Development of Measures for d/Deaf and Hard of Hearing Stigma: Introduction to the Special Supplement on Stigma Measurement Tools.

People who are d/Deaf or hard of hearing (d/DHH) often experience stigma and discrimination in their daily lives. Qualitative research describing their lived experiences has provided useful, in-depth insights into the pervasiveness of stigma. Quantitative measures could facilitate further investigation of the scope of this phenomenon. Thus, under the auspices of the Lancet Commission on Hearing Loss, we developed and preliminarily validated survey measures of different types of stigma related to d/Deafness and hearing loss in the United States (a high-income country) and Ghana (a lower-middle income country). In this introductory article, we first present working definitions of the different types of stigma; an overview of what is known about stigma in the context of hearing loss; and the motivation underlying the development of measures that capture different types of stigma from the perspectives of different key groups. We then describe the mixed-methods exploratory sequential approach used to develop the stigma measures for several key groups: people who are d/DHH, parents of children who are d/DHH, care partners of people who are d/DHH, healthcare providers, and the general population. The subsequent manuscripts in this special supplement of Ear and Hearing describe the psychometric validation of the various stigma scales developed using these methods.

Preliminary Validation of Measures of Experienced, Perceived, and Internalized Stigma Among Adults Who Are d/Deaf or Hard of Hearing in the United States and Ghana.

OBJECTIVES: In this article, we examine the psychometric performance of 3 scales measuring experienced, perceived, and internalized d/Deaf or hard of hearing (d/DHH) stigma among adult (18 and older) populations of individuals who are d/DHH, including those who have been d/DHH since before they developed language (lifelong) and those who became d/DHH after they developed language (acquired) in the United States and Ghana. DESIGN: The preliminary validation study took place in the Greater Accra and Eastern regions of Ghana and across the United States. In the United States, all data were collected online via self-administered surveys in English. In Ghana, trained interviewers who are d/DHH and fluent in Ghanaian Sign Language conducted interviews with participants who are lifelong d/DHH using a video survey. Ghanaian participants with acquired d/DHH status were surveyed by trained hearing interviewers. We calculated polychoric correlation matrices between the measures to remove redundant and unrelated items and used exploratory factor analysis to create the final scales. We also tested the association between the factor scores and a simple summing method for calculating the scale. RESULTS: The study sample included people who have been d/DHH since before they developed language (Ghana: n = 171, United States n = 100) and people who became d/DHH after they developed language (Ghana: n = 174, United States: n = 219). The final experienced, perceived, and internalized scales included six, seven, and five items, respectively. All three scales performed well as unidimensional measures across all four samples. Across the four samples, the experienced, perceived, and internalized stigma scales yielded ordinal αs ranging from 0.725 to 0.947, 0.856 to 0.935, and 0.856 to 0.935, respectively. It would be acceptable to operationalize all stigma scales as sum-of-item scores. CONCLUSIONS: The scales performed well and appear to provide a valid means of measuring different types of stigma among diverse groups of people who are d/DHH. Future work should refine and validate these scales in additional contexts.

Development and Preliminary Validation of Stigma Measures for Care Partners of Persons Who Are d/Deaf or Hard of Hearing.

OBJECTIVES: A great deal of literature documents the significant demands, both physical and psychosocial, that care partners experience when providing care to persons with a range of health conditions. There is, however, far less research available on care partners of adult persons who are d/Deaf or hard of hearing (d/DHH). In response to this gap, the authors developed measures of d/DHH stigma among care partners as part of the work of the Lancet Commission on Hearing Loss' Measures, Models, and Stigma Reduction Subgroup. The measures examined in this article are part of a larger set of parallel measures to enable comparison of stigma measurement across groups. DESIGN: The present study describes the preliminary validation of five stigma scales specifically tailored for use to assess the prevalence and effect of stigma on the care partners of adult people who are d/DHH in the United States. Care partners in this context are defined broadly and can include spouses, partners, adult children, siblings, and friends of persons who are d/DHH. The scales describe the care partner's own assessment of how the person who is d/DHH experiences and perceives stigma as well as the care partner's own internalized, experienced, and perceived stigma as a result of their association with a person who is d/DHH. This latter set of three scales describes secondary stigma, or the stigma a person experiences related to their association with a member of a stigmatized group. Measures were developed through a process that included a literature review, Delphi groups with people who became d/DHH after they developed spoken language, cognitive interviews, and a pretest. An online, self-administered preliminary validation survey was conducted with 151 care partners. RESULTS: Results support the internal reliability of each of the five stigma scales (ordinal α's all greater than 0.9) and that each scale is assessing a single factor. CONCLUSIONS: Additional testing is needed to confirm the validity of these measures. After further validation, they can be used to assess the prevalence and effect of stigma on care partners of persons who are d/DHH and to evaluate the success of interventions developed to address stigma and its effects both on the care partner and the person who is d/DHH and receiving the care.

Preliminary Validation of Hearing Device-Related Stigma Measures in Four United States Populations.

OBJECTIVES: Although hearing devices such as cochlear implants and hearing aids often improve communication, many people who are d/Deaf or hard of hearing (d/DHH) choose not to use them. Hearing device-related stigma, or negative societal beliefs about people who use hearing devices, often drives this decision. Although much research has documented the negative effects of hearing device-related stigma, no widely accepted, validated measure to quantify such stigma across populations currently exists. In this article, we describe the preliminary validation of four distinct but related scales measuring hearing device-related stigma in different populations, including people who use hearing devices and those close to them. DESIGN: We preliminarily validated four measures for quantifying hearing device-related stigma in different populations that were previously developed and refined through a literature review, Delphi interviews, cognitive interviews, and a pretest. We preliminarily validated these measures through self-administered online surveys in a convenience sample in the United States. Among participants who use a hearing device and who either (a) self-identified as being d/DHH before they developed language (lifelong; n = 78) or (b) those who self-identified as having acquired a d/DHH identity after they developed language (acquired n = 71), we validated an anticipated hearing device-related stigma scale (d/DHHS-LE-HDA). We validated three scales that measure perceived hearing device-related stigma observed by parents of children who are d/DHH and who use a hearing device (n = 79) (d/DHHS-P-HDPO), care partners of adults who are d/DHH and use a hearing device (n = 108) (d/DHHS-CP-HDPO), and health care providers (n = 203) (d/DHHS-HCP-HDSH). Exploratory factor analysis assessed the reliability of each measure. RESULTS: Each of the four scales loaded onto one factor. Factor loadings for the eight-item scale measuring anticipated hearing device-related stigma among the two populations with lived experience ranged from 0.635 to 0.910, with an ordinal α of 0.93 in the lifelong d/DHH participants and 0.94 among the acquired d/DHH participants. The six-item scale of perceived stigma observed by parents had item loadings from 0.630 to 0.920 (α = 0.91). The nine-item scale of hearing device-related stigma observed by care partners had item loadings from 0.554 to 0.922 (α = 0.95). The eight-item scale of hearing device-related stigma reported by health care providers had item loadings from 0.647 to 0.941 (α = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary validation results show that the four stigma measures perform well in their respective populations. The anticipated stigma scale performed similarly well for both lifelong d/DHH and acquired d/DHH, which suggests that it could perform well in different contexts. Future research should further validate the scales described here as well as measure hearing device-related stigma in different populations-including people who live in different geographic regions and people using different kinds of hearing devices-and evaluate the success of interventions developed to reduce hearing device-related stigma.

Research Agenda and Applications for Preliminarily Validated Measures of d/Deaf and Hard of Hearing Stigma.

In this special supplement of Ear and Hearing, we have presented preliminarily validated measures for stigma related to being d/Deaf or hard of hearing (d/DHH) in the United States and Ghana. In this concluding article, we suggest avenues for the future refinement and use of these measures. First, the measures should be further validated. Second, they should be used to assess the current state of d/DHH stigma and the importance of different kinds of stigma in different populations, which should in turn drive the development of interventions to reduce d/DHH stigma. Third, these measures can assist in evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of those interventions. The evidence from this work can then inform investment cases and cost-of-condition studies, which will support advocacy efforts and policy development for reducing stigma and improving the lives of people who are d/DHH.

Development and Preliminary Validation of Scales to Measure Enacted, Perceived, and Experienced Hearing Loss Stigma in Health Care Settings.

OBJECTIVES: Qualitative evidence suggests that stigma experienced by people who are d/Deaf and hard of hearing (d/DHH) can reduce willingness to engage with health services. Quantitative evidence remains lacking, however, about how health care providers (HCPs) perceive societal stigma toward people who are d/DHH, how HCPs might enact d/DHH stigma within provider-patient encounters, and what patients who are d/DHH share with providers about those patients' perceptions and experiences of stigma. Such quantitative evidence would allow HCPs to understand if and how stigma influences hearing health decisions made by people who are d/DHH. It could also shape practices to reduce d/DHH stigma within clinical encounters and guide providers in considering stigma as a driving force in their patients' hearing health care decisions. Building that evidence base requires validated quantitative measures. In response, the present study initiated an iterative process toward developing and preliminarily validating HCP self-report measures for different forms of d/DHH stigma. These measures draw upon HCPs' own perspectives, as well as their reports of secondhand information about stigma shared during clinical conversations. We developed and preliminary validated four measures: (1) provider-perceived stigma (HCPs' perceptions of the existence of negative attitudes and stereotypes toward d/DHH individuals in society), (2) provider-enacted stigma (self-reported subtle or indirect acts of stigma HCPs might commit during clinical encounters), (3) secondhand patient-experienced stigma (external acts of stigma reported to HCPs by patients who are d/DHH during clinical encounters), and (4) secondhand patient-perceived stigma (perceptions of negative attitudes and stereotypes reported to HCPs by patients who are d/DHH during clinical encounters). DESIGN: Scale items were extracted from a comprehensive literature review of stigma measures. Question stems and individual items were adapted for HCPs, cognitively tested on 5 HCPs, and pretested with 30 HCPs. The 4 scales were then validated on a sample of primary care providers and hearing care specialists (N = 204) recruited through an online survey. All data were collected in the United States. RESULTS: We conducted an exploratory factor analysis of the four proposed d/DHH stigma HCP stigma scales. Scale items loaded satisfactorily with ordinal alphas ranging between 0.854 and 0.944. CONCLUSIONS: The four measures developed and preliminarily validated in this study can provide opportunities for HCPs to develop a more nuanced understanding of stigma experienced and perceived by their patients who are d/DHH and how that stigma manifests across social contexts, including health care settings. Further, the ability to assess forms of d/DHH stigma in clinical encounters, as well as their association with patient disengagement and resistance to advanced hearing care, could lead to innovative stigma-reduction interventions. Such interventions could then be evaluated using the measures from this article and then applied to clinical practice. We envision these measures being further refined, adapted, and tested for a variety of health care contexts, including primary care settings where hearing difficulties may first be identified and in hearing health care settings where audiologic rehabilitation is initiated.

Preliminary Validation of Stigma Measures Among Parents of Children Who Are d/Deaf or Hard of Hearing in the United States and Ghana.

OBJECTIVES: Parents are integral to the development and overall well-being of their child. Previous research has studied the emotional effects parenting experiences have on parents. However, parents caring for children with disabilities have unique parenting experiences, filled with both victories and challenges. Parenting a child with disabilities can bring additional responsibilities as parents respond to their child's special needs. Specifically, parents of children who are d/Deaf or hard of hearing (d/DHH) are required to make ongoing life-changing decisions about their child's life, including mode of communication, medical care, and education. Across the world, many adults who are d/DHH experience stigma. However, less is known about the stigma faced by children who are d/DHH and their parents. Measuring the nature and magnitude of stigma-affecting parents of children who are d/DHH could offer insights into how to additionally support these parents. Nonetheless, there is a gap in validated scales to measure stigma among parents of children who are d/DHH. In response, we developed and preliminarily validated five measures of stigma among parents of children who are d/DHH. DESIGN: Measures were developed through a mixed-method process: (1) a scoping literature review, (2) a modified Delphi process consisting of two group discussions (n = 3, n = 4) and two individual discussions with parents of children who are d/DHH from high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), (3) cognitive interviews with parents of children who are d/DHH in the United States (U.S.) (n = 5) and Ghana (n = 5), and (4) a pretest of the survey in the U.S. (n = 28) and Ghana (n = 30). Modifications to the measures were made after each stage. This article focuses on evaluating the psychometric performance of the developed measures. Parents were recruited in the U.S. (n = 100) and Ghana (n = 173). Convenience sampling was used in both countries. In Ghana, survey administration was in-person with trained interviewers collecting data on tablets. In the U.S. data were collected online through self-administered surveys. RESULTS: The final five scales measured: (1) parental observation of stigma their child experiences (seven items), (2) parental perceptions of stigma toward their child (eight items), (3) parental secondary experienced stigma (eight items), (4) perceived parental secondary stigma (five items), and (5) parental internalized stigma (seven items). All scales performed strongly and similarly across both country samples. The scales had ordinal αs ranging from 0.864 to 0.960, indicating strong reliability. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a set of preliminarily validated stigma measures to capture the experience of parents of children who are d/DHH. Measuring stigma among parents is critical to understanding parental mental health, as parental well-being affects the health and development of their child. Furthermore, measuring observed stigma by parents can allow the researcher to gain an understanding of the stigma experienced by children who are d/DHH that they may not be able to communicate. Further studies testing these measures across other countries and with more diverse samples are needed.

Differences in the type of vocabulary understood by deaf and hearing students: Results to guide interventions.

INTRODUCTION: Vocabulary knowledge is an essential element in language development. There is evidence of significant differences in vocabulary knowledge between deaf children and hearing peers of the same age. These differences put deaf students at a disadvantage when compared to their hearing counterparts. The aim of this study was to investigate whether certain types of words characterise the lexical difficulties of deaf students. Our starting point is that this knowledge is needed to design interventions that are adapted to the particular needs of these students for their lexical development. METHODS: We evaluated the lexical comprehension of 90 Spanish students. The sample comprised 45 hearing students and 45 students with severe or profound hearing loss. Both groups were attending the later years of primary school (8 to -12-year-olds). They were tested using the Spanish Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III. The performance of both groups was statistically compared using percentiles and standard scores as well as a selected set of words from the test. RESULTS: No significant differences between hearing and deaf groups were found by age, sex, and sociocultural level. Significant differences were found between groups in their percentile and standard scores. There were no significant differences in performance between the two groups on only five of the 25 words with the highest error rate in the deaf group. The qualitative analysis of the remaining 20 words that were especially challenging for deaf students reveals results of interest which could help guide interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate the need for lexical intervention for deaf students in the final years of primary school. The specialised support service for deaf learners should approach the intervention by targeting a specific type of vocabulary, making the semantic relationships between these words more transparent and promoting a deeper understanding of them.

The Impact of Hearing Aids on Listening Effort and Listening-Related Fatigue - Investigations in a Virtual Realistic Listening Environment.

Participation in complex listening situations such as group conversations in noisy environments sets high demands on the auditory system and on cognitive processing. Reports of hearing-impaired people indicate that strenuous listening situations occurring throughout the day lead to feelings of fatigue at the end of the day. The aim of the present study was to develop a suitable test sequence to evoke and measure listening effort (LE) and listening-related fatigue (LRF), and, to evaluate the influence of hearing aid use on both dimensions in mild to moderately hearing-impaired participants. The chosen approach aims to reconstruct a representative acoustic day (Time Compressed Acoustic Day [TCAD]) by means of an eight-part hearing-test sequence with a total duration of approximately 2½ h. For this purpose, the hearing test sequence combined four different listening tasks with five different acoustic scenarios and was presented to the 20 test subjects using virtual acoustics in an open field measurement in aided and unaided conditions. Besides subjective ratings of LE and LRF, behavioral measures (response accuracy, reaction times), and an attention test (d2-R) were performed prior to and after the TCAD. Furthermore, stress hormones were evaluated by taking salivary samples. Subjective ratings of LRF increased throughout the test sequence. This effect was observed to be higher when testing unaided. In three of the eight listening tests, the aided condition led to significantly faster reaction times/response accuracies than in the unaided condition. In the d2-R test, an interaction in processing speed between time (pre- vs. post-TCAD) and provision (unaided vs. aided) was found suggesting an influence of hearing aid provision on LRF. A comparison of the averaged subjective ratings at the beginning and end of the TCAD shows a significant increase in LRF for both conditions. At the end of the TCAD, subjective fatigue was significantly lower when wearing hearing aids. The analysis of stress hormones did not reveal significant effects.

Effects of Monaural Temporal Electrode Asynchrony and Channel Interactions in Bilateral and Unilateral Cochlear-Implant Stimulation.

Timing cues such as interaural time differences (ITDs) and temporal pitch are pivotal for sound localization and source segregation, but their perception is degraded in cochlear-implant (CI) listeners as compared to normal-hearing listeners. In multi-electrode stimulation, intra-aural channel interactions between electrodes are assumed to be an important factor limiting access to those cues. The monaural asynchrony of stimulation timing across electrodes is assumed to mediate the amount of these interactions. This study investigated the effect of the monaural temporal electrode asynchrony (mTEA) between two electrodes, applied similarly in both ears, on ITD-based left/right discrimination sensitivity in five CI listeners, using pulse trains with 100 pulses per second and per electrode. Forward-masked spatial tuning curves were measured at both ears to find electrode separations evoking controlled degrees of across-electrode masking. For electrode separations smaller than 3 mm, results showed an effect of mTEA. Patterns were u/v-shaped, consistent with an explanation in terms of the effective pulse rate that appears to be subject to the well-known rate limitation in electric hearing. For separations larger than 7 mm, no mTEA effects were observed. A comparison to monaural rate-pitch discrimination in a separate set of listeners and in a matched setup showed no systematic differences between percepts. Overall, an important role of the mTEA in both binaural and monaural dual-electrode stimulation is consistent with a monaural pulse-rate limitation whose effect is mediated by channel interactions. Future CI stimulation strategies aiming at improved timing-cue encoding should minimize the stimulation delay between nearby electrodes that need to be stimulated successively.

A Step Toward Precision Audiology: Individual Differences and Characteristic Profiles From Auditory Perceptual and Cognitive Abilities.

Older adults with normal hearing or with age-related hearing loss face challenges when listening to speech in noisy environments. To better serve individuals with communication difficulties, precision diagnostics are needed to characterize individuals' auditory perceptual and cognitive abilities beyond pure tone thresholds. These abilities can be heterogenous across individuals within the same population. The goal of the present study is to consider the suprathreshold variability and develop characteristic profiles for older adults with normal hearing (ONH) and with hearing loss (OHL). Auditory perceptual and cognitive abilities were tested on ONH (n = 20) and OHL (n = 20) on an abbreviated test battery using portable automated rapid testing. Using cluster analyses, three main profiles were revealed for each group, showing differences in auditory perceptual and cognitive abilities despite similar audiometric thresholds. Analysis of variance showed that ONH profiles differed in spatial release from masking, speech-in-babble testing, cognition, tone-in-noise, and binaural temporal processing abilities. The OHL profiles differed in spatial release from masking, speech-in-babble testing, cognition, and tolerance to background noise performance. Correlation analyses showed significant relationships between auditory and cognitive abilities in both groups. This study showed that auditory perceptual and cognitive deficits can be present to varying degrees in the presence of audiometrically normal hearing and among listeners with similar degrees of hearing loss. The results of this study inform the need for taking individual differences into consideration and developing targeted intervention options beyond pure tone thresholds and speech testing.

Prevalence and Characteristics of Veterans with Severe Hearing Loss: A Descriptive Study.

Hearing loss is common among Veterans, and extensive hearing care resources are prioritized within the Veterans Administration (VA). Severe hearing loss poses unique communication challenges with speech understanding that may not be overcome with amplification. We analyzed data from the VA Audiometric Repository between 2005 and 2017 and the relationship between hearing loss severity with speech recognition scores. We hypothesized that a significant subset of Veterans with severe or worse hearing loss would have poor unaided speech perception outcomes even with adequate audibility. Sociodemographic characteristics and comorbidities were compiled using electronic medical records as was self-report measures of hearing disability. We identified a cohort of 137,500 unique Veterans with 232,789 audiograms demonstrating bilateral severe or worse hearing loss (four-frequency PTA > 70 dB HL). The median (IQR; range) age of Veterans at their first audiogram with severe or worse hearing loss was 81 years (74 to 87; 21-90+), and a majority were male (136,087 [99%]) and non-Hispanic white (107,798 [78.4%]). Among those with bilateral severe or worse hearing loss, 41,901 (30.5%) also had poor speech recognition scores (<50% words), with greater hearing loss severity correlating with worse speech perception. We observed variability in speech perception abilities in those with moderate-severe and greater levels of hearing loss who may derive limited benefit from amplification. Veterans with communication challenges may warrant alternative approaches and treatment strategies such as cochlear implants to support communication needs.

A Perspective on Auditory Wellness: What It Is, Why It Is Important, and How It Can Be Managed.

During the last decade, there has been a move towards consumer-centric hearing healthcare. This is a direct result of technological advancements (e.g., merger of consumer grade hearing aids with consumer grade earphones creating a wide range of hearing devices) as well as policy changes (e.g., the U.S. Food and Drug Administration creating a new over-the-counter [OTC] hearing aid category). In addition to various direct-to-consumer (DTC) hearing devices available on the market, there are also several validated tools for the self-assessment of auditory function and the detection of ear disease, as well as tools for education about hearing loss, hearing devices, and communication strategies. Further, all can be made easily available to a wide range of people. This perspective provides a framework and identifies tools to improve and maintain optimal auditory wellness across the adult life course. A broadly available and accessible set of tools that can be made available on a digital platform to aid adults in the assessment and as needed, the improvement, of auditory wellness is discussed.

Bengali-Sign: A Machine Learning-Based Bengali Sign Language Interpretation for Deaf and Non-Verbal People.

Sign language is undoubtedly a common way of communication among deaf and non-verbal people. But it is not common among hearing people to use sign language to express feelings or share information in everyday life. Therefore, a significant communication gap exists between deaf and hearing individuals, despite both groups experiencing similar emotions and sentiments. In this paper, we developed a convolutional neural network-squeeze excitation network to predict the sign language signs and developed a smartphone application to provide access to the ML model to use it. The SE block provides attention to the channel of the image, thus improving the performance of the model. On the other hand, the smartphone application brings the ML model close to people so that everyone can benefit from it. In addition, we used the Shapley additive explanation to interpret the black box nature of the ML model and understand the models working from within. Using our ML model, we achieved an accuracy of 99.86% on the KU-BdSL dataset. The SHAP analysis shows that the model primarily relies on hand-related visual cues to predict sign language signs, aligning with human communication patterns.

Narrative reconstruction in deaf and hearing children: A comparative study in the context of Arabic diglossia.

This study explores the narrative skills of deaf and hearing children within the context of Arabic diglossia, a linguistic environment characterised by significant differences between spoken dialects and formal written language. Using Stein and Glenn's (1979) and Bruner's (1991) frameworks, the research analyses the narrative constructions of 13 hearing and 13 deaf children in Kuwait. The findings reveal that hearing children, benefiting from consistent exposure to spoken and formal Arabic, produced more coherent and detailed narratives compared to deaf children. Hearing participants also demonstrated greater vocabulary diversity. Age-related improvements in narrative skills were more pronounced among hearing children, while the impact of sign language exposure on narrative abilities was significant among deaf children. The study underscores the critical role of early language exposure and educational support in fostering narrative development, particularly in a diglossic context. These findings highlight the need for specialised educational strategies to support the unique narrative development needs of deaf children.

Factors associated with the anxiety score of deaf and hearing mothers. / Fatores associados ao escore de ansiedade de mães surdas e ouvintes.

PURPOSE: To associate maternal anxiety with sociodemographic factors, breastfeeding practices, oral habits, and the child's entry into daycare among deaf and hearing (non-deaf) mothers. METHODS: This retrospective comparative cross-sectional study included 116 mothers (29 deaf and 87 hearing) of children aged between two and five years. Deaf mothers belonged to a reference center in the city, while hearing mothers were contacted in public daycares where their children were enrolled. Mothers underwent interviews covering socio-economic factors and child development-related aspects. Additionally, they completed the Brazilian Beck Anxiety Inventory, adapted for both deaf and hearing individuals, serving as instruments to assess anxiety. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test, Kruskal Wallis test, Mann-Whitney test, and Poisson Regression were employed for statistical analyses (p<0.05). RESULTS: Deaf mothers exhibited anxiety scores one and a half times higher than hearing mothers. Moreover, mothers of children with thumb-sucking habits showed higher anxiety scores, while mothers whose children started attending daycare as infants demonstrated lower anxiety scores compared to mothers of children without such habits and who did not attend daycare. CONCLUSION: Deaf mothers displayed higher anxiety levels when compared to hearing mothers. Children's behaviors, such as thumb-sucking habits, and early enrollment in daycare during the first year of life influenced maternal anxiety.

OBJETIVO: Associar a ansiedade materna aos fatores sociodemográficos, pratica de aleitamento, hábitos bucais e ingresso da criança em creche entre mulheres surdas e ouvintes. MÉTODO: Participaram deste estudo transversal retrospectivo comparativo, 116 mães (29 surdas e 87 ouvintes) de crianças na faixa etária entre dois e cinco anos. As mães surdas pertenciam a um centro de referência da cidade e as mães ouvintes foram contatadas em creches públicas, onde seus filhos estavam matriculados. As mães foram submetidas a entrevista sobre fatores socioeconômicos e relacionados ao desenvolvimento dos filhos, além de realizarem o preenchimento do Inventário Brasileiro de Ansiedade de Beck, nas versões para surdos e ouvintes, que foram instrumentos usados para avaliar a ansiedade. O teste de normalidade de Kolmogorov-Smirnov, os testes de Kruskal Wallis, Mann-Whitney e Regressão de Poisson foram utilizados para análises estatísticas (p <0,05). RESULTADOS: Mães surdas apresentaram escore de ansiedade uma vez e meia maior que mães ouvintes. Além disso, mães de crianças com hábito de sucção de dedo apresentaram maior escore de ansiedade e mães cujos filhos começaram a frequentar a creche ainda bebês apresentaram menor escore de ansiedade, quando comparados a crianças sem o hábito e que não frequentavam a creche. CONCLUSÃO: Mães surdas apresentaram maior ansiedade quando comparadas às ouvintes. Comportamento dos filhos com hábitos de sucção de dedo e o ingresso em creches no primeiro ano de vida influenciaram a ansiedade materna.

Biomarkers of auditory cortical plasticity and development of binaural pathways in children with unilateral hearing loss using a hearing aid.

Congenital or early-onset unilateral hearing loss (UHL) can disrupt the normal development of the auditory system. In extreme cases of UHL (i.e., single sided deafness), consistent cochlear implant use during sensitive periods resulted in cortical reorganization that partially reversed the detrimental effects of unilateral sensory deprivation. There is a gap in knowledge, however, regarding cortical plasticity i.e. the brain's capacity to adapt, reorganize, and develop binaural pathways in milder degrees of UHL rehabilitated by a hearing aid (HA). The current study was set to investigate early-stage cortical processing and electrophysiological manifestations of binaural processing by means of cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) to speech sounds, in children with moderate to severe-to-profound UHL using a HA. Fourteen children with UHL (CHwUHL), 6-14 years old consistently using a HA for 3.5 (±2.3) years participated in the study. CAEPs were elicited to the speech sounds /m/, /g/, and /t/ in three listening conditions: monaural [Normal hearing (NH), HA], and bilateral [BI (NH + HA)]. Results indicated age-appropriate CAEP morphology in the NH and BI listening conditions in all children. In the HA listening condition: (1) CAEPs showed similar morphology to that found in the NH listening condition, however, the mature morphology observed in older children in the NH listening condition was not evident; (2) P1 was elicited in all but two children with severe-to-profound hearing loss, to at least one speech stimuli, indicating effective audibility; (3) A significant mismatch in timing and synchrony between the NH and HA ear was found; (4) P1 was sensitive to the acoustic features of the eliciting stimulus and to the amplification characteristics of the HA. Finally, a cortical binaural interaction component (BIC) was derived in most children. In conclusion, the current study provides first-time evidence for cortical plasticity and partial reversal of the detrimental effects of moderate to severe-to-profound UHL rehabilitated by a HA. The derivation of a cortical biomarker of binaural processing implies that functional binaural pathways can develop when sufficient auditory input is provided to the affected ear. CAEPs may thus serve as a clinical tool for assessing, monitoring, and managing CHwUHL using a HA.

The Benefit of Hearing Aids as Measured by Listening Accuracy, Subjective Listening Effort, and Functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy.

There is broad consensus that listening effort is an important outcome for measuring hearing performance. However, there remains debate on the best ways to measure listening effort. This study sought to measure neural correlates of listening effort using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) in experienced adult hearing aid users. The study evaluated impacts of amplification and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) on cerebral blood oxygenation, with the expectation that easier listening conditions would be associated with less oxygenation in the prefrontal cortex. Thirty experienced adult hearing aid users repeated sentence-final words from low-context Revised Speech Perception in Noise Test sentences. Participants repeated words at a hard SNR (individual SNR-50) or easy SNR (individual SNR-50 + 10 dB), while wearing hearing aids fit to prescriptive targets or without wearing hearing aids. In addition to assessing listening accuracy and subjective listening effort, prefrontal blood oxygenation was measured using fNIRS. As expected, easier listening conditions (i.e., easy SNR, with hearing aids) led to better listening accuracy, lower subjective listening effort, and lower oxygenation across the entire prefrontal cortex compared to harder listening conditions. Listening accuracy and subjective listening effort were also significant predictors of oxygenation.