway communities (intervention), 68.5% received follow-up (268/391), compared to 32.1% (128/399) in primary care referral communities (control)(previously reported). When broken down by community, the mean proportion receiving follow-up was 75.26% (SD 22.5) and 37.9% (SD 11.4) for the telemedicine specialty referral communities and primary care referral communities, respectively. For qualitative data collection, semistructured interviews were conducted with 101 individuals between December 2018 and August 2019. Six stakeholder groups participated: elders (n = 14), parents (n = 25), children (n = 11), teachers/school staff (n = 18), principals (n = 6), and healthcare providers/clinic staff (n = 27). Six overall factors related to the outcomes of the telemedicine specialty referral pathway emerged during analysis: clinic capacity, personnel ownership and engagement, scheduling, telemedicine equipment/processes, communication, and awareness of the need for follow-up. We integrated these factors with the community-specific follow-up percentages and found associations for four of the six qualitative factors: clinic capacity, personnel ownership and engagement, communication, and awareness. An association was not seen for scheduling and telemedicine equipment/processes, which had variable relationships with the follow-up outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The Hearing Norton Sound trial demonstrated that a telemedicine specialty referral pathway can close the gap on children lost to follow up after school hearing screening. As a whole, the intervention profoundly increased the proportion of children receiving follow-up, but there was variability in outcomes within and between communities. To understand this variability, we analyzed community-specific intervention outcomes alongside community member feedback on factors related to the intervention. We identified four key factors that contributed to the success of the intervention. Attention to these factors will be essential to successful adaptation and implementation of this telemedicine specialty referral intervention and other similar interventions in future work in rural Alaska and beyond.

Community Perspectives on Hearing Loss in Rural Alaska.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to present an explanatory model of hearing loss in the Bering Strait region of Alaska in order to contextualize the results of a cluster randomized trial and propose implications for regional hearing-related health care. DESIGN: To promote ecological validity, or the generalizability of trial findings to real world experiences, qualitative methods (focus groups and interviews) were used within a mixed methods cluster randomized trial evaluating school hearing screening and follow-up processes in 15 communities in the Bering Strait region of Alaska. Focus groups were held between April and August 2017, and semistructured interviews were conducted between December 2018 and August 2019. Convenience sampling was used for six of the 11 focus groups to capture broad community feedback. Purposive sampling was used for the remaining five focus groups and for all interviews to capture a variety of experiences with hearing loss. Audio recordings of focus groups and interviews were transcribed, and both notes and transcripts were deidentified. All notes and transcripts were included in the analysis. The constant comparative method was used to develop a codebook by iteratively moving between transcripts and preliminary themes. Researchers then used this codebook to code data from all focus groups and interviews using qualitative analysis software (NVIVO 12, QSR International) and conducted thematic analyses to distill the findings presented in this article. RESULTS: Participants in focus groups (n = 116) and interviews (n = 101) shared perspectives in three domains: etiology, impact, and treatment of hearing loss. Regarding etiology, participants emphasized noise-induced hearing loss but also discussed infection-related hearing loss and various causes of ear infections. Participants described the impact of hearing loss on subsistence activities, while also detailing social, academic, and economic consequences. Participants described burdensome treatment pathways that are repetitive and often travel and time intensive. Communication breakdowns within these pathways were also described. Some participants spoke positively of increased access via onsite hearing health care services in "field clinics" as well as via telemedicine services. Others described weaknesses in these processes (infrequent field clinics and communication delays in telemedicine care pathways). Participants also described home remedies and stigma surrounding the treatment for hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-centered health care requires an understanding of context. Explanatory models of illness are context-specific ways in which patients and their networks perceive and describe the experience of an illness or disability. In this study, we documented explanatory models of hearing loss to foster ecological validity and better understand the relevance of research findings to real-life hearing-related experiences. These findings suggest several areas that should be addressed in future implementation of hearing health care interventions elsewhere in rural Alaska, including management of repetitious treatments, awareness of infection-mediated hearing loss, mistrust, and communication breakdowns. For hearing-related health care in this region, these findings suggest localized recommendations for approaches for prevention and treatment. For community-based hearing research, this study offers an example of how qualitative methods can be used to generate ecologically valid (i.e., contextually grounded) findings.

A Hybrid Deep Learning Approach to Identify Preventable Childhood Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVE: Childhood hearing loss has well-known, lifelong consequences. Infection-related hearing loss disproportionately affects underserved communities yet can be prevented with early identification and treatment. This study evaluates the utility of machine learning in automating tympanogram classifications of the middle ear to facilitate layperson-guided tympanometry in resource-constrained communities. DESIGN: Diagnostic performance of a hybrid deep learning model for classifying narrow-band tympanometry tracings was evaluated. Using 10-fold cross-validation, a machine learning model was trained and evaluated on 4810 pairs of tympanometry tracings acquired by an audiologist and layperson. The model was trained to classify tracings into types A (normal), B (effusion or perforation), and C (retraction), with the audiologist interpretation serving as reference standard. Tympanometry data were collected from 1635 children from October 10, 2017, to March 28, 2019, from two previous cluster-randomized hearing screening trials (NCT03309553, NCT03662256). Participants were school-aged children from an underserved population in rural Alaska with a high prevalence of infection-related hearing loss. Two-level classification performance statistics were calculated by treating type A as pass and types B and C as refer. RESULTS: For layperson-acquired data, the machine-learning model achieved a sensitivity of 95.2% (93.3, 97.1), specificity of 92.3% (91.5, 93.1), and area under curve of 0.968 (0.955, 0.978). The model's sensitivity was greater than that of the tympanometer's built-in classifier [79.2% (75.5, 82.8)] and a decision tree based on clinically recommended normative values [56.9% (52.4, 61.3)]. For audiologist-acquired data, the model achieved a higher AUC of 0.987 (0.980, 0.993), had an equivalent sensitivity of 95.2 (93.3, 97.1), and a higher specificity of 97.7 (97.3, 98.2). CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning can detect middle ear disease with comparable performance to an audiologist using tympanograms acquired either by an audiologist or a layperson. Automated classification enables the use of layperson-guided tympanometry in hearing screening programs in rural and underserved communities, where early detection of treatable pathology in children is crucial to prevent the lifelong adverse effects of childhood hearing loss.

Telemedicine Referral to Improve Access to Specialty Care for Preschool Children in Rural Alaska: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Preschool programs provide essential preventive services, such as hearing screening, but in rural regions, limited access to specialists and loss to follow-up compound rural health disparities. We conducted a parallel-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial to evaluate telemedicine specialty referral for preschool hearing screening. The goal of this trial was to improve timely identification and treatment of early childhood infection-related hearing loss, a preventable condition with lifelong implications. We hypothesized that telemedicine specialty referral would improve time to follow-up and the number of children receiving follow-up compared with the standard primary care referral. DESIGN: We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial in K-12 schools in 15 communities over two academic years. Community randomization occurred within four strata using location and school size. In the second academic year (2018-2019), an ancillary trial was performed in the 14 communities that had preschools to compare telemedicine specialty referral (intervention) to standard primary care referral (comparison) for preschool hearing screening. Randomization of communities from the main trial was used for this ancillary trial. All children enrolled in preschool were eligible. Masking was not possible because of timing in the second year of the main trial, but referral assignment was not openly disclosed. Study team members and school staff were masked throughout data collection, and statisticians were blinded to allocation during analysis. Preschool screening occurred once, and children who were referred for possible hearing loss or ear disease were monitored for follow-up for 9 months from the screening date. The primary outcome was time to ear/hearing-related follow-up from the date of screening. The secondary outcome was any ear/hearing follow-up from screening to 9 months. Analyses were conducted using an intention-to-treat approach. RESULTS: A total of 153 children were screened between September 2018 and March 2019. Of the 14 communities, 8 were assigned to the telemedicine specialty referral pathway (90 children), and 6 to the standard primary care referral pathway (63 children). Seventy-one children (46.4%) were referred for follow-up: 39 (43.3%) in the telemedicine specialty referral communities and 32 (50.8%) in the standard primary care referral communities. Of children referred, 30 (76.9%) children in telemedicine specialty referral communities and 16 (50.0%) children in standard primary care referral communities received follow-up within 9 months (Risk Ratio = 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22 to 2.01). Among children who received follow-up, median time to follow-up was 28 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 15 to 71) in telemedicine specialty referral communities compared with 85 days (IQR: 26 to 129) in standard primary care referral communities. Mean time to follow-up for all referred children was 4.5 (event time ratio = 4.5; 95% CI, 1.8 to 11.4; p = 0.045) times faster in telemedicine specialty referral communities compared with standard primary care referral communities in the 9-month follow-up time frame. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine specialty referral significantly improved follow-up and reduced time to follow-up after preschool hearing screening in rural Alaska. Telemedicine referrals could extend to other preventive school-based services to improve access to specialty care for rural preschool children.

Prevalence of Childhood Hearing Loss in Rural Alaska.

OBJECTIVES: Childhood hearing loss has well-known lifelong consequences. Certain rural populations are at higher risk for infection-related hearing loss. For Alaska Native children, historical data on hearing loss prevalence suggest a higher burden of infection-related hearing loss, but updated prevalence data are urgently needed in this high-risk population. DESIGN: Hearing data were collected as part of two school-based cluster-randomized trials in 15 communities in rural northwest Alaska over two academic years (2017-2019). All enrolled children from preschool to 12th grade were eligible. Pure-tone thresholds were obtained using standard audiometry and conditioned play when indicated. The analysis included the first available audiometric assessment for each child (n = 1634 participants, 3 to 21 years), except for the high-frequency analysis, which was limited to year 2 when higher frequencies were collected. Multiple imputation was used to quantify the prevalence of hearing loss in younger children, where missing data were more frequent due to the need for behavioral responses. Hearing loss in either ear was evaluated using both the former World Health Organization (WHO) definition (pure-tone average [PTA] > 25 dB) and the new WHO definition (PTA ≥ 20 dB), which was published after the study. Analyses with the new definition were limited to children 7 years and older due to incomplete data obtained on younger children at lower thresholds. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of hearing loss (PTA > 25 dB; 0.5, 1, 2, 4 kHz) was 10.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.9 to 12.1). Hearing loss was predominately mild (PTA >25 to 40 dB; 8.9%, 95% CI, 7.4 to 10.5). The prevalence of unilateral hearing loss was 7.7% (95% CI, 6.3 to 9.0). Conductive hearing loss (air-bone gap of ≥ 10 dB) was the most common hearing loss type (9.1%, 95% CI, 7.6 to 10.7). Stratified by age, hearing loss (PTA >25 dB) was more common in children 3 to 6 years (14.9%, 95% CI, 11.4 to 18.5) compared to children 7 years and older (8.7%, 95% CI, 7.1 to 10.4). In children 7 years and older, the new WHO definition increased the prevalence of hearing loss to 23.4% (95% CI, 21.0 to 25.8) compared to the former definition (8.7%, 95% CI, 7.1 to 10.4). Middle ear disease prevalence was 17.6% (95% CI, 15.7 to 19.4) and was higher in younger children (23.6%, 95% CI, 19.7 to 27.6) compared to older children (15.2%, 95% CI, 13.2 to 17.3). High-frequency hearing loss (4, 6, 8kHz) was present in 20.5% (95% CI, 18.4 to 22.7 [PTA >25 dB]) of all children and 22.8% (95% CI, 20.3 to 25.3 [PTA >25 dB]) and 29.7% (95% CI, 27.0 to 32.4 [PTA ≥ 20 dB]) of children 7 years and older (limited to year 2). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis represents the first prevalence study on childhood hearing loss in Alaska in over 60 years and is the largest cohort with hearing data ever collected in rural Alaska. Our results highlight that hearing loss continues to be common in rural Alaska Native children, with middle ear disease more prevalent in younger children and high-frequency hearing loss more prevalent with increasing age. Prevention efforts may benefit from managing hearing loss type by age. Lastly, continued research is needed on the impact of the new WHO definition of hearing loss on field studies.

Changing the Paradigm for School Hearing Screening Globally: Evaluation of Screening Protocols From Two Randomized Trials in Rural Alaska.

OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated for various screening tools, including mobile health (mHealth) pure-tone screening, tympanometry, distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE), and inclusion of high frequencies to determine the most accurate screening protocol for identifying children with hearing loss in rural Alaska where the prevalence of middle ear disease is high. DESIGN: Hearing screening data were collected as part of two cluster randomized trials conducted in 15 communities in rural northwest Alaska. All children enrolled in school from preschool to 12th grade were eligible. Analysis was limited to data collected 2018 to 2019 (n = 1449), when both trials were running and measurement of high frequencies were included in the protocols. Analyses included estimates of diagnostic accuracy for each screening tool, as well as exploring performance by age and grade. Multiple imputation was used to assess diagnostic accuracy in younger children, where missing data were more prevalent due to requirements for conditioned responses. The audiometric reference standard included otoscopy, tympanometry, and high frequencies to ensure detection of infection-related and noise-induced hearing loss. RESULTS: Both the mHealth pure-tone screen and DPOAE screen performed better when tympanometry was added to the protocol (increase in sensitivity of 19.9%, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 15.9 to 24.1 for mHealth screen, 17.9%, 95% CI: 14.0 to 21.8 for high-frequency mHealth screen, and 10.4%, 95% CI: 7.5 to 13.9 for DPOAE). The addition of 6 kHz to the mHealth pure-tone screen provided an 8.7 percentage point improvement in sensitivity (95% CI: 6.5 to 11.3). Completeness of data for both the reference standard and the mHealth screening tool differed substantially by age, due to difficulty with behavioral testing in young children. By age 7, children were able to complete behavioral testing, and data indicated that high-frequency mHealth pure-tone screen with tympanometry was the superior tool for children 7 years and older. For children 3 to 6 years of age, DPOAE plus tympanometry performed the best, both for complete data and multiply imputed data, which better approximates accuracy for children with missing data. CONCLUSIONS: This study directly evaluated pure-tone, DPOAE, and tympanometry tools as part of school hearing screening in rural Alaskan children (3 to 18+ years). Results from this study indicate that tympanometry is a key component in the hearing screening protocol, particularly in environments with higher prevalence of infection-related hearing loss. DPOAE is the preferred hearing screening tool when evaluating children younger than 7 years of age (below 2nd grade in the United States) due to the frequency of missing data with behavioral testing in this age group. For children 7 years and older, the addition of high frequencies to pure-tone screening increased the accuracy of screening, likely due to improved identification of hearing loss from noise exposure. The lack of a consistent reference standard in the literature makes comparing across studies challenging. In our study with a reference standard inclusive of otoscopy, tympanometry, and high frequencies, less than ideal sensitivities were found even for the most sensitive screening protocols, suggesting more investigation is necessary to ensure screening programs are appropriately identifying noise- and infection-related hearing loss in rural, low-resource settings.

The prevalence of Post-Ebola Syndrome hearing loss, Sierra Leone.

BACKGROUND: Globally, hearing loss is the second leading cause of disability, affecting approximately 18.7% of the world's population. However, the burden of hearing loss is unequally distributed, with the majority of affected individuals located in Asia or Sub-Saharan Africa. Following the 2014 West African Ebola Outbreak, disease survivors began to describe hearing loss as part of the constellation of symptoms known as Post-Ebola Syndrome. The goal of this study was to more fully characterize hearing loss among Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) survivors. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: EVD survivors and their household contacts were recruited (n = 1,12) from Eastern Sierra Leone. Each individual completed a symptom questionnaire, physical exam, and a two-step audiometry process measuring both air and bone conduction thresholds. In comparison to contacts, EVD survivors were more likely to have complaints or abnormal findings affecting every organ system. A significantly greater percentage of EVD survivors were found to have hearing loss in comparison to contacts (23% vs. 9%, p < 0.001). Additionally, survivors were more likely to have bilateral hearing loss of a mixed etiology. Logistic regression revealed that the presence of any symptoms of middle or inner ear (p < 0.001), eye (p = 0.005), psychiatric (p = 0.019), and nervous system (p = 0.037) increased the odds of developing hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: This study is the first to use an objective and standardized measurement to report hearing loss among EVD survivors in a clinically meaningful manner. In this study it was found that greater than 1/5th of EVD survivors develop hearing loss. The association between hearing impairment and symptoms affecting the eye and nervous system may indicate a similar mechanism of pathogenesis, which should be investigated further. Due to the quality of life and socioeconomic detriments associated with untreated hearing loss, a greater emphasis must be placed on understanding and mitigating hearing loss following survival to aid in economic recovery following infectious disease epidemics.

Expanding Clinical Trials Designs to Extend Equitable Hearing Care.

Clinical trials are critically important to translate scientific innovations into clinical practice. Hearing healthcare depends on this translational approach to improve outcomes and quality of life. Across the spectrum of healthcare, there is a lack of diverse participation in clinical trials, a failure to recruit and retain underrepresented and underserved populations, and an absence of rigorous dissemination and implementation of novel research to broader populations. The field of hearing healthcare research would benefit from expanding the types and designs of clinical trials that extend hearing healthcare and novel interventions to diverse populations, as well as emphasizing trials that evaluate factors influencing how that care can be delivered effectively. This article explores the following: (1) the role, value, and design types of clinical trials (randomized controlled, cluster randomized, stepped wedge, and mixed methods) to address health equity; (2) the importance of integrating community and stakeholder involvement; and (3) dissemination and implementation frameworks and designs for clinical trials (hybrid trial designs). By adopting a broader range of clinical trial designs, hearing healthcare researchers may be able to extend scientific discoveries to a more diverse population.

Early Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Experience With the Use of Telehealth to Address Disparities: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Health systems and providers across America are increasingly employing telehealth technologies to better serve medically underserved low-income, minority, and rural populations at the highest risk for health disparities. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) has invested US $386 million in comparative effectiveness research in telehealth, yet little is known about the key early lessons garnered from this research regarding the best practices in using telehealth to address disparities. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes preliminary lessons from the body of research using study findings and case studies drawn from PCORI seminal patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) initiatives. The primary purpose was to identify common barriers and facilitators to implementing telehealth technologies in populations at risk for disparities. METHODS: A systematic scoping review of telehealth studies addressing disparities was performed. It was guided by the Arksey and O'Malley Scoping Review Framework and focused on PCORI's active portfolio of telehealth studies and key PCOR identified by study investigators. We drew on this broad literature using illustrative examples from early PCOR experience and published literature to assess barriers and facilitators to implementing telehealth in populations at risk for disparities, using the active implementation framework to extract data. Major themes regarding how telehealth interventions can overcome barriers to telehealth adoption and implementation were identified through this review using an iterative Delphi process to achieve consensus among the PCORI investigators participating in the study. RESULTS: PCORI has funded 89 comparative effectiveness studies in telehealth, of which 41 assessed the use of telehealth to improve outcomes for populations at risk for health disparities. These 41 studies employed various overlapping modalities including mobile devices (29/41, 71%), web-based interventions (30/41, 73%), real-time videoconferencing (15/41, 37%), remote patient monitoring (8/41, 20%), and store-and-forward (ie, asynchronous electronic transmission) interventions (4/41, 10%). The studies targeted one or more of PCORI's priority populations, including racial and ethnic minorities (31/41, 41%), people living in rural areas, and those with low income/low socioeconomic status, low health literacy, or disabilities. Major themes identified across these studies included the importance of patient-centered design, cultural tailoring of telehealth solutions, delivering telehealth through trusted intermediaries, partnering with payers to expand telehealth reimbursement, and ensuring confidential sharing of private information. CONCLUSIONS: Early PCOR evidence suggests that the most effective health system- and provider-level telehealth implementation solutions to address disparities employ patient-centered and culturally tailored telehealth solutions whose development is actively guided by the patients themselves to meet the needs of specific communities and populations. Further, this evidence shows that the best practices in telehealth implementation include delivery of telehealth through trusted intermediaries, close partnership with payers to facilitate reimbursement and sustainability, and safeguards to ensure patient-guided confidential sharing of personal health information.

The inaugural World Report on Hearing: From barriers to a platform for change.

The inaugural World Report on Hearing was recently published by the World Health Organisation, and outlines the burden of hearing loss, and strategies to overcome this through preventative and public health approaches. Here, we identify barriers to wide-scale adoption, including historic low prioritisation of hearing loss against other public health needs, a lack of a health workforce with relevant training, poor access to assistive technology, and individual and community-level stigma and misunderstanding. Overcoming these barriers will require multi-sector stakeholder collaboration, involving ear and hearing care professionals, patients, communities, industry and policymakers.

Hearing care across the life course provided in the community.

Untreated hearing loss is recognized as a growing global health priority because of its prevalence and harmful effects on health and well-being. Until recently, little progress had been made in expanding hearing care beyond traditional clinic-based models to incorporate public health approaches that increase accessibility to and affordability of hearing care. As demonstrated in numerous countries and for many health conditions, sharing health-care tasks with community health workers (CHWs) offers advantages as a complementary approach to expand health-service delivery and improve public health. This paper explores the possibilities of task shifting to provide hearing care across the life course by reviewing several ongoing projects in a variety of settings - Bangladesh, India, South Africa and the United States of America. The selected programmes train CHWs to provide a range of hearing-care services, from childhood hearing screening to management of age-related hearing loss. We discuss lessons learnt from these examples to inform best practices for task shifting within community-delivered hearing care. Preliminary evidence supports the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of hearing care delivered by CHWs in these varied settings. To make further progress, community-delivered hearing care must build on established models of CHWs and ensure adequate training and supervision, delineation of the scope of practice, supportive local and national legislation, incorporation of appropriate technology and analysis of programme costs and cost-effectiveness. In view of the growing evidence, community-delivered hearing care may now be a way forward to improve hearing health equity.

La perte de l'acuité auditive non traitée est considérée comme une priorité sanitaire de plus en plus importante à l'échelle mondiale en raison de sa prévalence et de ses effets nocifs sur la santé et le bien-être. Jusqu'à récemment, peu de progrès avaient été accomplis pour développer les soins auditifs en dehors des modèles cliniques traditionnels de façon à intégrer des approches de santé publique permettant d'accroître l'accessibilité, notamment économique, des soins auditifs. Comme cela a été démontré dans de nombreux pays et pour de multiples problèmes de santé, transférer des tâches de soins de santé aux agents sanitaires des collectivités présente des avantages en tant qu'approche complémentaire permettant d'étendre la prestation des services de santé et d'améliorer la santé publique. Cette publication étudie les possibilités de transfert de tâches pour dispenser des soins auditifs tout au long de la vie en examinant plusieurs projets en cours à différents endroits ­ Bangladesh, Inde, Afrique du Sud et États-Unis d'Amérique. Les programmes sélectionnés apprennent aux agents sanitaires des collectivités à dispenser divers services de soins auditifs, du dépistage auditif chez les enfants à la gestion de la perte de l'acuité auditive liée à l'âge. Nous évoquons les leçons tirées de ces exemples pour définir les pratiques optimales concernant le transfert des tâches dans le cadre des soins auditifs dispensés dans des structures de proximité. Les observations préliminaires étayent la faisabilité, l'acceptabilité et l'efficacité des soins auditifs dispensés par les agents sanitaires des collectivités dans ces différents contextes. Pour continuer à progresser, les soins auditifs dispensés dans des structures de proximité doivent s'appuyer sur des modèles éprouvés d'agents sanitaires des collectivités. Il convient par ailleurs d'assurer une formation et une supervision adéquates, de délimiter le champ de pratique, d'adopter une législation locale et nationale favorable, d'intégrer une technologie appropriée et d'analyser les coûts du programme et le rapport coût-efficacité. Compte tenu du nombre croissant d'éléments d'appréciation, les soins auditifs dispensés dans des structures de proximité peuvent désormais constituer une solution pour améliorer l'équité en matière de santé auditive.

La pérdida de audición no tratada se reconoce como una prioridad sanitaria mundial cada vez mayor debido a su prevalencia y a sus efectos perjudiciales para la salud y el bienestar. Recientemente, se había avanzado poco en la expansión de la asistencia auditiva más allá de los modelos tradicionales basados en clínicas para incorporar enfoques de salud pública que aumenten la accesibilidad y asequibilidad de la asistencia auditiva. Como se ha demostrado en numerosos países y para muchas condiciones sanitarias, delegar las tareas de atención sanitaria a los trabajadores sanitarios de la comunidad (CHW) ofrece ventajas como enfoque complementario para ampliar la prestación de servicios sanitarios y mejorar la salud pública. Este documento explora las posibilidades de la delegación de funciones para ofrecer atención auditiva a lo largo de toda la vida mediante la revisión de distintos proyectos en curso en una variedad de entornos: Bangladesh, Estados Unidos de América, India y Sudáfrica. Los programas seleccionados capacitan a los CHW para que ofrezcan una amplia gama de servicios de atención auditiva, desde exámenes auditivos para la infancia hasta el tratamiento de la pérdida de audición relacionada con la edad. Discutimos las lecciones aprendidas de estos ejemplos para informar las mejores prácticas sobre la delegación de funciones dentro de la atención auditiva proporcionada en la comunidad. La evidencia preliminar apoya la factibilidad, aceptabilidad y efectividad de la atención auditiva proporcionada por los CHW en estos variados entornos. Para seguir avanzando, la atención auditiva proporcionada en la comunidad debe basarse en modelos establecidos de los CHW y garantizar una formación y supervisión adecuadas, la delimitación del campo de aplicación, el apoyo de la legislación local y nacional, la incorporación de la tecnología adecuada y el análisis de los costes de los programas y la relación coste-eficacia. En vista de las pruebas cada vez más numerosas, la atención auditiva proporcionada en la comunidad puede ser ahora una solución para mejorar la equidad en la salud auditiva.

Child stunting is associated with weaker human capital among native Amazonians.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed associations between child stunting, recovery, and faltering with schooling and human capital skills in a native Amazonian society of horticulturalists-foragers (Tsimane'). METHODS: We used cross-sectional data (2008) from 1262 children aged 6 to 16 years in 53 villages to assess contemporaneous associations between three height categories: stunted (height-for-age Z score, HAZ<-2), moderately stunted (-2 ≤ HAZ≤-1), and nonstunted (HAZ>-1), and three categories of human capital: completed grades of schooling, test-based academic skills (math, reading, writing), and local plant knowledge. We used annual longitudinal data (2002-2010) from all children (n = 853) in 13 villages to estimate the association between changes in height categories between the first and last years of measure and schooling and academic skills. RESULTS: Stunting was associated with 0.4 fewer completed grades of schooling (∼24% less) and with 13-15% lower probability of showing any writing or math skills. Moderate stunting was associated with ∼20% lower scores in local plant knowledge and 9% lower probability of showing writing skills, but was not associated with schooling or math and writing skills. Compared with nonstunted children, children who became stunted had 18-21% and 15-21% lower probabilities of showing math and writing skills, and stunted children had 0.4 fewer completed grades of schooling. Stunted children who recovered showed human capital outcomes that were indistinguishable from nonstunted children. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirm adverse associations between child stunting and human capital skills. Predictors of growth recovery and faltering can affect human capital outcomes, even in a remote, economically self-sufficient society.

Birth seasons and heights among girls and boys below 12 years of age: lasting effects and catch-up growth among native Amazonians in Bolivia.

BACKGROUND: Seasons affect many social, economic, and biological outcomes, particularly in low-resource settings, and some studies suggest that birth season affects child growth. AIM: To study a predictor of stunting that has received limited attention: birth season. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This study uses cross-sectional data collected during 2008 in a low-resource society of horticulturists-foragers in the Bolivian Amazon, Tsimane'. It estimates the associations between birth months and height-for-age Z-scores (HAZ) for 562 girls and 546 boys separately, from birth until age 11 years or pre-puberty, which in this society occurs ∼13-14 years. RESULTS: Children born during the rainy season (February-May) were shorter, while children born during the end of the dry season and the start of the rainy season (August-November) were taller, both compared with their age-sex peers born during the rest of the year. The correlations of birth season with HAZ were stronger for boys than for girls. Controlling for birth season, there is some evidence of eventual partial catch-up growth, with the HAZ of girls or boys worsening until ∼ age 4-5 years, but improving thereafter. By age 6 years, many girls and boys had ceased to be stunted, irrespective of birth season. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that redressing stunting will require attention to conditions in utero, infancy and late childhood.

Hearing-related quality of life in children and adolescents in rural Alaska.

Objective: This study evaluated the Hearing Environments and Reflection on Quality of Life (HEAR-QL) questionnaire in rural Alaska, including an addendum crafted through community feedback to reflect the local context. The objectives were to assess whether HEAR-QL score was inversely correlated with hearing loss and middle ear disease in an Alaska Native population. Methods: The HEAR-QL questionnaires for children and adolescents were administered as part of a cluster randomized trial in rural Alaska from 2017 to 2019. Enrolled students completed an audiometric evaluation and HEAR-QL questionnaire on the same day. A cross-sectional evaluation of questionnaire data was utilized. Results: A total of 733 children (ages 7-12 years) and 440 adolescents (ages ≥13 years) completed the questionnaire. Median HEAR-QL scores were similar among children with and without hearing loss (Kruskal-Wallis, p = .39); however, adolescent HEAR-QL scores significantly decreased with increasing hearing loss (p < .001). Median HEAR-QL scores were significantly lower in both children (p = .02) and adolescents (p < .001) with middle ear disease compared with those without. In both children and adolescents, the addendum scores were strongly correlated with total HEAR-QL score (ρSpearman = 0.72 and 0.69, respectively). Conclusions: The expected negative association between hearing loss and HEAR-QL score was observed in adolescents. However, there was significant variability that could not be explained by hearing loss, and further investigation is warranted. The expected negative association was not observed in children. HEAR-QL scores were associated with middle ear disease in both children and adolescents, making it potentially valuable in populations where the prevalence of ear infections is high. Level of Evidence: Level 2 Clinicaltrials.gov registration numbers: NCT03309553.

Potential Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids in the US.

Importance: Over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids are now available in the US; however, their clinical and economic outcomes are unknown. Objective: To project the clinical and economic outcomes of traditional hearing aid provision compared with OTC hearing aid provision. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cost-effectiveness analysis used a previously validated decision model of hearing loss (HL) to simulate US adults aged 40 years and older across their lifetime in US primary care offices who experienced yearly probabilities of acquiring HL (0.1%-10.4%), worsening of their HL, and traditional hearing aid uptake (0.5%-8.1%/y at a fixed uptake cost of $3690) and utility benefits (0.11 additional utils/y). For OTC hearing aid provision, persons with perceived mild to moderate HL experienced increased OTC hearing aid uptake (1%-16%/y) based on estimates of time to first HL diagnosis. In the base case, OTC hearing aid utility benefits ranged from 0.05 to 0.11 additional utils/y (45%-100% of traditional hearing aids), and costs were $200 to $1400 (5%-38% of traditional hearing aids). Distributions were assigned to parameters to conduct probabilistic uncertainty analysis. Intervention: Provision of OTC hearing aids, at increased uptake rates, across a range of effectiveness and costs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Lifetime undiscounted and discounted (3%/y) costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results: Traditional hearing aid provision resulted in 18.162 QALYs, compared with 18.162 to 18.186 for OTC hearing aids varying with OTC hearing aid utility benefit (45%-100% that of traditional hearing aids). Provision of OTC hearing aids was associated with greater lifetime discounted costs by $70 to $200 along with OTC device cost ($200-$1000/pair; 5%-38% traditional hearing aid cost) due to increased hearing aid uptake. Provision of OTC hearing aids was considered cost-effective (ICER<$100 000/QALY) if the OTC utility benefit was 0.06 or greater (55% of the traditional hearing aid effectiveness). In probabilistic uncertainty analysis, OTC hearing aid provision was cost-effective in 53% of simulations. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cost-effectiveness analysis, provision of OTC hearing aids was associated with greater uptake of hearing intervention and was cost-effective over a range of prices so long as OTC hearing aids were greater than 55% as beneficial to patient quality of life as traditional hearing aids.

Estimated Monetary Value of Future Research Clarifying Uncertainties Around the Optimal Adult Hearing Screening Schedule.

Importance: Adult hearing screening is not routinely performed, and most individuals with hearing loss (HL) have never had their hearing tested as adults. Objective: To project the monetary value of future research clarifying uncertainties around the optimal adult hearing screening schedule. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this economic evaluation, a validated decision model of HL (DeciBHAL-US: Decision model of the Burden of Hearing loss Across the Lifespan) was used to simulate current detection and treatment of HL vs hearing screening schedules. Key model inputs included HL incidence (0.06%-10.42%/y), hearing aid uptake (0.54%-8.14%/y), screening effectiveness (1.62 × hearing aid uptake), utility benefits of hearing aids (+0.11), and hearing aid device costs ($3690). Distributions to model parameters for probabilistic uncertainty analysis were assigned. The expected value of perfect information (EVPI) and expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI) using a willingness to pay of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was estimated. The EVPI and EVPPI estimate the upper bound of the dollar value of future research. This study was based on 40-year-old persons over their remaining lifetimes in a US primary care setting. Exposures: Screening schedules beginning at ages 45, 55, 65, and 75 years, and frequencies of every 1 or 5 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were QALYs and costs (2020 US dollars) from a health system perspective. Results: The average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for yearly screening beginning at ages 55 to 75 years ranged from $39 200 to $80 200/QALY. Yearly screening beginning at age 55 years was the optimal screening schedule in 38% of probabilistic uncertainty analysis simulations. The population EVPI, or value of reducing all uncertainty, was $8.2 to $12.6 billion varying with willingness to pay and the EVPPI, or value of reducing all screening effectiveness uncertainty, was $2.4 billion. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation of US adult hearing screening, large uncertainty around the optimal adult hearing screening schedule was identified. Future research on hearing screening has a high potential value so is likely justified.

Mobile health school screening and telemedicine referral to improve access to specialty care in rural Alaska: a cluster- randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: School-based programmes, including hearing screening, provide essential preventive services for rural children. However, minimal evidence on screening methodologies, loss to follow-up, and scarcity of specialists for subsequent care compound rural health disparities. We hypothesised telemedicine specialty referral would improve time to follow-up for school hearing screening compared with standard primary care referral. METHODS: In this cluster-randomised controlled trial conducted in 15 rural Alaskan communities, USA, we randomised communities to telemedicine specialty referral (intervention) or standard primary care referral (control) for school hearing screening. All children (K-12; aged 4-21 years) enrolled in Bering Straight School District were eligible. Community randomisation occurred within four strata using location and school size. Participants were masked to group allocation until screening day, and assessors were masked throughout data collection. Screening occurred annually, and children who screened positive for possible hearing loss or ear disease were monitored for 9 months from the screening date for follow-up. Primary outcome was the time to follow-up after a positive hearing screen; analysis was by intention to treat. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03309553. FINDINGS: We recruited participants between Oct 10, 2017, and March 28, 2019. 15 communities were randomised: eight (750 children) to telemedicine referral and seven (731 children) to primary care referral. 790 (53·3%) of 1481 children screened positive in at least one study year: 391 (52∤1%) in the telemedicine referral communities and 399 (50∤4%) in the primary care referral communities. Of children referred, 268 (68·5%) in the telemedicine referral communities and 128 (32·1%) in primary care referral communities received follow-up within 9 months. Among children who received follow-up, mean time to follow-up was 41·5 days (SD 55·7) in the telemedicine referral communities and 92·0 days (75·8) in the primary care referral communities (adjusted event-time ratio 17·6 [95% CI 6·8-45·3] for all referred children). There were no adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Telemedicine specialty referral significantly improved the time to follow-up after hearing screening in Alaska. Telemedicine might apply to other preventive school-based services to improve access to specialty care for rural children. FUNDING: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.