scholarly journals Sensorineural hearing loss and risk of stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Masoud Khosravipour ◽  
Fatemeh Rajati
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Mesh Terms ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Newcastle Ottawa Scale ◽  
Adjusted Model

AbstractThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis study was to clarify the effects of sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) on the incidence of stroke. In line with this, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect databases were searched using related keywords and MeSH terms from inception to March 1, 2020. Out of the 1961 initial records, eight cohort studies comprising 4,564,202 participants were included, and their qualities were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Then, the random-effects model was used to pool HR (95% CI) for risk of stroke; and heterogeneity was presented with I2 index. Subgroup analysis and publication bias tests were performed, and the pooled HR (95% CI) of stroke in SNHL was estimated as 1.31 (1.08, 1.53) for the unadjusted model and 1.33 (1.18, 1.49) for the adjusted model. Subgroup analysis indicates a significantly higher risk of stroke in patients with sudden SNHL (SSNHL) in comparison to age-related HL (ARHL) both in the unadjusted model, [HR = 1.46; 95% CI (1.08, 1.63)] versus [HR = 1.14; 95% CI (0.64, 1.65)], and in the adjusted model, [HR = 1.44; 95% CI (1.15, 1.74)] versus [HR = 1.29; 95% CI (1.24, 1.34)]. Our study showed that patients with SNHL face a higher risk of stroke than those without SNHL. It is necessary to perform hematologic and neurological examinations to help clinicians detect patients who are potentially at risk for stroke.

scholarly journals Association of anemia with sensorineural hearing loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shimel Hussien Mohammed ◽  
Sakineh Shab-Bidar ◽  
Samer Abuzerr ◽  
Tesfa Dejenie Habtewold ◽  
Shahab Alizadeh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk factors for sudden sensorineural hearing loss in adults

2012 ◽  
Vol 122 (3) ◽  
pp. 624-635 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Jun Lin ◽  
Randall Krall ◽  
Brian D. Westerberg ◽  
Neil K. Chadha ◽  
Justin K. Chau
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing

Hearing Aid Benefit in Patients with Mild Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (04) ◽  
pp. 293-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carole E. Johnson ◽  
Jeffrey L. Danhauer ◽  
Blakely B. Ellis ◽  
Anna Marie Jilla
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Medium Effect

Background: Untreated sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) is associated with chronic health-care conditions, isolation, loneliness, and reduced quality of life. Although hearing aids can minimize the negative effects of SNHL, only about one in five persons with SNHL seeks help for communication problems. Many persons wait 10 yr or more from the time they first notice a problem before pursuing amplification. Further, little information about the benefits of amplification is available for persons with mild SNHL (MSNHL), who likely defer treatment even longer. Purpose: To conduct a systematic review to weigh the evidence regarding benefits derived from the use of amplification by adults with MSNHL. Research Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Study Sample: Adult hearing aid wearers with bilateral average pure-tone thresholds ≤45 dB HL at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. Data Collection and Analysis: PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied-Health Literature, Cochrane Collaboration, and Google Scholar were searched independently by the authors during September 2013. The authors used a consensus approach to assess the quality and extract data for the meta-analysis. Results: Of 106 articles recovered for full-text review, only 10 met inclusion criteria (at least Level IV of evidence and involved and reported separate pre-/postfitting hearing aid outcomes for patients with MSNHL). Included studies involved mainly middle-aged to elderly patients using hearing aids of various styles and circuitry. Results from all of the studies indicated positive benefits from amplification for patients with MSNHL. Data from five studies were suitable for a meta-analysis, which produced a small-to-medium effect size of 0.85 (95% confidence intervals = 0.44–1.25) after adjusting for a small publication bias. This evidence confirmed benefits from the use of amplification in adults with MSNHL. Conclusions: Evidence exists supporting the notion that adults with MSNHL benefit from hearing aids. This information is important and useful to audiologists, patients, and third-party payers, even considering that most of the studies in this systematic review were limited, somewhat dated, and used analog and early digital technology available when the studies were conducted. Clinical recommendations may be even stronger as future studies become available for patients fit with modern styles and high-technology hearing aids.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document