-
Clinical Otolaryngology : Official... Jan 2024Technological advancements in mobile audiometry (MA) have enabled hearing assessment using tablets and smartphones. This systematic review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021274761)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Technological advancements in mobile audiometry (MA) have enabled hearing assessment using tablets and smartphones. This systematic review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021274761) aimed to identify MA options available to health providers, assess their accuracy in measuring hearing thresholds, and explore factors that might influence their accuracy.
DESIGN AND SETTING
A systematic search of online databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Evidence Search and Dynamed was conducted on 13th December 2021, and repeated on 30th October 2022, using appropriate Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms. Eligible studies reported the use of MA to determine hearing thresholds and compared results to conventional pure-tone audiometry (CA). Studies investigating MA for hearing screening (i.e. reporting just pass/fail) were ineligible for inclusion. Two authors independently reviewed studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality and risk of bias using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool.
PARTICIPANTS
Adults and children, with and without diagnosis of hearing impairment.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
A meta-analysis was performed to obtain the mean difference between thresholds measured using MA and CA in dB HL.
RESULTS
Searches returned 858 articles. After systematic review, 17 articles including 1032 participants were analysed. The most used software application was Shoebox (6/17) followed by Hearing Test (3/17), then HearTest (2/17). Tablet computers were used in ten studies, smartphones in six, and a computer in one. The mean difference between MA and CA thresholds was 1.36 dB (95% CI, 0.07-2.66, p = 0.04). Significant differences between mobile audiometry (MA) and conventional audiometry (CA) thresholds were observed in thresholds measured at 500Hz, in children, when MA was conducted in a sound booth, and when MA was self-administered. However, these differences did not exceed the clinically significant threshold of 10 decibels (dB). Included studies exhibited high levels of heterogeneity, high risk of bias and low concerns about applicability.
CONCLUSIONS
MA compares favourably to CA in measuring hearing thresholds and has role in providing access to hearing assessment in situations where CA is not available or feasible. Future studies should prioritize the integration of pure-tone threshold assessment with additional tests, such as Speech Recognition and Digits-in-Noise, for a more rounded evaluation of hearing ability, assesses acceptability and feasibility, and the cost-effectiveness of MA in non-specialist settings.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Auditory Threshold; Hearing; Hearing Loss; Audiometry; Audiometry, Pure-Tone; Smartphone
PubMed: 37828806
DOI: 10.1111/coa.14107 -
Audiology Research Aug 2023This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and benefit of cartilage conduction hearing aids (CC-HAs) and that factors that influence purchasing decisions. The hearing... (Review)
Review
This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and benefit of cartilage conduction hearing aids (CC-HAs) and that factors that influence purchasing decisions. The hearing thresholds and functional gain following CC-HA wear were synthesised. A one-way analysis of variance compared the differences in the hearing thresholds and functional gain at individual frequencies and in patients with a variety of pathological changes. The synchronised aided hearing threshold and functional gain at 2.0 kHz were significantly better than at 0.5, 1.0, and 4.0 kHz. There was no significant difference in the synchronised unaided hearing thresholds across individual frequencies between 0.5 and 4.0 kHz. The synchronised functional gain in patients with atresia was significantly greater than in patients with aural atresia or stenosis and middle ear pathologies with normal ear canals. The acceptability of CC-HAs in terms of purchase decision is influenced by the condition of the external auditory meatus and severity of hearing loss, with the highest purchase rate seen in patients with aural atresia or stenosis. CC-HAs' fitting procedure advantages and cosmetic considerations make these devices a viable and preferred choice for individuals with microtia and aural atresia. Additional research to evaluate the benefits towards emotional well-being is crucial to gain insights into the psychological impact of CC-HA use.
PubMed: 37622931
DOI: 10.3390/audiolres13040055 -
Laryngoscope Investigative... Jun 2024To establish audiological and other outcomes following cochlear implantation in humans and animals with eluting electrodes. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To establish audiological and other outcomes following cochlear implantation in humans and animals with eluting electrodes.
METHODS
Systematic review and narrative synthesis. Databases searched (April 2023): MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Web of Science. Studies reporting outcomes in either humans or animals following cochlear implantation with a drug-eluting electrode were included. No limits were placed on language or year of publication. Risk of bias assessment was performed on all included studies using either the Brazzelli or Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) assessment tools. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement.
RESULTS
Searches identified 146 abstracts and 108 full texts. Of these, 18 studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting outcomes in 523 animals (17 studies) and 24 humans (1 study). Eluting electrodes included dexamethasone (16 studies), aracytine (1 study), nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (1 study), the growth factors insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1) and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) (1 study), and neurotrophin-3 (1 study). All included studies compare outcomes following implantation with an eluting electrode with a control non-eluting electrode. In the majority of studies, audiological outcomes (e.g., auditory brainstem response threshold) were superior following implantation with an eluting electrode compared with a standard electrode. Most studies which investigated post-implantation impedance reported lower impedance following implantation with an eluting electrode. The influence of eluting electrodes on other reported outcomes (including post-implantation cochlear fibrosis and the survival of hair cells and spiral ganglion neurons) was more varied across the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Eluting electrodes have shown promise in animal studies in preserving residual hearing following cochlear implantation and in reducing impedance, though data from human studies remain lacking. Further in-human studies will be required to determine the clinical usefulness of drug-eluting cochlear implants as a future treatment for sensorineural hearing loss.
PubMed: 38855776
DOI: 10.1002/lio2.1263 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Sep 2023Bone conduction devices (BCDs) are widely used in the treatment of conductive hearing loss (CHL), but their applications on unilateral CHL (UCHL) patients remain... (Review)
Review
Bone conduction devices (BCDs) are widely used in the treatment of conductive hearing loss (CHL), but their applications on unilateral CHL (UCHL) patients remain controversial. To evaluate the effects of BCDs in UCHL, a systematic search was undertaken until May 2023 following the PRISMA guidelines. Among the 391 references, 21 studies met the inclusion criteria and were ultimately selected for review. Data on hearing thresholds, speech recognition, sound localization, and subjective questionnaire outcomes were collected and summarized. Moderate hearing threshold improvements were found in UCHL patients aided with BCDs. Their speech recognition abilities improved significantly. However, sound localization results showed wide individual variations. According to subjective questionnaires, BCDs had an overall positive influence on the daily life of UCHL patients, although several unfavorable experiences were reported by some of them. We concluded that the positive audiological benefits and subjective questionnaire results have made BCDs a credible intervention for UCHL patients. Before final implantations, UCHL patients should first go through a period of time when they were fitted with non-implantable BCDs as a trial.
PubMed: 37762842
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12185901 -
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and... Dec 2023To investigate the effectiveness of computer-based auditory training on speech-in-noise perception in adults. With no language restriction, 11 databases were searched...
UNLABELLED
To investigate the effectiveness of computer-based auditory training on speech-in-noise perception in adults. With no language restriction, 11 databases were searched from 1990 to 2020. We included any clinical trial studies with concurrent comparison groups that examined the effectiveness of computer-based auditory training programs in adults. The primary outcome was a speech in noise perception that was estimated using the "difference pretest-posttest-control" index (d). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane collaboration tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials. The certainty of the evidence was investigated using the GRADE in two primary outcomes. Twenty three studies were included in two subgroups based on primary outcome: 12 studies with speech perception threshold and 11 studies with speech-in-noise test scores. Computer-based auditory training resulted in a speech in noise perception improvement (dppc: -0.69, 95%CI: -1.11 to -0.26; I = 69.6%, = 0.00) and (dppc: 0.71, 95%CI: 0.38-1.03, I2: 17.8%, = 0.27) respectively in both subgroups. 19 studies were judged to have a high risk of bias and 3 studies had a low risk of bias and the strength of the evidence was low in both primary outcomes. This finding indicates that computer-based auditory training can be a moderately effective intervention for speech-in-noise perception in adults. However, due to the low quality of primary studies and the low certainty of the evidence, the results are not yet definite. Prospero registration number: CRD42021233193.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12070-023-03920-0.
PubMed: 37974862
DOI: 10.1007/s12070-023-03920-0 -
European Archives of... Jun 2024The indications of Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) have been expanded to include patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss due to congenital aural atresia (CAA).... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The indications of Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) have been expanded to include patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss due to congenital aural atresia (CAA). However, the current evidence supporting the auditory outcomes of VSB is based mainly on case reports and retrospective chart reviews. Therefore, the present systematic review aims to summarize and critically appraise the current evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of VSB in children and adult patients with CAA.
METHODS
A systematic literature search retrieved studies that evaluated the outcomes of unilateral or bilateral implantation of VSB in patients with CAA. The bibliographic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases from January 2000 to December 2022.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven studies were included in the present systematic review. Overall, the speech perception after VSB was good, with a mean word recognition score (WRS) score ranging from 60 to 96.7%. The mean postoperative speech recognition threshold (SRT) after implantation ranged from 20.8 to 50 dB. The effective gain was reported in 15 studies, ranging from 31.3 to 45.5 dB. In terms of user satisfaction with VSB, the included studies showed significant improvements in the patient-reported outcomes, such as the Speech Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale and Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile. The VSB implantation was generally safe with low incidence of postoperative complications.
CONCLUSION
VSB provides significant benefits to individuals with hearing loss owing to CAA, with very good subjective outcomes and a low risk of complications.
Topics: Humans; Congenital Abnormalities; Ear; Hearing Aids; Hearing Loss, Conductive; Hearing Loss, Mixed Conductive-Sensorineural; Speech Perception
PubMed: 38647685
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-024-08629-6