Blast Exposure Associations With Hearing Loss and Self-Reported Hearing Difficulty.

OBJECTIVE: Examine associations between military blast exposures on hearing loss and self-reported hearing difficulties among Active-Duty Service Members (ADSM) and Veterans from the Noise Outcomes in Servicemembers Epidemiology (NOISE) study. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: Multi-institutional tertiary referral centers. METHODS: Blast exposure was assessed with a comprehensive blast questionnaire. Outcome measures included pure-tone hearing thresholds; Speech Recognition in Noise Test; Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults (HHIA); and Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ)-12. RESULTS: Twenty-one percent (102/494) of ADSM and 36.8% (196/533) of Veterans self-reported blast exposure. Compared to ADSM without blast exposure, blast-exposed ADSM had increased odds of high frequency (3-8 kHz) and extended-high frequency (9-16 kHz) hearing loss (odds ratio [OR] = 2.5, CI: 1.3, 4.7; OR = 3.7, CI: 1.9, 7.0, respectively). ADSM and Veterans with blast exposure were more likely than their nonblast exposed counterparts to report hearing difficulty on the HHIA (OR = 1.9, CI: 1.1, 3.3; OR = 2.1, CI: 1.4, 3.2, respectively). Those with self-reported blast exposure also had lower SSQ-12 scores (ADSM mean difference = -0.6, CI: -1.0, -0.1; Veteran mean difference: -0.9, CI: -1.3, -0.5). CONCLUSION: Results suggest that blast exposure is a prevalent source of hearing injury in the military. We found that among ADSM, blast exposure was associated with hearing loss, predominately in the higher frequencies. Blast exposure was associated with poorer self-perceived hearing ability in ADSM and Veterans. IRB: #FWH20180143H Joint Base San Antonio (JBSA) Military Healthcare System; #3159/9495 Joint VA Portland Health Care System (VAPORHCS) Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU).

Descriptive Characterization of High-Frequency Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission Source Components in Children.

PURPOSE: Distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) provide an objective assessment of cochlear function and are used for serial ototoxicity monitoring in pediatric cancer patients. DPOAEs are modeled as having distortion (near f2) and reflection (near 2f1-f2) component sources, and developmental changes are observed in these components' relative strengths in infants compared with adults. However, little is known about source component strengths in childhood or at extended high frequencies (EHFs; > 8 kHz). Thus, the purpose of this study was to describe the effects of age and stimulus frequency on DPOAE components in children. METHOD: DPOAEs were collected with varied frequency ratios (f2/f1 = 1.1-1.25) for a wide range of frequencies (2-16 kHz) in 39 younger (3-6 years) and 41 older (10-12 years) children with constant levels (L1/L2) of 65/50 dB SPL. A depth-compensated simulator sound pressure level method of calibration was employed. A time waveform representation of the results across various ratios was created to estimate peak pressures and latencies of each DPOAE component. RESULTS: Estimated peak pressures of DPOAE components revealed the greatest differences in DPOAE sources between children occurring at the highest frequencies tested, where the peak pressure of both components was largest for younger compared with older children. Latency differences between the children were only noted at higher frequencies for the distortion component. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that DPOAE levels decrease with age and reflection emissions are vulnerable to cochlear change. This work guides optimization of protocols for pediatric ototoxicity monitoring, whereby including EHF otoacoustic emissions is clearly warranted and choosing to isolate DPOAE sources may prove beneficial. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.23669214.

Occupational Noise Exposure and Longitudinal Hearing Changes in Post-9/11 US Military Personnel During an Initial Period of Military Service.

OBJECTIVES: Auditory impairments, particularly those resulting from hazardous occupational noise exposures, are pressing concerns for the US Departments of Defense (DoD) and Veterans Affairs (VA). However, to date, no studies have estimated the rate of hearing threshold change that occurs during service or how changes may vary by military occupation. Hearing threshold changes during military service have historically been reported as the proportion of Service members demonstrating a significant threshold shift. This approach does not capture the rate of the hearing threshold change or the specific audiometric frequencies impacted. Determining the rate of hearing threshold change, and factors that affect the rate of change, is important to elucidate the impact of military service on hearing and to guide prevention strategies and subsequent hearing health care. Our primary objective was to estimate the annual rate of hearing threshold change during military service as a consequence of military occupational noise exposure ranking. DESIGN: We linked audiometric data, collected from military personnel as part of a DoD hearing conservation program, to data describing demographic and military-service characteristics obtained from individuals enrolled in the Noise Outcomes In Service members Epidemiology Study. The analytic cohort included Veterans who enlisted in military service after September 2001 (n = 246). We examined the longitudinal association between military occupations categorized as having a low, moderate, or high noise exposure ranking and pure-tone hearing thresholds (500 to 6000 Hz) using a hierarchical linear model. The average annual rate of hearing threshold change and their 95% confidence intervals were estimated by service branch, military occupational noise exposure ranking, and audiometric test frequency. RESULTS: On average, hearing threshold change ranged between -0.5 and 1.1 dB/year and changes over time varied by service branch, audiometric test frequency, and military occupation noise ranking. Generally, higher test frequencies (3000 to 6000 Hz) and military occupations with moderate or high noise exposure rankings had the greatest average annual rates of hearing threshold change; however, no dose-response relationship was observed. Among Marine Corps personnel, those exposed to occupations with high noise rankings demonstrated the greatest average annual rate of change (1.1 dB/year at 6000 Hz). Army personnel exposed to occupations with moderate noise rankings demonstrated the greatest average annual rate of change (0.6 dB/year at 6000 Hz). CONCLUSIONS: This study (1) demonstrates the unique use of DoD hearing conservation program data, (2) is the first analysis of hearing threshold changes over time using such data, and (3) adds to the limited literature on longitudinal changes in hearing. The difference in hearing threshold changes across military branches is likely indicative of their varying noise exposures, hearing protection device use and enforcement, and surveillance practices. Results suggest Marine Corps and Army personnel are at risk for hearing threshold changes and that, among Army personnel, this is most pronounced among those exposed to moderate levels of occupational noise exposure. Estimates of the rate of hearing threshold change by frequency and factors that impact hearing are useful to inform the DoD's efforts to protect the hearing of their Service members and to the Veterans Affairs's efforts to identify and rehabilitate those most likely to experience hearing threshold change.

Proposed comprehensive ototoxicity monitoring program for VA healthcare (COMP-VA).

Prevention and rehabilitation of hearing loss and tinnitus, the two most commonly awarded service-connected disabilities, are high priority initiatives in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). At least 4,000 Veterans, most with significant hearing loss, will receive cisplatin this year, with more than half sustaining permanent hearing shift and nearly 40% developing new tinnitus. With improved survivability following cancer treatment, Veterans treated with cisplatin are approached with the dual goals of effective treatment and preserved quality of life. This article describes COMP-VA, a comprehensive ototoxicity monitoring program developed for VA patients receiving cisplatin. The program includes an individualized pretreatment prediction model that identifies the likelihood of hearing shift given cisplatin dose and patient factors. It supports both manual and automated hearing testing with a newly developed portable audiometer capable of performing the recommended procedures on the chemotherapy unit during treatment. It also includes objective methods for identifying outer hair cell changes and predicting audiogram changes using distortion-product otoacoustic emissions. We describe this program of evidence-based ototoxicity monitoring protocols using a case example to give the reader an understanding of how this program would be applied, along with a plan for future work to accomplish the final stages of program development.

The statistical basis for serial monitoring in audiology.

OBJECTIVES: Audiologists regularly use serial monitoring to evaluate changes in a patient's auditory function over time. Observed changes are compared with reference standards to determine whether further clinical action is necessary. Reference standards are established in a control sample of otherwise healthy subjects to identify the range of auditory shifts that one might reasonably expect to occur in the absence of any pathological insult. Statistical approaches to this seemingly mundane problem typically invoke 1 of 3 approaches: percentiles of the cumulative distribution, the variance of observed shifts, and the "standard error of measurement." In this article, the authors describe the statistical foundation for these approaches, along with a mixed model-based alternative, and identify several necessary, although typically unacknowledged assumptions. Regression to the mean, the phenomenon of an unusual measurement typically followed by a more common one, can seriously bias observed changes in auditory function and clinical expectations. An approach that adjusts for this important effect is also described. DESIGN: Distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) elicited at a single primary frequency, f2 of 3175 Hz, were collected from 32 healthy subjects at baseline and 19 to 29 days later. Ninety percent test-retest reference limits were computed from these data using each statistical approach. DPOAE shifts were also collected from a sample of 18 cisplatin patients tested after 120 to 200 mg of cisplatin. Reference limits established according to each of the statistical approaches in the healthy sample were used to identify clinically alarming DPOAE shifts in the cisplatin patient sample. RESULTS: Reference limits established with any of the parametric methods were similar. The percentile-based approach gave the widest and least precisely estimated intervals. The highest sensitivity for detecting clinically alarming DPOAE shifts was based on a mixed model approach that adjusts for regression to the mean. CONCLUSIONS: Parametric methods give similar serial monitoring criteria as long as certain critical assumptions are met by the data. The most flexible method for estimating test-retest limits is based on the linear mixed model. Clinical sensitivity may be further enhanced by adjusting for regression to the mean.

Multivariate DPOAE metrics for identifying changes in hearing: perspectives from ototoxicity monitoring.

Distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) provide a window into real-time cochlear mechanical function. Yet, relationships between the changes in DPOAE metrics and auditory sensitivity are still poorly understood. Explicating these relationships might support the use of DPOAEs in hearing conservation programs (HCPs) for detecting early damage leading to noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) so that mitigating steps might be taken to limit any lasting damage. This report describes the development of DPOAE-based statistical models to assess the risk of hearing loss from cisplatin treatment among cancer patients. Ototoxicity risk assessment (ORA) models were constructed using a machine learning paradigm in which partial least squares and leave-one-out cross-validation were applied, yielding optimal screening algorithms from a set of known risk factors for ototoxicity and DPOAE changes from pre-exposure baseline measures. Single DPOAE metrics alone were poorer indicators of the risk of ototoxic hearing shifts than the best performing multivariate models. This finding suggests that multivariate approaches applied to the use of DPOAEs in a HCP, will improve the ability of DPOAE measures to identify ears with noise-induced mechanical damage and/or hearing loss at each monitoring interval. This prediction must be empirically assessed in noise-exposed subjects.

Distortion-product otoacoustic emission test performance for ototoxicity monitoring.

INTRODUCTION: A nonbehavioral method for monitoring ototoxicity in patients treated with cisplatin is needed because patients enduring chemotherapy may not be well or cooperative enough to undergo repeated hearing tests. Distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) provide a nonbehavioral measure of auditory function that is sensitive to cisplatin exposure. However, interpreting DPOAE findings in the context of ototoxicity monitoring requires that their accuracy be determined in relation to a clinically accepted gold standard test. OBJECTIVES: Among patients receiving cisplatin for the treatment of cancer, we sought to (1) identify the combination of DPOAE metrics and ototoxicity risk factors that best classified ears with and without ototoxic-induced hearing changes; and (2) evaluate the test performance achieved by the composite measure as well as by DPOAEs alone. DESIGN: Odds of experiencing hearing changes at a given patient visit were determined using data collected prospectively from 24 Veterans receiving cisplatin. Pure-tone thresholds were examined within an octave of each subject's high-frequency hearing limit. DPOAE were collected as a set of four response growth (input/output) functions near the highest f2 frequency that yielded a robust response at L2 = L1 = 65 dB SPL. Logistic regression modeled the risk of hearing change using several DPOAE metrics, drug treatment factors, and other patient factors as independent variables. An optimal discriminant function was derived by reducing the model so that only statistically significant variables were included. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were used to evaluate test performance. RESULTS: At higher cisplatin doses, ears with better hearing at baseline were more likely to exhibit ototoxic hearing changes than those with poorer hearing. Measures of pre-exposure hearing, cumulative drug dose, and DPOAEs generated a highly accurate discriminant function with a cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.9. DPOAEs alone also provided an indication of ototoxic hearing change when measured at the highest DPOAE test frequency that yielded a robust response. CONCLUSIONS: DPOAEs alone and especially in combination with pre-exposure hearing and cisplatin dose provide an indication of whether or not hearing has changed as a result of cisplatin administration. These promising results need to be validated in a separate sample.

Ototoxicity risk assessment combining distortion product otoacoustic emissions with a cisplatin dose model.

An objective method for identifying ototoxic hearing loss among patients receiving cisplatin is necessary since the ability of patients to take a behavioral test may change over the course of treatment. Data from 56 monitoring visits by 19 Veterans taking cisplatin were used to identify combinations of distortion-product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) metrics and ototoxicity risk factors that best identified ototoxic hearing loss. Models were tested that incorporated DPOAE metrics generated statistically using partial least-squares analysis. Models were also tested that incorporated a priori DPOAE change criteria, such as a minimum DPOAE level shift of 6 dB. Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis was used to compare the accuracy of these models. The best performing model incorporated weighted combinations of pre-treatment hearing, cumulative cisplatin dose and DPOAE metrics that were determined using partial least-squares and evaluated over a quarter octave range near each subjects' high frequency DPOAE limit. Using this model and the DPOAE recording methods described herein, the chance of ototoxic hearing change can be determined at any given observed change in DPOAE level. This approach appears to provide an accurate and rapid ototoxicity risk assessment (ORA) that once validated can be used clinically.

Tinnitus onset rates from chemotherapeutic agents and ototoxic antibiotics: results of a large prospective study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To report on the incidence and relative risk of tinnitus onset from a variety of drug therapies known to be ototoxic. Two main questions were asked: (1) What is the prevalence and incidence of tinnitus among patients treated with cisplatin, carboplatin, or ototoxic antibiotic therapies? (2) Do commonly reported treatment or subject factors confound or modify the incidence of tinnitus onset? DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A prospective observational study design was used to evaluate occurrence of significant otologic changes in 488 veterans (962 ears) receiving chemotherapeutic agents (cisplatin, carboplatin), ototoxic antibiotics (primarily aminoglycoside), or nonototoxic drugs (control medications). A subset of 260 veterans lacking tinnitus prior to drug exposure was used to compare rates of tinnitus onset. Subjects were tested prior to, during, and following their treatment. Planned comparisons using logistic regression, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and chi(2) statistics were made among groups by the type of medication taken, age, presence of preexisting hearing loss, days on drug, and cumulative dose of drug. RESULTS: Baseline tinnitus rates were high (nearly 47%) relative to the general population of a similar age. Subjects with exposure to ototoxic medications had significantly increased risk for developing tinnitus. Those on chemotherapeutic agents were found to have the greatest risk. Cisplatin elevated the risk by 5.53 times while carboplatin increased the risk by 3.75 over nonototoxic control medications. Ototoxic antibiotics resulted in borderline risk (2.81) for new tinnitus. Contrary to other reports, we did not find that subject factors (increased age or pre-existing hearing loss) or treatment factors (days on drug or cumulative dose) contributed to rates of tinnitus onset during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This large prospective study confirms that new tinnitus during treatment is associated with chemotherapy and with certain ototoxic antibiotic treatment. Cisplatin and carboplatin were found to be the most potent ototoxic agents causing tinnitus at much greater numbers than the other drugs studied. Implications for counseling and audiological resource allocation are discussed.

Factors associated with delayed treatment of acute testicular torsion-do demographics or interhospital transfer matter?

PURPOSE: Testicular torsion is a true urological emergency. We determined whether a delay in treatment due to hospital transfer or socioeconomic factors would impact the orchiectomy rate in children with this condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the records of boys seen at a single institution emergency department who proceeded to surgery for a diagnosis of acute testicular torsion from 2003 to 2008. Charts were reviewed for transfer status, symptom duration, race, insurance presence or absence and distance from the hospital. Orchiectomy specimens were evaluated for histological confirmation of nonviability. RESULTS: We reviewed 97 records. The orchiectomy rate in patients who were vs were not transferred to the emergency department was 47.8% vs 68.9%, respectively (p = 0.07). Symptom duration was greater in the orchiectomy group with a mean difference of 47.9 hours (p <0.01). The mean transfer delay was 1 hour 15 minutes longer in the orchiectomy group (p = 0.01). Boys who underwent orchiectomy were 2.2 years younger than those who avoided orchiectomy (p = 0.01). Multivariate analysis showed that symptom duration and distance from the hospital were the strongest predictors of orchiectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Data suggest that torsion is a time dependent event and factors that delay time to treatment lead to poorer outcomes. These factors include distance from the hospital and the time delay associated with hospital transfer.

Evaluation of audiometric threshold shift criteria for ototoxicity monitoring.

BACKGROUND: There is disagreement about ototoxicity monitoring methods. Controversy exists about what audiometric threshold shift criteria should be used, which frequencies should be tested, and with what step size. An evaluation of the test performance achieved using various criteria and methods for ototoxicity monitoring may help resolve these issues. PURPOSE: (1) Evaluate test performance achieved using various significant threshold shift (STS) definitions for ototoxicity monitoring in a predominately veteran population; and (2) determine whether testing in (1/6)- or (1/3)-octave steps improves test performance compared to (1/2)-octave steps. RESEARCH DESIGN: A prospective, observational study design was used in which STSs were evaluated at frequencies within an octave of each subject's high-frequency hearing limit at two time points, an early monitoring test and the final monitoring test. STUDY SAMPLE: Data were analyzed from 78 ears of 41 patients receiving cisplatin and from 53 ears of 28 hospitalized patients receiving nonototoxic antibiotics. Cisplatin-treated subjects received a cumulative dosage > or =350 mg by the final monitoring test. Testing schedule, age, and pre-exposure hearing characteristics were similar between the subject groups. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Threshold shifts relative to baseline were examined to determine whether they met criteria based on magnitudes of positive STS (shifts of > or =5, 10, 15, or 20 dB) and numbers of frequencies affected (shifts at > or =1, 2, or 3 adjacent frequencies) for data collected using approximately (1/6)-, (1/3)-, or (1/2)-octave steps. Thresholds were confirmed during monitoring sessions in which shifts were identified. Test performance was evaluated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves developed using a surrogate "gold standard"; true positive (TP) rates were derived from the cisplatin-exposed group and false positive (FP) rates from the nonexposed, control group. Best STS definitions were identified that achieved the greatest areas under ROC curves or resulted in the highest TP rates for a fixed FP rate near 5%, chosen to minimize the number of patients incorrectly diagnosed with ototoxic hearing loss. RESULTS: At the early monitoring test, average threshold shifts differed only slightly across groups. Test-frequency step size did not affect performance, and changes at one or more frequencies yielded the best test performance. At the final monitoring test, average threshold shifts were +10.5 dB for the cisplatin group, compared with -0.2 dB for the control group. Compared with the (1/2)-octave step size used clinically, use of smaller frequency steps improved test performance for threshold shifts at > or =2 or > or =3 adjacent frequencies. Best overall test performance was achieved using a criterion cutoff of > or =10 dB threshold shift at > or =2 adjacent frequencies tested in (1/6)-octave steps. Best test performance for the (1/2)-octave step size was achieved for shifts > or =15 dB at one or more frequencies. CONCLUSIONS: An ototoxicity monitoring protocol that uses an individualized, one-octave range of frequencies tested in (1/6)-octave steps is quick to administer and has an acceptable FP rate. Similar test performance can be achieved using (1/3)-octave test frequencies, which further reduces monitoring test time.

Factors affecting sensitivity of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions to ototoxic hearing loss.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To determine the ototoxicity detection rate (sensitivity) for distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) testing in adults who received ototoxic medications and experienced pure-tone threshold changes during the course of treatment; (2) to determine the extent to which DPOAE sensitivity to ototoxicity depends on the type of drug administered (platinum or antibiotic), magnitude of ototoxic threshold shifts, pre-exposure pure-tone threshold, and DPOAE data; and (3) to build a model to predict DPOAE sensitivity. DESIGN: DPOAE and audiometric data were obtained as part of a prospective Veterans Affairs study investigating methods of ototoxicity monitoring. Data were analyzed from 90 ears of 53 subjects receiving ototoxic medications and showing significant hearing changes in at least one ear. Pure-tone threshold data were obtained at frequencies from 0.5 to 20 kHz, using 1/6-octave precision near the upper frequency limit of hearing. DPOAE data are reported for f2's from 0.8 to 8.0 kHz in 1/6-octave increments using primary levels (L1/L2) of 65/59 dB SPL and a primary frequency ratio (f2/f1) of 1.2. Test results were evaluated at various times during drug treatment to determine whether DPOAE level changes were associated with behavioral hearing changes. Univariate and multivariate analysis techniques were used to determine factors that affected DPOAE sensitivity to ototoxic damage. RESULTS: Of the 90 ears examined, 82 (91%) had DPOAEs that could be monitored for changes. Sixty-four of these 82 ears (78%) had DPOAEs that were reduced or absent following drug treatment. DPOAE sensitivity to ototoxicity was unrelated to the type of ototoxic drug administered. Rather, DPOAE sensitivity depended on the magnitude of postexposure hearing changes and on variables related to pre-exposure audiogram and DPOAE measurements. Behavioral hearing changes not detected by DPOAEs were small on average (<7 dB). DPOAE sensitivity was reduced in ears with poorer pre-exposure hearing, and in ears with measurable DPOAE frequencies limited to f2's below 2.5 kHz or more than one octave from the frequency region where hearing change occurred. Results of logistic regression modeling showed that DPOAEs present at f2's greater than 2.5 kHz were associated with the eventual success of ototoxicity monitoring with DPOAEs. However, independent variables examined could not explain differences in the relative timing of behavioral and DPOAE changes. A roughly equivalent proportion of ears experienced DPOAE changes before, during, or after behavioral hearing changes. CONCLUSIONS: DPOAEs are a useful screening tool for ototoxicity in adults with pre-exposure hearing loss, but are less sensitive compared with a behavioral test method that targets thresholds near the upper limit of a subject's audible frequency range. Ears successfully monitored for ototoxicity with DPOAEs are those with better pre-exposure hearing, greater postexposure hearing changes, and baseline DPOAEs near the highest behavioral test frequencies and present at high f2's. Results suggest that successful monitoring of ototoxicity with DPOAEs may be predicted clinically by assessing the measurable DPOAE f2 frequency range and its relation to the highest behavioral test frequencies.