Effects of Universal Newborn Hearing Screening on an Early Intervention Program for Children with Hearing Loss, Birth to 3 Yr of Age

2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (03) ◽  
pp. 169-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathy S. Halpin ◽  
Kay Y. Smith ◽  
Judith E. Widen ◽  
Mark E. Chertoff
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Late Onset ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Universal Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Age Of Diagnosis ◽  
Diagnosis Age

Background: Universal Newborn Hearing Screening (UNHS) was introduced in Kansas in 1999. Prior to UNHS a small percentage of newborns were screened for and identified with hearing loss. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of UNHS on a local early intervention (EI) program for young children with hearing loss. Research Design: This was a retrospective study based on the chart review of children enrolled in the EI program during target years before and after the establishment of UNHS. Study Sample: Charts for 145 children were reviewed. Data Collection and Analysis: The chart review targeted the following aspects of the EI program: caseload size, percentage of caseload identified by UNHS, age of diagnosis, age of enrollment in EI, degree of hearing loss, etiology of hearing loss, late onset of hearing loss, age of hearing aid fit, percentage of children fit with hearing aids by 6 mo, percentage of children with profound hearing loss with cochlear implants, and percentage of children with additional disabilities. Results: Changes in the EI program that occurred after UNHS were increases in caseload size, percentage of caseload identified by UNHS, percentage of children fit with hearing aids by 6 mo of age, and percentage of children with profound hearing loss with cochlear implants. There were decreases in age of diagnosis, age of enrollment in EI, and age of hearing aid fit. Before UNHS, the majority of children had severe and profound hearing loss; after UNHS there were more children with mild and moderate hearing loss. The percentage of known etiology and late-onset hearing loss was approximately the same before and after UNHS, as was the percentage of children with additional disabilities. Conclusion: UNHS had a positive impact on caseload size, age of diagnosis, age of enrollment in EI, and age of hearing aid fit. The percentage of the caseload identified in the newborn period was about 25% before UNHS and over 80% after its implementation. After UNHS, the EI caseload included as many children with mild and moderate hearing loss as with severe and profound loss. By the last reporting year in the study (academic year 2005–2006) all children with profound hearing losses had cochlear implants.

Working Memory, Sleep, and Hearing Problems in Patients with Tinnitus and Hearing Loss Fitted with Hearing Aids

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (02) ◽  
pp. 141-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reza Zarenoe ◽  
Mathias Hällgren ◽  
Gerhard Andersson ◽  
Torbjörn Ledin
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cognitive Function ◽  
Sleep Quality ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Reading Span ◽  
Full Sample ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Hearing Problems

Background: Tinnitus is a common condition and there is a need to evaluate effects of tinnitus management in relation to moderating factors such as degree of hearing loss. As it is possible that tinnitus influences concentration, and thus is likely to disturb cognitive processing, the role of cognitive functioning also needs to be investigated. Purpose: To compare a group of patients with sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus to a control group with only sensorineural hearing loss (and no tinnitus). To investigate working memory, sleep, and hearing problems measured before and after hearing rehabilitation. Research Design: A prospective study. Study Sample: The sample consisted of 100 patients, 50 with hearing loss and tinnitus, and 50 controls with hearing loss but no tinnitus. All patients were between 40 and 82 yr old and had a pure-tone average (PTA; average of 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz) <70 dB HL. Intervention: Patients were tested before and after rehabilitation with hearing aids with regard to their working memory capacity, sleep quality, hearing problems, speech recognition, and tinnitus annoyance. Data Collection and Analysis: Eight patients dropped out of the study. Thus, a total of 92 patients were included for analysis, with 46 in each group. As a consequence of unplanned age and PTA differences between the groups, an age-matched subsample (n = 30 + 30) was selected for further analysis. Tests including the Reading Span, Hearing-in-Noise Test (HINT), Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) were administered before and after hearing aid rehabilitation. Results: There were no between-group differences at baseline in the full sample (n = 92), with the exception of the THI (p < 0.001) and the PSQI (p < 0.002), on which the hearing loss and tinnitus group had significantly higher scores. Pre/post changes were significant for both groups on the Reading Span, and HHIE. However, these improvements were significantly larger for the patients in the hearing loss and tinnitus group on the Reading Span test (p < 0.001) and the PSQI (p < 0.001). Patients with tinnitus and hearing loss also exhibited significantly improved THI scores at follow-up, compared to baseline (p < 0.001).We conducted the same analyses for the age-matched subsample (n = 30 + 30). For the baseline data, only the THI (p < 0.001) and the PSQI (p < 0.015) difference remained significant. With regard to the pre/post changes, we found the same differences in improvement in Reading Span (p < 0.001) and the PSQI (p < 0.015) as in the full sample. Conclusions: Patients with tinnitus benefited from hearing aid rehabilitation. The observed differences in cognitive function were unexpected, and there were larger score improvements on the Reading Span test in the hearing loss and tinnitus group than in the hearing loss group. Patients with tinnitus and hearing loss may receive extra benefit in terms of cognitive function following hearing aid rehabilitation.

scholarly journals Evidence of Acclimatization in Persons with Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss

2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (02) ◽  
pp. 084-099 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis K. Kuk ◽  
Lisa Potts ◽  
Michael Valente ◽  
Lidia Lee ◽  
Jay Picirrillo
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Secondary Purpose ◽  
Objective Performance ◽  
Recognition Testing ◽  
The One ◽  
Better Than

The present study examined the phenomenon of acclimatization in persons with a severe-to-profound hearing loss. A secondary purpose was to examine the efficacy of a digital nonlinear power hearing aid that has a low compression threshold with expansion for this population. Twenty experienced hearing aid users wore the study hearing aids for three months and their performance with the study hearing aids was evaluated at the initial fitting, one month, and three months after the initial fitting. Performance of their current hearing aids was also evaluated at the initial fitting. Speech recognition testing was conducted at input levels of 50 dB SPL and 65 dB SPL in quiet, and 75 dB SPL in noise at a +10 SNR. Questionnaires were used to measure subjective performance at each evaluation interval. The results showed improvement in speech recognition score at the one-month evaluation over the initial evaluation. No significant improvement was seen at the three-month evaluation from the one-month visit. In addition, subjective and objective performance of the study hearing aids was significantly better than the participants' own hearing aids at all evaluation intervals. These results provided evidence of acclimatization in persons with a severe-to-profound hearing loss and reinforced the precaution that any trial of amplification, especially from linear to nonlinear mode, should consider this phenomenon.

The Hearing Performance Inventory and Hearing Aid Use in Profound Hearing Loss

1980 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 470-479 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elmer Owens ◽  
Sharon Fujikawa
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aid Use

Subjects with profound postlingual hearing loss completed the Hearing Performance Inventory (HPI) during the course of their hearing aid evaluations. Comparisons of responses to the HPI were made for (a) subjects who wore hearing aids versus subjects who did not, and (b)hearing aid users with losses greater than 100 dB versus users with losses between 80-100 dB. The former set of comparisons indicated consistently superior performance for the aided group, and the latter set indicated consistently superior performance for the 80-100 dB group. The HPI may be a valuable tool in hearing aid considerations.

Hearing aids and tinnitus therapy: a 25-year experience

2008 ◽  
Vol 122 (10) ◽  
pp. 1052-1056 ◽  
Author(s):  
M I Trotter ◽  
I Donaldson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
University Teaching ◽  
Digital Hearing Aids ◽  
Subjective Tinnitus ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Digital Hearing Aid ◽  
Tinnitus Therapy ◽  
The Impact

AbstractObjectives:(1) To assess the subjective tinnitus perception of patients with audiologically proven hearing loss presenting to a tinnitus clinic, both before and after hearing aid provision; (2) to investigate subjective tinnitus perception in patients with unilateral and bilateral hearing loss; and (3) to assess the impact on tinnitus perception, if any, of a digital hearing aid programme in patients provided with hearing aids.Design:Prospective data collection for patients attending a tinnitus clinic over a 25-year period (1980–2004).Setting:University teaching hospital otolaryngology department.Participants:A total of 2153 consecutive patients attending a consultant-delivered specialist tinnitus clinic.Main outcomes measures:A visual analogue scale was used to assess the degree of tinnitus perception improvement, if any, comparing before versus after unilateral or bilateral aiding (in those with audiometrically proven hearing loss). A further assessment compared the effect of digital hearing aid programme introduction on symptomatic tinnitus perception in patients provided with unilateral or bilateral aids.Results:A total of 1440 patients were given hearing aids (826 unilateral and 614 bilateral). There was little difference in tinnitus perception, comparing overall aiding results in unilaterally or bilaterally aided patients. Overall, 554 (67 per cent) of unilaterally aided patients and 424 (69 per cent) of bilaterally aided patients reported some improvement in their tinnitus perception following aiding. There was a statistically significant improvement in tinnitus perception, comparing analogue aids with digital hearing aids, following introduction of a digital hearing aid programme in 2000, in both unilaterally (p < 0.001) and bilaterally (p < 0.001) aided patients.Conclusions:Provision of hearing aids in patients with audiometrically demonstrable hearing loss can play a very important part in tinnitus control. The additional improvement in tinnitus control observed following introduction of programmable digital aids had a summative effect in the management of these patients.

scholarly journals The Effects of Manufacturer’s Prefit and Real-Ear Fitting on the Predicted Speech Perception of Children with Severe to Profound Hearing Loss

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (05) ◽  
pp. 346-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tian Kar Quar ◽  
Cila Umat ◽  
Yong Yee Chew
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
High Input ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
High Frequency Region ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractThe use of probe microphone measures in hearing aid verification is often neglected or not fully used by practitioners. Some practitioners rely on simulated gain and output provided by manufacturer's fitting software to verify hearing aids.This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of manufacturer’s prefit procedure in matching the prescribed real-ear targets. It also aims to study its correlated impact on the predicted speech perception in children with severe and profound hearing loss.This cross-sectional experiment was carried out by measuring the output of hearing aids based on prefit versus real-ear at low-, moderate-, and high-input levels. The predicted speech perception for different hearing aid fittings was determined based on the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII).Sixteen children (28 ears) aged between 4 and 7 yr, with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss took part in the study.Two different types of hearing aids (Phonak and Unitron) were programmed based on their respective manufacturers’ Desired Sensation Levels (DSL) v5 Child procedure. The hearing aids were then verified using coupler-based measurements and individual real-ear-to-coupler differences. The prefit outputs were compared with the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs at low-, moderate-, and high-input levels. The hearing aids were then adjusted to closely match the prescribed output. The SIIs were calculated for the fittings before and after adjustment.Sixty four percent of fittings that were based on the prefit procedure achieved the optimal fit-to-targets, with less than 5-dB RMS deviations from the DSL v5 Child targets. After adjusting the hearing aids to attempt to meet the DSL v5 Child targets, 75% of the ears tested achieved the optimal fit-to-targets. On average, hearing aid outputs generated by the manufacturer’s prefit procedure had good and reasonable agreement with the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs at low- and mid-frequencies. Nonetheless, at 4000 Hz, the hearing aid output mostly fell below the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs. This was still the case even after the hearing aid was adjusted to attempt to match with the targets. At low input level, some prefit outputs were found to be higher than the prescribed outputs. The deviations of prefit outputs from the prescribed outputs were dependent on the type of hearing aid and input levels. There was no significant difference between the SII calculated for fittings based on the prefit and adjusted fit.Prefit procedure tends to produce outputs that were below the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs, with the largest mean difference at 4000 Hz. Even though the hearing aid gains were adjusted to attempt to match with the targets, the outputs were still below the targets. The limitations of hearing aids to match the DSL v5 Child targets at high-frequency region have resulted in no improvement in the children’s predicted speech perception.

scholarly journals Profound Hearing Loss: Addressing Barriers to Hearing Healthcare

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (04) ◽  
pp. 428-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila Pratt
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Professional Training ◽  
Community Outreach ◽  
Health Issues ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Barriers To Healthcare ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Common Barriers

AbstractThe impact of profound hearing loss on infants and adults is variable and greatly influenced by improved audition derived from hearing aids and cochlear implants. However, barriers to healthcare, hearing healthcare in particular, can offset the benefits provided by these sensory devices. Common barriers include cost, location, availability of trained professionals, acceptance of the hearing loss, language and cultural differences, secondary disabilities, and mental health issues. These barriers and their distinct presentations vary somewhat by age, language, and where people live (urban vs. rural), and can interfere with receiving testing and devices in a timely manner. They also can limit auditory, speech and language therapies, and interfere with acceptance of the hearing loss and devices. Rehabilitation should focus on eliminating or reducing the adverse impact of these barriers on patients and their families. Some of which can be done through professional training and multidisciplinary activities, counseling, and community outreach.

scholarly journals The cost-effectiveness of Cochlear implants in Swedish adults

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mutsa Gumbie ◽  
Emma Olin ◽  
Bonny Parkinson ◽  
Ross Bowman ◽  
Henry Cutler
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Background Research has shown unilateral cochlear implants (CIs) significantly improve clinical outcomes and quality of life in adults. However, only 13% of eligible Swedish adults currently use a unilateral CI. The objective was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of unilateral CIs compared to a hearing aid for Swedish adults with severe to profound hearing loss. Methods A Markov model with a lifetime horizon and six-month cycle length was developed to estimate the benefits and costs of unilateral CIs from the Swedish health system perspective. A treatment pathway was developed through consultation with clinical experts to estimate resource use and costs. Unit costs were derived from the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare and the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions. Health outcomes were reported in terms of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Results Unilateral CIs for Swedish adults with severe to profound hearing loss are likely to be deemed cost-effective when compared to a hearing aid (SEK 140,474 per QALY gained). The results were most sensitive to the age when patients are implanted with a CI and the proportion of patients eligible for CIs after triage. Conclusions An increase in the prevalence of Swedish adults with severe to profound hearing loss is expected as the population ages. Earlier implantation of unilateral CIs improves the cost-effectiveness among people eligible for CIs. Unilateral CIs are an efficacious and cost-effective option to improve hearing and quality of life in Swedish adults with severe to profound hearing loss.

scholarly journals The cost-effectiveness of unilateral cochlear implants in UK adults

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry Cutler ◽  
Mutsa Gumbie ◽  
Emma Olin ◽  
Bonny Parkinson ◽  
Ross Bowman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Unit Costs ◽  
The Cost

Abstract Objective The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) updated its eligibility criteria for unilateral cochlear implants (UCIs) in 2019. NICE claimed this would not impact the cost-effectiveness results used within its 2009 technology appraisal guidance. This claim is uncertain given changed clinical practice and increased healthcare unit costs. Our objective was to estimate the cost-effectiveness estimates of UCIs in UK adults with severe to profound hearing loss within the contemporary NHS environment. Methods A cost–utility analysis employing a Markov model was undertaken to compare UCIs with hearing aids or no hearing aids for people with severe to profound hearing loss. A clinical pathway was developed to estimate resource use. Health-related quality of life, potential adverse events, device upgrades and device failure were captured. Unit costs were derived mostly from the NHS data. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis further assessed the effect of uncertain model inputs. Results A UCI is likely to be deemed cost-effective when compared to a hearing aid (£11,946/QALY) or no hearing aid (£10,499/QALY). A UCI has an 93.0% and 98.7% likelihood of being cost-effective within the UK adult population when compared to a hearing aid or no hearing aid, respectively. ICERs were mostly sensitive to the proportion of people eligible for cochlear implant, discount rate, surgery and device costs and processor upgrade cost. Conclusion UCIs remain cost-effective despite changes to clinical practice and increased healthcare unit costs. Updating the NICE criteria to provide better access UCIs is projected to increase annual implants in adults and children by 70% and expenditure by £28.6 million within three years. This increased access to UCIs will further improve quality of life of recipients and overall social welfare.

Transitioning Hearing Aid Users with Severe and Profound Loss to a New Gain/Frequency Response: Benefit, Perception, and Acceptance

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (03) ◽  
pp. 168-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Convery ◽  
Gitte Keidser
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Frequency Response ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Paired Comparison ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Discrimination Performance ◽  
Gradual Change ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Experimental Group

Background: Adults with severe and profound hearing loss tend to be long-term, full-time users of amplification who are highly reliant on their hearing aids. As a result of these characteristics, they are often reluctant to update their hearing aids when new features or signal-processing algorithms become available. Due to the electroacoustic constraints of older devices, many severely and profoundly hearing-impaired adults continue to wear hearing aids that provide more low- and mid-frequency gain and less high-frequency gain than would be prescribed by the National Acoustic Laboratories’ revised formula with profound correction factor (NAL-RP). Purpose: To investigate the effect of a gradual change in gain/frequency response on experienced hearing-aid wearers with moderately severe to profound hearing loss. Research Design: Double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Study Sample: Twenty-three experienced adult hearing-aid users with severe and profound hearing loss participated in the study. Participants were selected for inclusion in the study if the gain/frequency response of their own hearing aids differed significantly from their NAL-RP prescription. Participants were assigned either to a control or to an experimental group balanced for aided ear three-frequency pure-tone average (PTA) and age. Intervention: Participants were fitted with Siemens Artis 2 SP behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids that were matched to the gain/frequency response of their own hearing aids for a 65 dB SPL input level. The experimental group progressed incrementally to their NAL-RP targets over the course of 15 wk, while the control group maintained their initial settings throughout the study. Data Collection and Analysis: Aided speech discrimination testing, loudness scaling, and structured questionnaires were completed at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 wk postfitting. A paired comparison between the old and new gain/frequency responses was completed at 1 and 15 wk postfitting. Statistical analysis was conducted to examine differences between the experimental and control groups and changes in objective performance and subjective perception over time. Results: The results of the study showed that participants in the experimental group were subjectively accepting of the changes to their amplification characteristics, as evidenced by nonsignificant changes in the ratings of device performance over time. Perception of loudness, sound quality, speech intelligibility, and own voice volume did not change significantly throughout the study. Objectively, participants in the experimental group demonstrated poorer speech discrimination performance as the study progressed, although there was no change in objective loudness perception. According to the paired comparison, there was an overall subjective preference for the original gain/frequency response among all participants, although participants in the experimental group did show an increase in preference for the NAL-RP response by the end of the study. Conclusions: Based on the findings of this study, we suggest that undertaking a gradual change to a new gain/frequency response with severely and profoundly hearing-impaired adults is a feasible procedure. However, we recommend that clinicians select transition candidates carefully and initiate the procedure only if there is a clinical reason for doing so. A validated prescriptive formula should be used as a transition target, and speech discrimination performance should be monitored throughout the transition.

SOME CHARECTERISTIC EPIDEMIC OF HEARING LOSS CHILDREN UNDER 3 YEARS OLD IN NATIONAL CHILDREN HOSPITAL IN 2018-2019

2021 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vu Dinh Thiem ◽  
Lai Thu Ha ◽  
Phan Huu Phuc
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Language Therapy ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
High Risk Factors ◽  
History Of ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss ◽  
Impaired Children

A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted on a group of 461 hearing impaired children who were diagnosed and treated at the Audiology and Speech language therapy centre at the National Children Hospital from January 2018 to August 2019. The purpose of the study is to assess the distribution of children by age group, gender, degree of hearing loss, high risk factors of hearing loss, and status of intervention in this group of children. Data were taken by using questionnaires and analyzed using Stata software. The results showed in the study group, there were 281 boys and 180 girls. Children with profound hearing loss have the highest rate with 58.4%, followed by the severe (11,9%) and the moderate to severe (6,9%). ANSD accounts for 16.7%. The majority of children with hearing loss in both ears (90,5%), only 9,5% children with hearing loss in one ear. The most common age at which children with hearing loss are detected is 13-24 months (33,2%). Among ANSD children, 73,6% had a history of jaundice in the newborn period. Only 17,6% of children had hearing aids and 8,9% of children with severe to profound hearing loss had cochlear implants.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document