Mobile Audiometry for Use in Ototoxicity Monitoring Programs: A Scoping Review.

IF 1.4 Q3 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Journal of Audiology and Otology Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-18 DOI:10.7874/jao.2024.00815
Pierre W C Yim, Zee Hui Lim
{"title":"Mobile Audiometry for Use in Ototoxicity Monitoring Programs: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Pierre W C Yim, Zee Hui Lim","doi":"10.7874/jao.2024.00815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ototoxicity monitoring programs (OMPs) for cisplatin-induced hearing loss have not been widely adopted in clinical practice for various reasons. Mobile audiometry (MA) offers cost and convenience advantages over conventional pure-tone audiometry (CA) and it is currently used in hearing screening. However, there is no consensus on whether MA can replace CA for measuring hearing thresholds in OMPs. This scoping review examines the challenges of OMPs and evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of MA for hearing thresholds. A comprehensive search was conducted in four databases from their inception to December 2024. Data on study characteristics, reported OMP challenges, MA specifications, test settings, and performance measures were extracted. Nine studies on OMP challenges were reviewed. Identified barriers were inconsistent referrals, resource constraints, low awareness of ototoxicity monitoring, and patient-related factors. Twenty-three studies reporting on three portable audiometers, and 14 app-based hearing tests were evaluated for the diagnostic accuracy of MA for hearing thresholds. Only two studies involved testing at extended high frequencies. Studies used measures including MA-CA threshold differences, sensitivity/specificity, and test-retest reliability. App-based MA represents an accessible and scalable solution to the resource constraints faced by OMPs. However, its diagnostic accuracy remains uncertain given the substantial methodological variability across studies. OMPs using MAs should consider clinically validated modalities.</p>","PeriodicalId":44886,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Audiology and Otology","volume":"29 3","pages":"166-180"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12313441/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Audiology and Otology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7874/jao.2024.00815","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ototoxicity monitoring programs (OMPs) for cisplatin-induced hearing loss have not been widely adopted in clinical practice for various reasons. Mobile audiometry (MA) offers cost and convenience advantages over conventional pure-tone audiometry (CA) and it is currently used in hearing screening. However, there is no consensus on whether MA can replace CA for measuring hearing thresholds in OMPs. This scoping review examines the challenges of OMPs and evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of MA for hearing thresholds. A comprehensive search was conducted in four databases from their inception to December 2024. Data on study characteristics, reported OMP challenges, MA specifications, test settings, and performance measures were extracted. Nine studies on OMP challenges were reviewed. Identified barriers were inconsistent referrals, resource constraints, low awareness of ototoxicity monitoring, and patient-related factors. Twenty-three studies reporting on three portable audiometers, and 14 app-based hearing tests were evaluated for the diagnostic accuracy of MA for hearing thresholds. Only two studies involved testing at extended high frequencies. Studies used measures including MA-CA threshold differences, sensitivity/specificity, and test-retest reliability. App-based MA represents an accessible and scalable solution to the resource constraints faced by OMPs. However, its diagnostic accuracy remains uncertain given the substantial methodological variability across studies. OMPs using MAs should consider clinically validated modalities.

Abstract Image

用于耳毒性监测程序的移动听力学:范围审查。
由于各种原因,顺铂性听力损失的耳毒性监测程序(OMPs)尚未广泛应用于临床实践。与传统的纯音测听技术相比,移动测听技术具有成本低、使用方便等优点,目前已广泛应用于听力筛查。然而,对于MA是否可以取代CA来测量omp的听力阈值,目前还没有达成共识。本综述探讨了omp的挑战,并评估了MA对听力阈值的诊断准确性。从建立到2024年12月,在四个数据库中进行了全面的搜索。提取了有关研究特征、报告的OMP挑战、MA规格、测试设置和性能测量的数据。审查了关于OMP挑战的九项研究。确定的障碍是不一致的转诊,资源限制,耳毒性监测意识低,以及患者相关因素。23项研究报告了3种便携式听力计和14种基于app的听力测试,评估了MA对听力阈值的诊断准确性。只有两项研究涉及扩展高频的测试。研究使用的测量方法包括MA-CA阈值差异、敏感性/特异性和重测信度。基于应用程序的MA为omp面临的资源限制提供了一种可访问且可扩展的解决方案。然而,它的诊断准确性仍然不确定,因为在研究中有大量的方法可变性。使用MAs的omp应考虑临床验证的模式。
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
Journal of Audiology and Otology
Journal of Audiology and Otology OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Journal of Audiology and Otology (JAO) (formerly known as Korean Journal of Audiology) aims to publish the most advanced findings for all aspects of the auditory and vestibular system and diseases of the ear using state-of-the-art techniques and analyses. The journal covers recent trends related to the topics of audiology, otology, and neurotology conducted by professionals, with the goal of providing better possible treatment to people of all ages, from infants to the elderly, who suffer from auditory and/or vestibular disorders and thus, improving their quality of life. This journal encourages the submission of review papers about current professional issues, research papers presenting a scientific base and clinical application, and case papers with unique reports or clinical trials. We also invite letters to the editor and papers related to the manufacture and distribution of medical devices. This journal provides integrated views from otologists, audiologists, and other healthcare practitioners, offering readers high quality scientific and clinical information. This peer-reviewed and open access journal has been the official journal of the Korean Audiological Society since 1997 and of both the Korean Audiological Society and the Korean Otological Society since 2017. It is published in English four times a year in January, April, July, and October.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信