佩戴助听器和人工耳蜗的成年人的社会结果:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 5.6 1区 医学 Q1 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Kaitlin Hori, Rishabh Shah, Akhil Paladugu, Tyler J Gallagher, Sophie S Jang, Elizabeth V Weinfurter, Choo Phei Wee, Janet S Choi
{"title":"佩戴助听器和人工耳蜗的成年人的社会结果:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Kaitlin Hori, Rishabh Shah, Akhil Paladugu, Tyler J Gallagher, Sophie S Jang, Elizabeth V Weinfurter, Choo Phei Wee, Janet S Choi","doi":"10.1001/jamaoto.2025.1777","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Hearing loss is associated with social isolation and loneliness, which are known to negatively impact mental and cognitive health. However, high-quality evidence on the impact of hearing rehabilitation devices on social outcomes remains limited.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the impact of hearing rehabilitation device use on social outcomes in adults with hearing loss.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Embase, MEDLINE, Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched from database inception to March 13, 2024.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Included studies used a hearing rehabilitation device and compared a validated social outcome score to a baseline or control. Studies with baseline and follow-up scores, including variability measures, were eligible for meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Two independent reviewers screened studies and extracted data using a standardized template. The meta-analysis used restricted maximum likelihood-based random-effects models to estimate effect sizes.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Hearing rehabilitation devices included hearing aids, cochlear implants, bone conduction hearing aids, and personal sound amplification. The main outcomes included quality of life, isolation, loneliness, and social engagement using the following validated measures: the UCLA Loneliness Scale, Short Form 36, Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, Hearing Handicap Index for the Elderly, Hearing Handicap Index for Adults-Short, Cochlear Implant Quality of Life-35 Profile, Glasgow Benefit Inventory, and World Health Organization Quality of Life.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 5847 studies screened, 295 underwent full-text review, 65 were included in the systematic review, and 35 in meta-analysis. A total of 5911 participants (weighted mean [SD] age, 64.1 [6.3] years; weighted mean [SD] percentage female, 49.4% [13.9%]) were included among the studies in the systematic review, and 2664 participants (mean age [SD] age, 65.9 [8.3] years; weighted mean [SD] percentage female, 46.3% [13.6%] female) among the studies in the meta-analysis. Hearing rehabilitation with hearing aids or cochlear implants was generally associated with improved social outcomes, including higher social quality of life (QoL) and decreased perceived social handicap and loneliness. The meta-analysis revealed that both hearing aid and cochlear implant use were associated with higher social QoL scores compared to baseline or control groups (SMD, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.88-1.57). Hearing aid use was linked to a moderate improvement in social QoL (SMD, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.13-1.10). Cochlear implant use, for those with moderate to profound hearing loss and limited benefits from hearing aids, was associated with a larger improvement in social QoL (SMD, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.01-1.74). Hearing rehabilitation was associated with decreased perceived social handicap (SMD, -3.41; 95% CI, -5.16 to -1.65). The findings from the meta-analysis on loneliness were inconclusive due to the limited number of studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this systematic review and meta-analysis, hearing rehabilitative devices were associated with improved social outcomes for adults with hearing loss. Their use should be encouraged for those with hearing loss to potentially enhance social engagement and functional outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":14632,"journal":{"name":"JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery","volume":" ","pages":"806-816"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12232266/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social Outcomes Among Adults With Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Kaitlin Hori, Rishabh Shah, Akhil Paladugu, Tyler J Gallagher, Sophie S Jang, Elizabeth V Weinfurter, Choo Phei Wee, Janet S Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamaoto.2025.1777\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Hearing loss is associated with social isolation and loneliness, which are known to negatively impact mental and cognitive health. However, high-quality evidence on the impact of hearing rehabilitation devices on social outcomes remains limited.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the impact of hearing rehabilitation device use on social outcomes in adults with hearing loss.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Embase, MEDLINE, Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched from database inception to March 13, 2024.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Included studies used a hearing rehabilitation device and compared a validated social outcome score to a baseline or control. Studies with baseline and follow-up scores, including variability measures, were eligible for meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.</p><p><strong>Data extraction and synthesis: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Two independent reviewers screened studies and extracted data using a standardized template. The meta-analysis used restricted maximum likelihood-based random-effects models to estimate effect sizes.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Hearing rehabilitation devices included hearing aids, cochlear implants, bone conduction hearing aids, and personal sound amplification. The main outcomes included quality of life, isolation, loneliness, and social engagement using the following validated measures: the UCLA Loneliness Scale, Short Form 36, Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, Hearing Handicap Index for the Elderly, Hearing Handicap Index for Adults-Short, Cochlear Implant Quality of Life-35 Profile, Glasgow Benefit Inventory, and World Health Organization Quality of Life.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 5847 studies screened, 295 underwent full-text review, 65 were included in the systematic review, and 35 in meta-analysis. A total of 5911 participants (weighted mean [SD] age, 64.1 [6.3] years; weighted mean [SD] percentage female, 49.4% [13.9%]) were included among the studies in the systematic review, and 2664 participants (mean age [SD] age, 65.9 [8.3] years; weighted mean [SD] percentage female, 46.3% [13.6%] female) among the studies in the meta-analysis. Hearing rehabilitation with hearing aids or cochlear implants was generally associated with improved social outcomes, including higher social quality of life (QoL) and decreased perceived social handicap and loneliness. The meta-analysis revealed that both hearing aid and cochlear implant use were associated with higher social QoL scores compared to baseline or control groups (SMD, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.88-1.57). Hearing aid use was linked to a moderate improvement in social QoL (SMD, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.13-1.10). Cochlear implant use, for those with moderate to profound hearing loss and limited benefits from hearing aids, was associated with a larger improvement in social QoL (SMD, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.01-1.74). Hearing rehabilitation was associated with decreased perceived social handicap (SMD, -3.41; 95% CI, -5.16 to -1.65). The findings from the meta-analysis on loneliness were inconclusive due to the limited number of studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this systematic review and meta-analysis, hearing rehabilitative devices were associated with improved social outcomes for adults with hearing loss. Their use should be encouraged for those with hearing loss to potentially enhance social engagement and functional outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"806-816\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12232266/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2025.1777\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2025.1777","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:听力损失与社会孤立和孤独有关,这对心理和认知健康产生负面影响。然而,关于听力康复设备对社会结果影响的高质量证据仍然有限。目的:评估听力康复设备使用对成年听力损失患者社会结局的影响。数据来源:Embase、MEDLINE、Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts、CINAHL、PsycINFO检索自数据库建立至2024年3月13日。研究选择:纳入使用听力康复设备的研究,并将有效的社会结果评分与基线或对照进行比较。具有基线和随访评分(包括变异性测量)的研究符合meta分析的条件。偏倚风险采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表进行评估。数据提取和综合:本系统评价和荟萃分析遵循系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)报告指南。两名独立审稿人筛选研究并使用标准化模板提取数据。荟萃分析使用基于限制最大似然的随机效应模型来估计效应大小。主要结果和措施:听力康复设备包括助听器、人工耳蜗、骨传导助听器和个人扩声器。主要结果包括生活质量、隔离、孤独和社会参与,采用以下有效措施:加州大学洛杉矶分校孤独量表、简表36、奈梅亨人工耳蜗问卷、老年人听力障碍指数、成人听力障碍指数-简表、人工耳蜗生活质量35简介、格拉斯哥福利量表和世界卫生组织生活质量。结果:在筛选的5847项研究中,295项进行了全文综述,65项纳入系统综述,35项纳入荟萃分析。共有5911名参与者(加权平均[SD]年龄64.1[6.3]岁;该系统评价纳入了2664名参与者(平均年龄[SD] 65.9[8.3]岁;加权平均[SD]百分比女性,46.3%[13.6%]女性)。助听器或人工耳蜗的听力康复通常与改善的社会结果相关,包括更高的社会生活质量(QoL)和减少感知的社会障碍和孤独感。荟萃分析显示,与基线组或对照组相比,助听器和人工耳蜗的使用与更高的社会生活质量评分相关(SMD, 1.22;95% ci, 0.88-1.57)。使用助听器与社会生活质量的中度改善有关(SMD, 0.62;95% ci, 0.13-1.10)。对于中度至重度听力损失且助听器获益有限的患者,使用人工耳蜗与社会生活质量的较大改善相关(SMD, 1.37;95% ci, 1.01-1.74)。听力康复与感知社会障碍降低相关(SMD, -3.41;95% CI, -5.16 ~ -1.65)。由于研究数量有限,关于孤独感的荟萃分析的结果尚无定论。结论和相关性:在这项系统回顾和荟萃分析中,听力康复设备与听力损失成人社会结果的改善有关。应鼓励听力损失患者使用它们,以潜在地增强社会参与和功能预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Social Outcomes Among Adults With Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Hearing loss is associated with social isolation and loneliness, which are known to negatively impact mental and cognitive health. However, high-quality evidence on the impact of hearing rehabilitation devices on social outcomes remains limited.

Objective: To assess the impact of hearing rehabilitation device use on social outcomes in adults with hearing loss.

Data sources: Embase, MEDLINE, Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched from database inception to March 13, 2024.

Study selection: Included studies used a hearing rehabilitation device and compared a validated social outcome score to a baseline or control. Studies with baseline and follow-up scores, including variability measures, were eligible for meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Data extraction and synthesis: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Two independent reviewers screened studies and extracted data using a standardized template. The meta-analysis used restricted maximum likelihood-based random-effects models to estimate effect sizes.

Main outcomes and measures: Hearing rehabilitation devices included hearing aids, cochlear implants, bone conduction hearing aids, and personal sound amplification. The main outcomes included quality of life, isolation, loneliness, and social engagement using the following validated measures: the UCLA Loneliness Scale, Short Form 36, Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, Hearing Handicap Index for the Elderly, Hearing Handicap Index for Adults-Short, Cochlear Implant Quality of Life-35 Profile, Glasgow Benefit Inventory, and World Health Organization Quality of Life.

Results: Of 5847 studies screened, 295 underwent full-text review, 65 were included in the systematic review, and 35 in meta-analysis. A total of 5911 participants (weighted mean [SD] age, 64.1 [6.3] years; weighted mean [SD] percentage female, 49.4% [13.9%]) were included among the studies in the systematic review, and 2664 participants (mean age [SD] age, 65.9 [8.3] years; weighted mean [SD] percentage female, 46.3% [13.6%] female) among the studies in the meta-analysis. Hearing rehabilitation with hearing aids or cochlear implants was generally associated with improved social outcomes, including higher social quality of life (QoL) and decreased perceived social handicap and loneliness. The meta-analysis revealed that both hearing aid and cochlear implant use were associated with higher social QoL scores compared to baseline or control groups (SMD, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.88-1.57). Hearing aid use was linked to a moderate improvement in social QoL (SMD, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.13-1.10). Cochlear implant use, for those with moderate to profound hearing loss and limited benefits from hearing aids, was associated with a larger improvement in social QoL (SMD, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.01-1.74). Hearing rehabilitation was associated with decreased perceived social handicap (SMD, -3.41; 95% CI, -5.16 to -1.65). The findings from the meta-analysis on loneliness were inconclusive due to the limited number of studies.

Conclusions and relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, hearing rehabilitative devices were associated with improved social outcomes for adults with hearing loss. Their use should be encouraged for those with hearing loss to potentially enhance social engagement and functional outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
5.10%
发文量
230
期刊介绍: JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery is a globally recognized and peer-reviewed medical journal dedicated to providing up-to-date information on diseases affecting the head and neck. It originated in 1925 as Archives of Otolaryngology and currently serves as the official publication for the American Head and Neck Society. As part of the prestigious JAMA Network, a collection of reputable general medical and specialty publications, it ensures the highest standards of research and expertise. Physicians and scientists worldwide rely on JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery for invaluable insights in this specialized field.
×
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