scholarly journals Hearing Loss in Cryptococcal Meningitis Survivors

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S306-S306
Author(s):  
Sarah Lofgren ◽  
Martha Montgomery ◽  
Nathan Yueh ◽  
Alice Namudde ◽  
Joshua Rhein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Cryptococcal Meningitis ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Severe Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing ◽  
Air Conduction

Abstract Background Hearing loss is a known complication cryptococcal meningitis (CM); however, there is a paucity of data. We aimed to describe hearing loss in CM survivors. Methods We assessed hearing via audiometry 8 and 18 weeks after diagnosis of CM in Kampala, Uganda from 2015-2016. We measured at 0.5, 1, 2, 4 Hz. Normal hearing was defined as minimum hearing level at <25 decibels (dB), mild at 25-39, moderate hearing at 40–69, severe at 70–89, and profound hearing loss at 90+ dB. We compared clinical factors, fungal burden, and CSF parameters to evaluate for factors associated with improvement (change in hearing loss category). Results We evaluated hearing symptoms via audiogram at week 8 (n = 117) and week 18 (n = 98). At 8-weeks, 6 (5%) participants had normal hearing, 36 (31%) had mild hearing loss, 72 (62%) had moderate hearing loss, 3 (3%) had severe hearing loss and none had profound hearing loss. Of those with moderate/severe/profound loss at week 8, 63 (54%) had mixed conductive + sensorineural hearing loss, 15 (13%) had sensorineural hearing loss, and 14 (12%) had conductive hearing loss. An additional 19 (16%) had sensorineural loss but unknown air conduction, and 3 (3%) did not have sensorineural loss but unknown air conduction. We compared risk factors for hearing loss summarized in Table 1. We assessed 66 participants who had repeated audiograms at week 8 and week 18. Of those 31 (47%) had no change, 30 (45%) had improvement and 5 (8%) had worsening. Conclusion Moderate/severe hearing loss was common 8 weeks after diagnosis of CM. More than half had mixed hearing loss and 20% had conductive hearing loss which represents a higher incidence than noted in other types of meningitis. The data is complicated by advanced HIV. Further research is needed evaluating immunologic factors causes hearing impairment in those who survived CM. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

scholarly journals The validity of an isiZulu speech reception threshold test for use with adult isiZulu speakers

2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Seema Panday ◽  
Harsha Kathard ◽  
Wayne J. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
First Language ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Speech Reception ◽  
Conductive Hearing

Background: This study continued the development of an isiZulu speech reception threshold (zSRT) test for use with first language, adult speakers of isiZulu.Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the convergent and concurrent validity of the zSRT test.Methods: One hundred adult isiZulu first-language speakers with normal hearing and 76 first-language, adult isiZulu speakers with conductive or sensorineural hearing losses ranging from mild to severe were assessed on pure tone audiometry and a newly developed isiZulu SRT test. Convergent validity was established through agreement of the zSRT scores with pure tone average (PTA) scores. Concurrent validity was assessed by examining the steepness of the psychometric curve for each word in the zSRT test for each type and degree of hearing loss.Results: Intraclass correlation coefficient analyses showed zSRT scores were in substantial to very high agreement with PTA scores for the normal hearing and hearing loss groups (NH – right ear ICC consistency = 0.78, left ear ICC = 0.67; HL – right ear ICC consistency = 0.97, left ear ICC consistency = 0.95). The mean psychometric slope (%/dB) at 50% correct perception for all words in the zSRT test was 4.92%/dB for the mild conductive hearing loss group, 5.26%/dB for the moderate conductive hearing loss group, 2.85%/dB for the moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss group and 2.47%/dB for the severe sensorineural hearing loss group. These slopes were appropriate for the degree of hearing loss observed in each group.Conclusion: The zSRT test showed convergent and concurrent validity for assessing SRT in first language, adult speakers of isiZulu.

scholarly journals A Controlled Comparison of Auditory Steady-State Responses and Pure-Tone Audiometry in Patients with Hearing Loss

2017 ◽  
Vol 96 (10-11) ◽  
pp. E47-E52
Author(s):  
Raman Wadhera ◽  
Sharad Hernot ◽  
Sat Paul Gulati ◽  
Vijay Kalra
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Steady State ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Pure Tone Audiometry ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Hearing Thresholds ◽  
Conductive Hearing

We performed a prospective interventional study to evaluate correlations between hearing thresholds determined by pure-tone audiometry (PTA) and auditory steady-state response (ASSR) testing in two types of patients with hearing loss and a control group of persons with normal hearing. The study was conducted on 240 ears—80 ears with conductive hearing loss, 80 ears with sensorineural hearing loss, and 80 normal-hearing ears. We found that mean threshold differences between PTA results and ASSR testing at different frequencies did not exceed 15 dB in any group. Using Pearson correlation coefficient calculations, we determined that the two responses correlated better in patients with sensorineural hearing loss than in those with conductive hearing loss. We conclude that measuring ASSRs can be an excellent complement to other diagnostic methods in determining hearing thresholds.

scholarly journals Assess the hearing of contralateral ear in patients with unilateral chronic squamosal otitis media

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 886
Author(s):  
Raphella Khan ◽  
Anirudh Kasliwal
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Otitis Media ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Retraction Pocket ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Contralateral Ear ◽  
The Right ◽  
Conductive Hearing

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Chronic squamosal otitis media can occur due to many conditions affecting the middle ear. Most common sign of developing a chronic squamosal otitis media is formation of a retraction pocket in the tympanic membrane leading to further development of a cholesteatoma and if not treated properly, may lead to development of dangerous complication in the affected ear. These etiological factors may also affect the other ear. It is therefore very necessary to assess and diagnose the contralateral ear, so that the disease can be intervened and treated at the right time, to prevent any deterioration in hearing of the contralateral ear.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> The prospective study was done in 100 patients with unilateral chronic squamosal otitis media, where the contra lateral ear was examined and assessed for any hearing loss.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> We found hearing loss in the contra lateral ear ranging from mild conductive hearing loss to sensorineural hearing loss with the maximum patients with mild conductive hearing loss (42%) and lowest in sensorineural hearing loss (1%).  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> In our study, 76 patients were seen with conductive hearing loss. Out of that, 42% patients were seen with mild conductive hearing loss, 30% with moderate conductive hearing loss and 4% with severe conductive hearing loss. 20% patients were seen with normal hearing. 3% patients were seen with mixed hearing loss and only 1% patient was seen with sensorineural hearing loss in contralateral ear.</p>

A Smartphone-Based Weber Test May Discriminate between a Conductive and a Sensorineural Hearing Loss

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 191-196
Author(s):  
Omer J. Ungar ◽  
Ophir Handzel ◽  
Oren Cavel ◽  
Yahav Oron
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Clinical Study ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Tuning Fork ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing

Objective: The aim of this paper was to compare the accuracy of a smartphone-based Weber test (SPWT) with the traditional tuning fork Weber test (TFWT) in identifying and differentiating between sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) and conductive hearing loss (CHL). Study Design: We conducted a prospective, noncontrolled clinical study. Methods: Sixty patients referred to the emergency department due to unilateral hearing loss (HL) were enrolled. They were asked to press a single uncovered smartphone on their forehead and conduct a Weber test by means of the smartphone’s vibration application. The results were compared to the TFWT. Results: Twenty-six (43%) patients were diagnosed with a SNHL, and 34 (57%) with a CHL. The SPWT was in agreement with the TFWT (at a frequency of 512 Hz) in 55 (92%) patients. The sensitivity and specificity of the TFWT were 84.6 and 94.1%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the SPWT were 76.9 and 97.1%, respectively. Conclusion: SPWT can serve as an auxiliary diagnostic tool in the absence of a 512-Hz tuning fork to assist in the identification of the type of HL and to potentially hasten the diagnosis and provision of treatment when indicated.

Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss Rehabilitation

1991 ◽  
Vol 105 (6) ◽  
pp. 771-778 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Bradley Welling ◽  
Michael E. Glasscock ◽  
Charles I. Woods ◽  
Ronald C. Sheffey
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Selection Criteria ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Conductive Hearing

The Audiant Bone Conductor has been heralded as an aid for use in conductive hearing loss; however, its possible use in unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) has also been proposed. Between July 1987 and July 1989, profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss has been rehabilitated In 43 patients using the Xomed Audiant Bone Conductor. Patients who were willing to participate in this clinical trial and who were felt to be good contralateral routing of signals (CROS) aid candidates were selected preoperatively. Audiometric followup, selection criteria, patient satisfaction, and complications are discussed.

Patterns of hearing loss in non-explosive blast injury of the ear

1997 ◽  
Vol 111 (12) ◽  
pp. 1137-1141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilead Berger ◽  
Yehuda Finkelstein ◽  
Shabtai Avraham ◽  
Mordehai Himmelfarb
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Ossicular Chain ◽  
Blast Injury ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Single Frequency ◽  
A Prospective Study ◽  
Conductive Hearing

AbstractA prospective study of hearing loss in 120 cases with non-explosive blast injury of the ear, gathered over a six-year period, is presented. Thirty-three (27.5 per cent) patients had normal hearing, 57 (47.5 per cent) conductive hearing loss, 29 (24.2 per cent) mixed loss and one (0.8 per cent) had pure sensorineural loss. The severity of conductive hearing loss correlated with the size of the eardrum perforation; only a marginal difference was found between water and air pressure injuries, with respect to this type of hearing loss. Of all locations, perforations involving the posterior-inferior quadrant of the eardrum were associated with the largest air-bone gap. Audiometric assessment revealed that none of the patients suffered ossicular chain damage. Three patterns of sensorineural hearing loss were identified: a dip at a single frequency, two separate dips, and abnormality of bone conduction in several adjacent high frequencies. Involvement of several frequencies was associated with a more severe hearing loss than a dip in a single frequency. Healing of the perforation was always accompanied by closure of the air-bone gap, while the recovery of the sensorineural hearing loss was less favourable.

scholarly journals Effects of Radiotherapy on Auditory and Vestibular Function

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Sachin Sharad Nilakhe
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Vestibular Dysfunction ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Head And Neck Malignancies ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Conductive Hearing

ABSTRACT Introduction Radiotherapy either primary or adjuvant, is a commonly used modality of treatment in head and neck malignancies. The audiovestibular apparatus is often within the fields of radiation treatment, and hearing loss is a possible complication. This study was undertaken to assess the audiovestibular functions in patients undergoing radiation therapy for head and neck malignancies to determine the type and severity of hearing loss and vestibular dysfunction following radiation therapy. Materials and methods Fifty patients with head and neck malignancies reported to the malignant disease treatment center of INHS Asvini and received radiotherapy as a primary modality of treatment or in combination with surgery during the period May 2003 to Sep 2004 were included in this study. None of these patients had prior treatment by chemotherapy. Conclusion A significant number of patients who were subjected to radiation therapy for head and neck malignancies develop conductive hearing loss is predominant in the immediate postradiation period. Conductive hearing loss is reversible and improves with the conservative line of treatment. Sensorineural hearing loss more commonly affects the higher frequencies and is more common in older patients. Sensorineural hearing loss is more common when radiation doses exceed 60 Gy. There is no conclusive evidence of vestibular dysfunction in patients undergoing radiotherapy for head and neck cancers.

Atresia and Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (04) ◽  
pp. 241-248
Author(s):  
Steven P. Smith ◽  
Simon Milov ◽  
Joel A. Goebel
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Bone Anchored Hearing Aid ◽  
The Right ◽  
Conductive Hearing

This case study summarizes findings in an adult male, aged 57, who presented to the Adult Audiology Clinic with aural atresia in the right ear resulting in a conductive hearing loss and a sudden sensorineural hearing loss in the left ear. Treatment options included reconstruction surgery in the right ear, bone anchored hearing aid in the right ear to overcome the conductive hearing loss, bone anchored hearing aid in the left ear for single sided deafness, and intratympanic steroid injections in the left ear to salvage hearing.This case study highlights that when a patient is educated on all available options the patient is then able to make a decision comfortable to him and to help improve his hearing.

The Wildervanck Syndrome: Cervico-Oculo-Acoustic Dysplasia

1979 ◽  
Vol 87 (6) ◽  
pp. 892-897 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael L. Eisemann ◽  
Gopesh K. Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Inner Ear ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Semicircular Canals ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Lateral Rectus ◽  
Basilar Impression ◽  
Conductive Hearing

The Wildervanck syndrome consists of the Klippel-Feil deformity of the spine, eyeball retraction, lateral gaze weakness, and hearing loss. Conductive hearing loss, as well as a more frequently occurring sensorineural hearing loss, is caused by dysplasia of the inner ear. Typically, polytomograms demonstrate a bulbous vestibule and dilated lateral semicircular canals with basilar impression of the skull. The Duane's eyeball retraction phenomenon completes the syndrome; this may be explained either by misdirected innervation of the extra-ocular muscles or by atrophy or fibrosis of the lateral rectus muscles.

Audiometric Bing Test for Determination of Minimum Masking Levels for Bone-Conduction Tests

1974 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 148-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick N. Martin ◽  
Ernest C. Butler ◽  
Paul Burns
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
The Other ◽  
Occlusion Effect ◽  
Conductive Hearing

Occlusion effects were determined and compared on three groups of subjects (20 normal hearers, 20 with conductive hearing loss, and 20 with sensorineural hearing loss). As in previous studies, the occlusion effects of the conductive group were clearly different from those of the other two groups, especially at 250 Hz. Two procedures are discussed which use the principle of the Bing test to determine when and how to compensate for the occlusion effect while masking for bone conduction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document