Search

Purpose: An extra moment after a sentence is spoken may be important for listeners with hearing loss to mentally repair misperceptions during listening. The current audiologic test battery cannot distinguish between a listener who repaired a misperception versus a listener who heard the speech accurately with no need for repair. This study aims to develop a behavioral method to identify individuals who are at risk for relying on a quiet moment after a sentence. Method: Forty-three individuals with hearing loss (32 cochlear implant users, 11 hearing aid users) heard sentences that were followed by either 2 s of silence or 2 s of babble noise. Both high- and low-context sentences were used in the task. Results: Some individuals showed notable benefit in accuracy scores (particularly for high-context sentences) when given an extra moment of silent time following the sentence. This benefit was highly variable across individuals and sometimes absent altogether. However, the group-level patterns of results were mainly explained by the use of context and successful perception of the words preceding sentence-final words. Conclusions: These results suggest that some but not all individuals improve their speech recognition score by relying on a quiet moment after a sentence, and that this fragility of speech recognition cannot be assessed using one isolated utterance at a time. Reliance on a quiet moment to repair perceptions would potentially impede the perception of an upcoming utterance, making continuous communication in real-world scenarios difficult especially for individuals with hearing loss. The methods used in this study--along with some simple modifications if necessary--could potentially identify patients with hearing loss who retroactively repair mistakes by using clinically feasible methods that can ultimately lead to better patient-centered hearing health care.

Objective: To determine whether immigrant status is associated with likelihood of audiogram and hearing aid use among US adults with hearing loss. Study Design: Cross‐sectional study. Setting: Nationally representative data from 2009 to 2010, 2011 to 2012, 2015 to 2016, and 2017 to 2020 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) cycles. Methods: This cross‐sectional study of 4 merged cycles of NHANES included 12,455 adults with subjective (self‐reported) or objective (audiometric) hearing loss. Sequentially adjusted logistic regressions were used to assess the association of immigration status with likelihood of having undergone audiogram among those with objective and self‐reported hearing loss, and with likelihood of hearing aid use among candidates with objective hearing loss. Results: Immigrants were less likely to have received an audiogram among subjects with subjective (odds ratio [OR]: 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75‐0.87), and objective (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.72‐0.81) hearing loss, compared to nonimmigrants. The association persisted for those with subjective (OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.81‐0.96), and objective (OR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.80‐0.96) hearing loss after adjusting for sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, insurance, and hearing quality, but disappeared in both groups after adjusting for English proficiency. Immigrants were less likely to use hearing aids (OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.87‐0.93). However, this association disappeared (OR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.93‐1.04) in the adjusted model. Conclusion: Immigrant status is a significant barrier to hearing health care and is associated with lower rates of audiometric testing and hearing aid use among individuals with hearing loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This multi-center study examined the safety and effectiveness of cochlear implantation of children between 9 and 11 months of age. The intended impact was to support practice regarding candidacy assessment and prognostic counseling of pediatric cochlear implant candidates. Data in the clinical chart of children implanted at 9–11 months of age with Cochlear Ltd devices at five cochlear implant centers in the United States and Canada were included in analyses. The study included data from two cohorts implanted with one or two Nucleus devices during the periods of January 1, 2012–December 31, 2017 (Cohort 1, n = 83) or between January 1, 2018 and May 15, 2020 (Cohort 2, n = 50). Major adverse events (requiring another procedure/hospitalization) and minor adverse events (managed with medication alone or underwent an expected course of treatment that did not require surgery or hospitalization) out to 2 years post-implant were monitored and outcomes measured by audiometric thresholds and parent-reports on the IT-MAIS and LittlEARS questionnaires were collected. Results revealed 60 adverse events in 41 children and 227 ears implanted (26%) of which 14 major events occurred in 11 children; all were transitory and resolved. Improved hearing with cochlear implant use was shown in all outcome measures. Findings reveal that the procedure is safe for infants and that they show clear benefits of cochlear implantation including increased audibility and hearing development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]