Academic Outcomes with Hearing Amplification Devices in Children with Unilateral Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Daniel R Romano, Sampat Sindhar, Lauren H Yaeger, Judith E C Lieu
{"title":"Academic Outcomes with Hearing Amplification Devices in Children with Unilateral Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.","authors":"Daniel R Romano, Sampat Sindhar, Lauren H Yaeger, Judith E C Lieu","doi":"10.1159/000539513","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many studies have shown increased academic problems in children with unilateral hearing loss (UHL). However, whether hearing devices can ameliorate the educational difficulties associated with UHL is not well studied. Therefore, the objective of the current systematic review was to answer the question: do nonsurgical amplification devices, bone-anchored hearing aids, and/or cochlear implants improve academic outcomes in school-aged children and adolescents with UHL?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, APA PsycInfo, <ext-link ext-link-type=\"uri\" xlink:href=\"http://ClinicalTrials.gov\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\">ClinicalTrials.gov</ext-link>, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to December 21, 2022. Published, peer-reviewed studies comparing academic outcomes in patients with UHL aged ≥5 and ≤19 years with and without hearing devices (nonsurgical amplification devices, bone-anchored hearing aids, or cochlear implants) were included. Results of studies were qualitatively synthesized, and the risk of bias was evaluated with the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 5,644 non-duplicate publications were identified by the search, and four studies were included for synthesis, every one of which was investigating nonsurgical amplification. One small, single-arm study demonstrated significant improvement in subjective classroom listening difficulties after a 3- to 4-month trial with a behind-the-ear hearing aid. The other three studies of nonsurgical amplification devices showed no benefit across multiple academic outcomes with FM systems and conventional and CROS-style hearing aids.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The small sample sizes, heterogeneous and/or ill-defined study samples, and overall low quality of the available literature ultimately make it hard to draw definitive conclusions regarding nonsurgical amplification devices' effectiveness in improving academic outcomes in children with UHL. No articles were identified that studied cochlear implants or bone-anchored hearing aids. Further studies with high-quality study design, large sample sizes, and long-term follow-up are needed to answer this clinically important question.</p>","PeriodicalId":55432,"journal":{"name":"Audiology and Neuro-Otology","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11604817/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Audiology and Neuro-Otology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000539513","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Many studies have shown increased academic problems in children with unilateral hearing loss (UHL). However, whether hearing devices can ameliorate the educational difficulties associated with UHL is not well studied. Therefore, the objective of the current systematic review was to answer the question: do nonsurgical amplification devices, bone-anchored hearing aids, and/or cochlear implants improve academic outcomes in school-aged children and adolescents with UHL?

Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, APA PsycInfo, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to December 21, 2022. Published, peer-reviewed studies comparing academic outcomes in patients with UHL aged ≥5 and ≤19 years with and without hearing devices (nonsurgical amplification devices, bone-anchored hearing aids, or cochlear implants) were included. Results of studies were qualitatively synthesized, and the risk of bias was evaluated with the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool.

Results: A total of 5,644 non-duplicate publications were identified by the search, and four studies were included for synthesis, every one of which was investigating nonsurgical amplification. One small, single-arm study demonstrated significant improvement in subjective classroom listening difficulties after a 3- to 4-month trial with a behind-the-ear hearing aid. The other three studies of nonsurgical amplification devices showed no benefit across multiple academic outcomes with FM systems and conventional and CROS-style hearing aids.

Discussion: The small sample sizes, heterogeneous and/or ill-defined study samples, and overall low quality of the available literature ultimately make it hard to draw definitive conclusions regarding nonsurgical amplification devices' effectiveness in improving academic outcomes in children with UHL. No articles were identified that studied cochlear implants or bone-anchored hearing aids. Further studies with high-quality study design, large sample sizes, and long-term follow-up are needed to answer this clinically important question.

单侧听力损失儿童使用听力扩增设备的学习成绩:系统综述和叙述性综述。
背景:许多研究表明,单侧听力损失(UHL)儿童的学习问题越来越多。然而,听力设备能否改善与 UHL 相关的教育困难,目前还没有很好的研究。因此,本系统综述旨在回答以下问题:非手术扩音设备、骨固定助听器和/或人工耳蜗是否能改善 UHL 学龄儿童和青少年的学习成绩?检索了从开始到 12/21/22 的 Embase、MEDLINE、Scopus、CINAHL、APA PsycInfo、ClinicalTrials.gov 和 Cochrane 数据库。纳入了已发表的、经同行评审的研究,这些研究比较了年龄≥ 5 岁和≤ 19 岁的 UHL 患者使用和不使用听力设备(非手术扩音设备、骨固定助听器或人工耳蜗)的学术成果。对研究结果进行了定性综合,并使用有效公共卫生实践项目(EPHPP)质量评估工具对偏倚风险进行了评估:搜索共发现 5,644 篇非重复出版物,其中四项研究被纳入综合研究,每项研究都对非手术扩声进行了调查。其中一项小型单臂研究表明,在使用 BTE 助听器 3 至 4 个月后,课堂听力主观障碍有了显著改善。其他三项关于非手术放大设备的研究表明,调频系统、传统助听器和 CROS 型助听器在多种学习效果方面均无益处:讨论:由于样本量较小、研究样本不统一和/或定义不明确,以及现有文献的整体质量较低,最终很难就非手术扩音设备在改善 UHL 儿童学习成绩方面的有效性得出明确结论。没有发现研究人工耳蜗或骨固定助听器的文章。要回答这个具有重要临床意义的问题,还需要进行更多具有高质量研究设计、大样本量和长期随访的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Audiology and Neuro-Otology
Audiology and Neuro-Otology 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
35
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''Audiology and Neurotology'' provides a forum for the publication of the most-advanced and rigorous scientific research related to the basic science and clinical aspects of the auditory and vestibular system and diseases of the ear. This journal seeks submission of cutting edge research opening up new and innovative fields of study that may improve our understanding and treatment of patients with disorders of the auditory and vestibular systems, their central connections and their perception in the central nervous system. In addition to original papers the journal also offers invited review articles on current topics written by leading experts in the field. The journal is of primary importance for all scientists and practitioners interested in audiology, otology and neurotology, auditory neurosciences and related disciplines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信