Acesso a serviço de saúde e reabilitação auditiva de adultos e idosos durante o período inicial da pandemia COVID-19 no Brasil / Access to health service and hearing rehabilitation for adult and older adults during the initial period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil / Acceso a servicios de salud yrehabilitación auditiva para adultos y ancianos durante el período inicial de la pandemia COVID-19 en Brasil

Introdução: A perda auditiva é uma deficiência comum na população mundial e contribui para dificuldade na comunicação verbal e redução da qualidade de vida, evidenciando a importância da identificação precoce, reabilitação e acompanhamento audiológico dessa deficiência para mitigar suas consequências. Durante a pandemia da COVID-19, as medidas restritivas diminuíram a capacidade de atendimento dos serviços de saúde auditiva e dificultaram a busca de auxílio para resolver problemas relacionados à adaptação aos dispositivos eletrônicos de amplificação sonora (DAES), sendo uma barreira no processo de reabilitação da perda auditiva. Objetivo: Caracterizar os usuários de DEAS e o processo inicial de reabilitação auditiva de adultos e idosos e verificar fatores associados ao retorno para a consulta de monitoramento auditivo durante o período inicial da pandemia da COVID-19.Métodos: Estudo observacional transversal com usuários adultos e idosos de um serviço ambulatorial de saúde auditiva com retorno para consulta de monitoramento auditivo agendada no período inicial da implementação das medidas restritivas da pandemia da COVID-19 no Brasil. Resultados: A maioria dos participantes conseguiu retornou para a consulta de monitoramento auditivo, sendo eles em sua maioria idosos, do sexo feminino e vacinados contra a COVID-19. Houve maior prevalência de adaptação adequada aos DAES. Não houve associação estatística entre as variáveis relacionadas à adaptação aos DAES, COVID-19 e saúde mental e o retorno à consulta de monitoramento auditivo. Conclusão: Os fatores relacionados à adaptação aos DAES, à COVID-19 ou à saúde mental não influenciaram o retorno à consulta de monitoramento auditivo na presente pesquisa. (AU)

Introduction: Hearing loss is a common disability in the world population and contributes to difficulty in verbal communication and reduced quality of life, highlighting the importance of early identification, rehabilitation and audiological monitoring of this disability to mitigate its consequences. During the COVID-19 pandemic, restrictive measures reduced the service capacity of hearing health services and made it difficult to seek help to solve problems related to adaptation to personal sound amplification products (PSAPs), being a barrier in the rehabilitation process of hearing loss. Aim: To characterize PSAPs users and the initial hearing rehabilitation process for adults and elderly people and verify the factors associated with the return to hearing monitoring consultations in the initial period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Cross-sectional observational study with adults and elderly people: elderly users of an outpatient hearing health service who return for a scheduled hearing monitoring consultation in the initial period of the implementation of restrictive measures of the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. Results: Most participants were able to return to the hearing monitoring clinic, the majority of whom were elderly, female and vaccinated against COVID-19. There was a higher prevalence of adequate adaptation to the PSAPs. There was no statistical association between variables related to adaptation to PSAPs, COVID-19 and mental health and return to hearing monitoring consultation. Conclusion: Factors related to adaptation to PSAPs, COVID-19 or mental health did not influence the return to hearing monitoring consultation in the present investigation. (AU)

Introducción: La pérdida auditiva es una discapacidad común en la población mundial y contribuye a la dificultad en la comunicación verbal y a la reducción de la calidad de vida, destacando la importancia de la identificación temprana, rehabilitación y seguimiento audiológico de esta discapacidad para mitigar sus consecuencias. Durante la pandemia de COVID-19, las medidas restrictivas redujeron la capacidad de atención de los servicios de salud auditiva y dificultaron la búsqueda de ayuda para resolver problemas relacionados con la adaptación a dispositivos electrónicos de amplificación del sonido (DEAS), siendo una barrera en el proceso de rehabilitación de la pérdida auditiva. Objetivo: Caracterizar a los usuarios de DEAS y el proceso inicial de rehabilitación auditiva de adultos y ancianos y verificar los factores asociados al retorno a las consultas de monitorización auditiva en el período inicial de la pandemia COVID-19. Métodos: Estudio observacional transversal con adultos y ancianos: ancianos usuarios de un servicio ambulatorio de salud auditiva que regresan para consulta de monitorización auditiva programada en el período inicial de la implementación de medidas restrictivas de la pandemia de COVID-19 en Brasil. Resultados: La mayoría de los participantes pudieron regresar a la clínica de monitorización auditiva, la mayoría de los cuales eran ancianos, mujeres y estaban vacunados contra COVID-19. Hubo mayor prevalencia de adaptación adecuada a la DEAS. No hubo asociación estadística entre variables relacionadas con adaptación a DEAS, COVID-19 y salud mental y retorno a consulta de monitorización auditiva. Conclusión: Los factores relacionados con la adaptación a DEAS, el COVID-19 o la salud mental no influyeron en el retorno a la consulta de monitorización auditiva en la presente investigación. (AU)

Assessment of hearing sequelae in individuals tested post-trauma.

BACKGROUND: Over 5% of the global population (430 million people) require rehabilitation for hearing loss. Individuals with hearing impairments face significant challenges in business, daily life, and social participation. Hearing loss (HL) and other permanent physical and sensory disabilities escalate dramatically in cases with brain damage and temporal bone trauma associated with head injuries. This study aims to identify the significant risk factors for hearing loss following head trauma, utilizing current data, and discuss the findings in the context of the literature. This could contribute to the development of standard approaches for assessing such cases. METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed files and reports from individuals assessed for hearing loss at Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Forensic Medicine. The study included cases that applied at least 12 months post-trauma, between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2022, after their recovery process was completed. Sociodemographic data, types of temporal bone fractures, initial otoscopic examination findings, presence or absence of intracranial injury, type of hearing loss, and audiometry test results for air and bone conduction pure tone threshold averages were evaluated. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS 26.0 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences). RESULTS: Out of 244 cases, 177 (72.5%) were male and 67 (27.5%) were female. It was observed that the majority of trauma cases occurred in the 19-40 age group (49.2%; n=120). In the initial otoscopic examinations post-trauma, otorrhagia/otorrhea was the most common finding, both as an isolated symptom (n=59, 24.2%) and when accompanied by other symptoms. No temporal bone fractures were detected in 43 cases (17.6%). Longitudinal fractures were found in 141 cases (57.8%), transverse fractures in 48 (19.7%), and mixed-type fractures in 12 (4.9%). The statistical difference in air conduction and bone conduction pure tone threshold averages between groups with and without intracranial injury was significant (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Post-traumatic examinations should employ a multidisciplinary approach, adhering to standard medical improvement and assessment timelines. It is essential to verify whether each patient's medical improvement process has reached its maximum potential. We believe that adhering to these recommendations and utilizing standardized classifications for hearing loss will prevent the loss of rights.

'The burden is very much on yourself': A qualitative study to understand the illness and treatment burden of hearing loss across the life course.

INTRODUCTION: Hearing loss is a chronic health condition that rises sharply with age. The way people respond to and cope with health conditions is influenced by their capacity to perform illness and treatment-related work. The aim was to explore the cumulative burdens of living with hearing loss and the resources mobilised to ease the burdens. METHODS: A qualitative design was used with semi-structured interviews (online or in-person) with participants recruited through audiology services and nonclinical services, such as lip-reading classes. Forty-six participants with hearing loss aged between 16 and 96 years were interviewed. An abductive approach, informed by May et al.'s burden of treatment theory, was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: The illness burden involved participants working to make sense of their hearing loss, engaging in emotional work in response to changes in sound, social interactions and identity and coping with the daily frustrations required to communicate with others. Abandonment and uncertainty characterised the treatment burden; participants engaged in emotional work to adjust to hearing technology and deal with the uncertainty of how their hearing might progress. To ameliorate the burdens, participants drew on internal resources (psychological, health literacy, cognitive) and external resources (social support, financial, information, technology). CONCLUSIONS: The workload of hearing loss appears largely devolved to the patient and is not always visible. Our work indicates the need to widen approaches in audiological care through the implementation of lifeworld-led care, family-centred care and peer support to build support for those with hearing loss. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We developed the project in consultation with members of the public who have lived experience of hearing loss recruited through Aston University and volunteer links to audiology services. We also consulted people more likely to be affected by hearing loss adults including adults with learning disabilities, older adults in residential care and people from South Asia (Bangladeshi, Indian and Pakistani communities). These individuals commented on the study aims, interview schedule and participant recruitment practices. One of our co-authors (expert by experience) contributed to the development and interpretation of themes and preparation of the final manuscript.

Early assessment of communicative competence in children with hearing loss using the Child-Caregiver Communication Assessment through Rebesco's Evaluation (CC-CARE) method.

PURPOSE: This work presents a new frame-by-frame video analysis method called Child-Caregiver Communication Assessment through Rebesco's Evaluation (CC-CARE), developed in the context of pediatric hearing loss as a rehabilitation tool for assessing children's early communication skills. CC-CARE stems from the commonly used Tait video analysis and extends it by including a new set of parameters aimed at disentangling between hearing-dependent and hearing-independent aspects of communication. METHOD: In this paper, we collected video samples of child-caregiver interactions in a group of 65 normal-hearing children and a group of 165 hearing-impaired children. For each group, we present the CC-CARE method and describe the parameters, their score distributions, correlations and we estimate the adherence of the CC-CARE scores with children's developmental trajectory. Moreover, we compare the results of CC-CARE scores between the two groups having had different development of the auditory system. Finally, a fully-data driven approach was employed to assess the consistency of the communicative efficacy index (CEI), a score aiming to capture a global result of the CC-CARE procedure. RESULTS: Correlations among parameter scores were found in each within-group analysis, revealing CC-CARE's internal consistency in measuring associated but nonoverlapping communication dimensions. For both groups, CC-CARE scores were associated with participants' age. Differences between scores emerged for a between-group analysis, indicating CC-CARE sensitivity to extract communication differences as a function of the hearing status. For both groups, the data analysis revealed that the CEI captures large variance portions across all parameter scores of the CC-CARE method. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide the first evidence that the CC-CARE video analysis method could be a reliable tool capable of highlighting the cascading effects of hearing impairment on children's preverbal communicative efficacy. The CC-CARE method aims to support early rehabilitation of hearing loss by describing a child's communicative efficacy.

Reported Unmet Hearing Aid Need in Older People With Dementia: The US National Core Indicators Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Hearing aids have important health benefits for older adults with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD); however, hearing aid adoption in this group is low. This study aimed to determine where to target hearing aid interventions for American long-term care recipients with ADRD by examining the association of ADRD and residence type with respondent-reported unmet hearing aid need. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study used data from the United States National Core Indicators-Aging and Disabilities survey (2015-2019) for long-term care recipients aged ≥65 years. METHODS: We used multivariable logistic regression to model the likelihood of reporting unmet hearing aid need conditional on ADRD status and residence type (own/family house or apartment, residential care, or nursing facility/home), adjusting for sociodemographic factors and response type (self vs proxy). RESULTS: Of the 25,492 respondents [median (IQR) age, 77 (71, 84) years; 7074 (27.8%) male], 5442 (21.4%) had ADRD and 3659 (14.4%) owned hearing aids. Residence types were 17,004 (66.8%) own/family house or apartment, 4966 (19.5%) residential care, and 3522 (13.8%) nursing home. Among non-hearing aid owners, ADRD [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.80-1.0] and residence type were associated with respondent-reported unmet hearing aid need. Compared to the nursing home reference group, respondents in their own/family home (AOR 1.85, 95% CI 1.61-2.13) and residential care (AOR 1.30, 95% CI 1.10-1.53) were more likely to report unmet hearing aid need. This pattern was significantly more pronounced in people with ADRD than in those without, stemming from an interaction between ADRD and residence type. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: American long-term care recipients with ADRD living in their own/family home are more likely to report unmet hearing aid need than those with ADRD in institutional and congregate settings. This information can inform the design and delivery of hearing interventions for older adults with ADRD.

Hearing and vision impairment and social isolation over 8 years in community-dwelling older adults.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the long-term impact of hearing and vision impairment on social isolation. This study quantifies the association between hearing, vision, and concurrent hearing and vision impairment (dual sensory impairment) and social isolation over 8 years among older adults. METHODS: Data were from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS), a cohort study (2011 - 2019) of U.S. Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older. Social isolation was measured by a binary indicator incorporating four domains: living arrangement, core discussion network size, religious attendance, and social participation. Hearing, vision, and dual sensory impairments were measured by self-report and modeled categorically (no impairment [ref.], hearing impairment only, vision impairment only, dual sensory impairment). Associations between sensory impairments and odds of social isolation over 8 years were assessed using multivariate generalized logistic mixed models and adjusted for demographic and health characteristics. RESULTS: Among 5,552 participants, 18.9% self-reported hearing impairment, 4.8% self-reported vision impairment, and 2.3% self-reported dual sensory impairment. Over 8 years, hearing impairment only was associated with 28% greater odds of social isolation. Participants with hearing impairment only were more likely to live alone and have limited social participation. CONCLUSION: Greater clinical awareness of hearing impairment as a risk factor for social isolation can increase opportunities to identify and aid older adults who may benefit from resources and interventions to increase social connection and mitigate social isolation.

Education Intervention on 'Hearing Impairment - Its Assessment and Management' among Medical Practitioners in Sikkim, India.

BACKGROUND: Health care providers must be aware of the choices in aural rehabilitation methods and assessment procedures available presently to those with hearing impairment in order to facilitate early identification and intervention and ensure quality of care to those hearing impaired individuals. The referrals from the medical fraternities for the audiological services are not uniform across India. Part of reason may be that awareness about the roles of and responsibilities of audiologist's is poor among medical practitioners. In some regions of India medical practitioners may be only grossly be aware of audiologists per se. They may not know enough to refer all individuals with hearing or balance disorders for the required audiological services. AIM: To evaluate changes in pre survey and post survey after education intervention specifically planned for medical practitioners in the state of Sikkim, India. Education intervention included awareness about hearing impairment and its assessment and management by audiologists. METHOD: A pre and post survey comparison research design with purposive convenient sampling technique was applied. Participants were medical practitioners working in geographical area of Sikkim at the time of the study. Inspection of demographic data of respondents showed that they were in their age range of 24 and 60 years and with work experience ranging 1-40 years. Participants were invited for an awareness talk which included, information about hearing loss, early identification and early intervention, tests and management of hearing loss in different age groups, need for hearing aids/cochlear implants, auditory training, and the role of an audiologist in the management of hearing loss and ways to prevent hearing loss. A pre and post awareness program responses were collected from all the participants using a customized questionnaire tool. RESULTS: Respondents exhibited, in the pre-survey questionnaire, lack of awareness in many aspects of audiology, including assessing hearing impairment, diagnosing hearing loss, and the role of an audiologist. There was an overall, statistically significant difference in the level of performance on the pre-awareness and post-awareness responses. CONCLUSION: Following an awareness campaign among the medical professionals in Sikkim, there was a considerable change in their level of awareness of hearing impairment, its assessment, and management by audiologists. The reach of the awareness campaign was significant as around 70% of subjects showed significant change in their knowledge and attitude towards hearing impairment, its management.

Hearing Loss and Associated 7-Year Cognitive Outcomes Among Hispanic and Latino Adults.

Importance: Hearing loss appears to have adverse effects on cognition and increases risk for cognitive impairment. These associations have not been thoroughly investigated in the Hispanic and Latino population, which faces hearing health disparities. Objective: To examine associations between hearing loss with 7-year cognitive change and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) prevalence among a diverse cohort of Hispanic/Latino adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from a large community health survey of Hispanic Latino adults in 4 major US cities. Eligible participants were aged 50 years or older at their second visit to study field centers. Cognitive data were collected at visit 1 and visit 2, an average of 7 years later. Data were last analyzed between September 2023 and January 2024. Exposure: Hearing loss at visit 1 was defined as a pure-tone average (500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz) greater than 25 dB hearing loss in the better ear. Main outcomes and measures: Cognitive data were collected at visit 1 and visit 2, an average of 7 years later and included measures of episodic learning and memory (the Brief-Spanish English Verbal Learning Test Sum of Trials and Delayed Recall), verbal fluency (word fluency-phonemic fluency), executive functioning (Trails Making Test-Trail B), and processing speed (Digit-Symbol Substitution, Trails Making Test-Trail A). MCI at visit 2 was defined using the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer Association criteria. Results: A total of 6113 Hispanic Latino adults were included (mean [SD] age, 56.4 [8.1] years; 3919 women [64.1%]). Hearing loss at visit 1 was associated with worse cognitive performance at 7-year follow-up (global cognition: ß = -0.11 [95% CI, -0.18 to -0.05]), equivalent to 4.6 years of aging and greater adverse change (slowing) in processing speed (ß = -0.12 [95% CI, -0.23 to -0.003]) equivalent to 5.4 years of cognitive change due to aging. There were no associations with MCI. Conclusions and relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that hearing loss decreases cognitive performance and increases rate of adverse change in processing speed. These findings underscore the need to prevent, assess, and treat hearing loss in the Hispanic and Latino community.

How Individuals Shape Their Acoustic Environment: Implications for Hearing Aid Comparison in Ecological Momentary Assessment.

OBJECTIVES: When using ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to compare different hearing aid programs, it is usually assumed that for sufficiently long study durations similar situations will be experienced in both programs. However, conscious or subconscious adaptation of situations to one's hearing ability (e.g., asking a conversation partner to speak up, increasing TV volume)-which might be different across the time spent in different hearing aid programs-may challenge this assumption. In the present study, we investigated how test participants modify their acoustic environment and if these modifications depend on the hearing program. DESIGN: Twenty-nine experienced hearing aid users were provided with hearing aids containing two hearing programs differing in directionality and noise reduction (NR). The hearing programs called NR-on and NR-off changed each day automatically. Over the course of 3 weeks, participants were asked to answer a questionnaire every time they encountered an acoustic situation they modified or would have liked to modify to improve the listening situation. Objective data on sound pressure level and classification of the acoustic situation were collected from the hearing aids. At the beginning of the study participants recollected modifications of the acoustic environments they typically do when using their own hearing aids and reported on the frequency of this behavior. RESULTS: During the field trial, participants reported on average 2.3 situations per day that they modified or would have liked to modify. Modifications were usually performed quickly after the onset of the situation and significantly improved the pleasantness of the listening situation. While the number of the reported situations did not differ between the programs, modifications increasing the volume of the target signal and increasing the hearing aid volume were more frequent for the NR-on hearing program. Changes in the objective data at the time of the modification were consistent with the reported modifications. Further, the usage time as well as the distribution of the acoustic situations over the entire study period differed between the two hearing programs. CONCLUSIONS: The large improvement in pleasantness due to the modification might explain the generally positive ratings observed in EMA studies. Furthermore, the results found here suggest that caution is needed when comparing ratings of audiological attributes in EMA, because the different modification behavior across hearing programs may lead to an underestimation of hearing problems and reduced sensitivity when comparing two technologies.

Estimation and projection of the burden of hearing loss in China: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.

OBJECTIVES: The comprehensive description of hearing loss in China and the shifting pattern remain unclear. We conducted the study to estimate the burden of hearing loss in China and project the trends from 2020 to 2034. STUDY DESIGN AND METHOD: Data on the disease burden of hearing loss were extracted from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Estimated annual percentage changes (EAPCs) were calculated to quantify the trends of the age-standardized rates. Projections of hearing loss burden were made until 2034 using Bayesian age-period-cohort analysis. RESULTS: In China, prevalent cases of hearing loss increased from 224.4 million in 1990 to 426.5 million in 2019, representing an increase of 90.1 %. The age-standardized prevalence rate of hearing loss ranged from 22,592.8/100,000 in 1990-22,612.4/100,000 in 2019, with an EAPC of 0.003 %, representing a stable trend. Of the category of hearing loss, mild hearing loss accounted for the highest proportion, with 331.4 million people. More than 95 million people had moderate-to-complete hearing loss. Moreover, hearing loss was mostly attributable to age-related and other factors for adults and otitis media for children younger than 10 years. Based on the projection results, there will be 561 million people (40.1 % of the total population) have hearing loss by 2034. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalent cases of hearing loss in China substantially increased over the last 30 years. Over two in five Chinese people will have hearing loss by 2034, thus suggesting more solutions should be established to reduce the burden of hearing loss.

A Comparison of Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scores among Individuals with Normal Hearing and Cochlear Implants.

OBJECTIVES: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a cognitive screening tool that has 4 of 10 test items heavily dependent on auditory input, potentially leaving hearing-impaired (HI) individuals at a disadvantage. Previous work found that HI individuals scored lower than normal-hearing (NH) individuals on the MoCA, potentially attributed to the degraded auditory signals negatively impacting the ability to commit auditory information to memory. However, there is no research comparing how cochlear implant (CI) recipients perform on the MoCA relative to NH and HI individuals. This study aimed to (1) examine the effect of implementing three different hearing-adjusted scoring methods for a group of age-matched CI recipients and NH individuals, (2) determine if there is a difference between the two groups in overall scores and hearing-adjusted scores, and (3) compare scores across our CI and NH data to the published HI data for all scoring methods. We hypothesized that (1) scores for CI recipients would improve with implementation of the hearing-adjusted scoring methods over the original method, (2) CI recipients would score lower than NH participants for both original and adjusted scoring methods, and (3) the difference in scores between NH and CI listeners for both adjusted and unadjusted scores would be greater than that reported in the literature between NH and HI individuals due to the greater severity of hearing loss and relatively poor spectral resolution of CIs. DESIGN: A total of 94 adults with CIs and 105 adults with NH were initially enrolled. After age-matching the two groups and excluding those who self-identified as NH but failed a hearing screening, a total of 75 CI participants (mean age 61.2 y) and 74 NH participants (mean age 58.8 y) were administered the MoCA. Scores were compared between the NH and CI groups, as well as to published HI data, using the original MoCA scoring method and three alternative scoring methods that excluded various auditory-dependent test items. RESULTS: MoCA scores improved for all groups when two of the three alternative scoring methods were used, with no significant interaction between scoring method and group. Scores for CI recipients were significantly poorer than those for age-matched NH participants for all scoring methods. CI recipients scored better than the published data for HI individuals; however, the HI group was not age matched to the CI and NH groups. CONCLUSIONS: MoCA scores are only partly affected by the potentially greater cognitive processing required to interpret degraded auditory signals. Even with the removal of the auditory-dependent items, CI recipients still did not perform as well as the age-matched NH group. Importantly, removing auditory-dependent items significantly and fundamentally alters the test, thereby reducing its sensitivity. This has important limitations for administration and interpretation of the MoCA for people with hearing loss.

Examining Barriers to Early Hearing Diagnosis.

PURPOSE: Many factors create barriers for early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI), especially those related to unfavorable social determinants of health (SDOH). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic timing of infants at risk for congenital hearing loss in consideration of known barriers. Understanding the specific barriers to early diagnosis can inform interventions to improve timeliness of diagnosis and subsequent habilitation. METHOD: A retrospective chart review was completed for infants referred for diagnostic audiologic testing at a tertiary urban-setting Children's Hospital from 2018 to 2021. After exclusion criteria were applied, 1,488 infants were included in the analysis. Various factors were recorded from electronic medical records including those specific to SDOH. Time to diagnosis was derived and compared across five factors of interest that have previously been shown to impact diagnostic timeline, including (a) insurance type, (b) race/ethnicity, (c) presence of middle ear dysfunction at first auditory brainstem response (ABR), (d) proximity to diagnostic center, and (e) diagnostic timing before and during/after the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Across the study time period, 77% of infants referred for diagnostic testing had confirmed diagnosis by the EHDI benchmark of 3 months. Analysis of time to diagnosis across factors of interest revealed no clinically significant differences for insurance type, race/ethnicity, proximity to diagnostic center, or timing in reference to the COVID-19 pandemic. Presence of middle ear dysfunction on first ABR was found to significantly protract final diagnostic timing. CONCLUSIONS: Although some known barriers for EHDI can be universal, other factors may have a differential impact on an infant's timeline to diagnosis based on their specific location, which can interact differently with additional known barriers. Understanding local challenges will serve to better guide programs in implementing facilitators that will address their specific needs for improved outcomes.

Speech-in-Noise Assessment in the Routine Audiologic Test Battery: Relationship to Perceived Auditory Disability.

OBJECTIVES: Self-assessment of perceived communication difficulty has been used in clinical and research practices for decades. Such questionnaires routinely assess the perceived ability of an individual to understand speech, particularly in background noise. Despite the emphasis on perceived performance in noise, speech recognition in routine audiologic practice is measured by word recognition in quiet (WRQ). Moreover, surprisingly little data exist that compare speech understanding in noise (SIN) abilities to perceived communication difficulty. Here, we address these issues by examining audiometric thresholds, WRQ scores, QuickSIN signal to noise ratio (SNR) loss, and perceived auditory disability as measured by the five questions on the Speech Spatial Questionnaire-12 (SSQ12) devoted to speech understanding (SSQ12-Speech5). DESIGN: We examined data from 1633 patients who underwent audiometric assessment at the Stanford Ear Institute. All individuals completed the SSQ12 questionnaire, pure-tone audiometry, and speech assessment consisting of ear-specific WRQ, and ear-specific QuickSIN. Only individuals with hearing threshold asymmetries ≤10 dB HL in their high-frequency pure-tone average (HFPTA) were included. Our primary objectives were to (1) examine the relationship between audiometric variables and the SSQ12-Speech5 scores, (2) determine the amount of variance in the SSQ12-Speech5 scores which could be predicted from audiometric variables, and (3) predict which patients were likely to report greater perceived auditory disability according to the SSQ12-Speech5. RESULTS: Performance on the SSQ12-Speech5 indicated greater perceived auditory disability with more severe degrees of hearing loss and greater QuickSIN SNR loss. Degree of hearing loss and QuickSIN SNR loss were found to account for modest but significant variance in SSQ12-Speech5 scores after accounting for age. In contrast, WRQ scores did not significantly contribute to the predictive power of the model. Degree of hearing loss and QuickSIN SNR loss were also found to have moderate diagnostic accuracy for determining which patients were likely to report SSQ12-Speech5 scores indicating greater perceived auditory disability. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, these data indicate that audiometric factors including degree of hearing loss (i.e., HFPTA) and QuickSIN SNR loss are predictive of SSQ12-Speech5 scores, though notable variance remains unaccounted for after considering these factors. HFPTA and QuickSIN SNR loss-but not WRQ scores-accounted for a significant amount of variance in SSQ12-Speech5 scores and were largely effective at predicting which patients are likely to report greater perceived auditory disability on the SSQ12-Speech5. This provides further evidence for the notion that speech-in-noise measures have greater clinical utility than WRQ in most instances as they relate more closely to measures of perceived auditory disability.

Assessment of gentamicin dosing and monitoring in neonates: A single center experience.

BACKGROUND: Gentamicin is a commonly used medication in NICUs. It is known to have ototoxic & nephrotoxic side effects. To date there is no consensus about dosing regimen in different institutions. Our study aims to evaluate the Neofax® dosing regimen for gentamicin in neonatal early onset sepsis in relation to trough level before the second dose and its association with the incidence of gentamicin side effects, namely hearing impairment/loss and acute kidney injury. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of newborns admitted to Tawam hospital NICU (June 2019-May 2020) who received gentamicin for early onset sepsis (≤72 hours old). Trough levels before the second dose at 24,36 and 48 hours were reviewed (≥1 mg/L is high). Excluded patients with renal risk factors. Side effects (hearing impairment, acute renal injury) were also assessed. RESULTS: Total of 265 infants were included, among whom 149 patients received gentamicin at 24 hours interval, 99 at 36 and 17 at 48 hours interval. Trough level was high in 76% (P = 0.022), 65% (P = 0.127), and 53% (P = 0.108) of patients who received gentamicin at 24, 36, and 48 hours, respectively. Hearing screening was normal in 99.2% of patients, while 2 patients failed the test (Both with normal trough levels). No patients in our study developed renal injury related to gentamicin use. CONCLUSION: Neofax® gentamicin dosing often results in high trough levels, especially in late preterm/term infants. This study found no correlation between high trough levels and hearing impairment upon discharge or acute kidney injury. Further studies with larger sample size are recommended.

Social Determinants of Health and Hearing Loss in U.S. Adults.

OBJECTIVES: Social determinants of health (SDH) are nonmedical, societal factors that influence health. There is limited information on the current relationship between SDH and hearing loss (HL) in the United States. This study aims to compare the odds of HL among US adults by race/ethnicity, education level, income-to-poverty level ratio, health insurance coverage, and health care access. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: The 2015-2020 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data were analyzed to compare odds ratios (ORs) for HL, defined as pure tone average over 25 dB HL in at least one ear, by SDH categories using sample weights. Adjusted ORs were calculated using logistic regression models controlling for sex, age, race/ethnicity, education level, income-to-federal-poverty level, health care insurance coverage and access, and loud noise, pesticide, and cigarette exposure. RESULTS: A total of 6028 participants were included. Non-Hispanic Black participants had half the odds of HL as Non-Hispanic White participants (OR 0.52, p < 0.05). Lower education level correlated with higher odds of HL: those without a high school diploma had double the odds of HL compared with college graduates or above (OR 2.05, 1.91, p < 0.05). The income-to-federal-poverty level ratio of 1.3 to less than 2 had higher odds of HL than the 4+ group (OR 1.45, p < 0.05). Use of multiple health care locations was associated with nearly three times the odds of HL than the group using one location (OR 2.87, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: SDH are associated with HL. Further investigation is needed into the mechanism of disparities for targeted prevention and treatment for hearing care equity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV Laryngoscope, 134:2848-2856, 2024.

Self-reported dual sensory impairment and related factors: a European population-based cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Data on population-based self-reported dual vision and hearing impairment are sparse in Europe. We aimed to investigate self-reported dual sensory impairment (DSI) in European population. METHODS: A standardised questionnaire was used to collect medical and socio-economic data among individuals aged 15 years or more in 29 European countries. Individuals living in collective households or in institutions were excluded from the survey. RESULTS: Among 296 677 individuals, the survey included 153 866 respondents aged 50 years old or more. The crude prevalence of DSI was of 7.54% (7.36-7.72). Among individuals aged 60 or more, 9.23% of men and 10.94% of women had DSI. Eastern and southern countries had a higher prevalence of DSI. Multivariable analyses showed that social isolation and poor self-rated health status were associated with DSI with ORs of 2.01 (1.77-2.29) and 2.33 (2.15-2.52), while higher income was associated with lower risk of DSI (OR of 0.83 (0.78-0.89). Considering country-level socioeconomic factors, Human Development Index explained almost 38% of the variance of age-adjusted prevalence of DSI. CONCLUSION: There are important differences in terms of prevalence of DSI in Europe, depending on socioeconomic and medical factors. Prevention of DSI does represent an important challenge for maintaining quality of life in elderly population.

Hearing Loss and Sociodemographic Barriers to Health Care Access Using the All of Us Research Program.

OBJECTIVE: To explore how gender and low-income status independently influence general health care access in patients with hearing loss. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: National database. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of sensorineural hearing loss from the National Institutes of Health All of Us database were included. Data entered from May 2018 to November 2022 was analyzed. Patient demographics such as age, gender, educational level, and insurance status were assessed. Multivariate logistic regressions were performed for statistical evaluation. RESULTS: A subset of 8875 patients (48.3% male, mean age 69) were evaluated. After multivariate analysis, female participants were more likely than male participants to report difficulty affording prescribed medications (odds ratio [OR]: 1.7, p < .0005) and specialists (OR: 1.4, p < 0.005). Female patients were also more likely to delay care due to elder care responsibilities (OR: 2.6, p < .0005), employment obligations (OR: 1.7, p < .0005), and feelings of apprehension in seeing a provider (OR: 1.7, p < .0005). Finally, female participants reported feeling less likely to be involved in their own medical care compared to males (OR: 1.2, p < .005). Low-income (<$25,000) participants reported less likely to feel respected (OR: 3.2, p < .0005) and delivered understandable health information (OR: 2.3, p < .0005) by providers compared to participants of higher income. CONCLUSION: This work suggests that patients with hearing loss, female gender, and lower socioeconomic status independently introduce barriers to health care access and utilization. These factors should be considered in efforts to promote equity in the care of patients with hearing loss.

Diagnostic Utility of Parent Ratings on the Behavior Assessment System for Children-Third Edition in Children who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing and Diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Between 1 to 2 of every 1,000 children are born deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) and, of those, 30-50% have additional disabilities, including Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Most measures assessing ASD characteristics rely on some degree of behavioral response to sound (e.g., responding to name, listening response), and may not be appropriate for use with children who are DHH. Further, ASD specific measures do not provide information on a child's functional abilities across developmental domains. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis comparing mean T-scores on a standardized multidimensional measure, the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Third Edition, Parent Rating Scale (BASC-3 PRS), across three groups matched for age and sex: children who are DHH and diagnosed with ASD (DHH + ASD; n = 16); children who are DHH without ASD (DHH-ASD; n = 16); and children who are typically hearing with ASD (H + ASD; n = 16). Analyses revealed statistically significant differences across scales of Attention Problems, Atypicality, Withdrawal, Behavioral Symptoms Index, Social Skills, Leadership, Functional Communication, Activities of Daily Living, Adaptive Skills, Autism Probability Indices, and Developmental Social Disorders. Pairwise comparisons showed DHH + ASD and H + ASD mean T-scores were statistically similar and distinct from DHH-ASD mean T-scores on all these scales except for Withdrawal, Leadership, Functional Communication, and Activities of Daily Living, where pairwise comparisons varied. The findings add to the literature on ASD and DHH children and call for further exploration of the BASC-3 as a tool for both evaluation of ASD and the development of individualized treatment plans in this unique population.

Social participation in older people with hearing impairment in Chinese community: A latent profile analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Hearing impairment may lead to increased communication difficulties for older people, making their social participation less optimistic. However, there is little research on the social participation of older people with hearing impairment, especially based on the characteristics of their social participation. This study aimed to identify different social participation profiles in older people with hearing impairment and to explore sociodemographic characteristics, disease-related characteristics and psychosocial factors with different social participation profiles. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 300 older people with hearing impairment using the sociodemographic questionnaire, the Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire, the Lubben Social Network Scale-6, Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey and Geriatric Depression Scale-15 from May to August 2023 in a community of Beijing, China. Latent profile analysis was used to analyse the latent profiles of social participation in elderly with hearing impairment. Multiple logistic regression was used to explore the predictors of different profiles. RESULTS: The social participation of older people with hearing impairment in the community can be classified into three potential profiles: Profile 1 - high social participation group (76.05 %), Profile 2 - moderate social participation group (17.34 %), Profile 3 - low social participation group (6.61 %). Age, types of chronic diseases, self-reported health, severity of hearing impairment, social network, social support and depression were predictors of different profiles. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses should pay attention to the characteristics, depression, social network and support of older people with different hearing impairment to improve social participation in different profiles. IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: This was the first study exploring latent profiles of social participation in older people with hearing impairment. Insights from this study are useful for gerontological nursing to distinguish different profiles and further identify the characteristics of different profiles in older people with hearing impairment by characterizing the level of social participation in the community and better implement interventions according to profiles.

Hearing loss and cognition: A protocol for ensuring speech understanding before neurocognitive assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Many neurocognitive evaluations involve auditory stimuli, yet there are no standard testing guidelines for individuals with hearing loss. The ensuring speech understanding (ESU) test was developed to confirm speech understanding and determine whether hearing accommodations are necessary for neurocognitive testing. METHODS: Hearing was assessed using audiometry. The probability of ESU test failure by hearing status was estimated in 2679 participants (mean age: 81.4 ± 4.6 years) using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Only 2.2% (N = 58) of participants failed the ESU test. The probability of failure increased with hearing loss severity; similar results were observed for those with and without mild cognitive impairment or dementia. DISCUSSION: The ESU test is appropriate for individuals who have variable degrees of hearing loss and cognitive function. This test can be used prior to neurocognitive testing to help reduce the risk of hearing loss and compromised auditory access to speech stimuli causing poorer performance on neurocognitive evaluation.