Search

AbstractObjectivesDesignStudy SampleResultsConclusionThe objective of this systematic review was to assess the evidence about the prevalence of permanent hearing loss for children not identified from newborn hearing screening (NHS).Articles were grouped into three categories based on the methodological approach: (1) all participants received diagnostic testing, (2) otoacoustic emission (OAE) or pure tone screening was completed and those not passing were referred for a diagnostic test, and (3) data were retrieved from archival records. Study characteristics, prevalence, and contextual factors were synthesised and narratively described.30 peer-reviewed articles.Prevalence of permanent hearing loss per 1,000 children ranged from 0.32 to 77.87 (M = 7.30; SD = 16.87). Variations in the criteria for inclusion contributed to prevalence differences. Prevalence was higher when unilateral and milder degrees of hearing loss were included, and older children had higher prevalence (M = 13.71; SD = 23.21) than younger children (M = 1.57; SD = 0.86).There is scant research on prevalence of childhood hearing loss after NHS that utilised methods to accurately differentiate between permanent and temporary hearing loss. Rigorous research is needed on the prevalence of permanent childhood hearing loss to inform strategies for monitoring, identification, intervention, and management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study examined classroom listening experiences reported by students who are deaf or hard of hearing using the Listening Inventory For Education--Revised (LIFE-R). Method: Retrospective electronic survey responses from 3,584 school-age participants were analyzed using descriptive statistics to report student perceptions of listening difficulty in various classroom scenarios, including the strategies students used when they did not hear or understand. Stratified data were used to explore potential differences between grades and across degree of hearing loss or type of hearing technology. Results: Average student listening appraisal ratings for 15 classroom, school, and social scenarios was 5.7 based on a 10-point Likert scale (0 = "difficult," 10 = "easy"), highlighting listening difficulties encountered during the school day. This finding can be considered in context with the average rating of 7.2 reported from a previous study of students with typical hearing using the LIFE-R. The greatest difficulties were reported when trying to listen when other students in the class were making noise and in hearing the comments of other classmates. Average listening difficulty was greater for respondents in Grades 3-6 than those in Grades 7-12. Listening difficulty also generally increased relative to degree of hearing loss. When unable to hear, some students took proactive steps to improve their listening access; some reported they did nothing. Conclusions: Students who are deaf or hard of hearing can face challenges in hearing and understanding throughout the school day. A functional tool to evaluate and monitor student experiences, such as the LIFE-R, can provide information to make necessary and effective adjustments to classroom instruction and the listening environment.

Children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) are at risk for language and literacy delays, and parent--child book reading can contribute to developing early literacy foundations. Although many parents read with their children, some parents may be unsure how to utilize effective reading strategies to maximize literacy growth. This multiple case pilot study involved four mothers of preschool-age children with hearing loss who used listening and spoken language (LSL) as their mode of communication. After a short training session on strategies to promote child engagement and increased child interaction during storybook reading, results showed parents increased their use of engaging questions, along with a statistically significant increase in each child's expressive contribution to the reading activity. Retention data indicated sustained parent reading behaviors that promoted child engagement. Providing parents with supported training may help parents implement effective reading strategies to promote literacy growth in young children who are DHH.

Purpose: The purpose of the study was twofold: (a) to explore hearing aid management experiences of Spanish-speaking parents who have young children using hearing aids and (b) to explore parents' access to the Internet and perceptions about remote audiology services. Method: The study used a mixed methods design. Data were collected through a phone interview. Results: Eleven mothers of children aged 14-60 months participated. Most of the children (9/11) had a bilateral hearing loss, and two had an additional disability. Three themes emerged for hearing aid management experiences: audiology services, routines, and emotional challenges/supports. Parents had variable levels of confidence in their skills ranging from no confidence to complete confidence, with the greatest variability for three items: (a) using the listening tube to make sure that the sound quality of the hearing aid is good, (b) removing moisture from the earmold tubing, and (c) troubleshooting problems when your child's hearing aids are not working. All participants reported having consistent Internet access and had positive perceptions about the possibility of remote audiology services. Conclusions: This study provided insights into hearing aid management experiences and perceptions of Spanish-speaking parents. Parents described variability for audiology services, routines for hearing aid use and care, and access to other parents of children with hearing loss. Spanish-speaking parents present additional elements in the hearing care process that need to be incorporated in planning. Remote services may be an opportunity to enhance access to support that could improve effectiveness of hearing aid management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) may find adherence to their hearing devices difficult due to internal experiences related to their hearing loss such as sadness or frustration. The Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-Adult Hearing Loss (AAQ-AHL) is the only measure available to assess psychological inflexibility as it relates to hearing loss. The purpose of this study was to confirm the single latent structure of the AAQ-AHL (through confirmatory factory analysis) and test convergent and discriminant validity. Cross-sectional data was used to further validate the AAQ-AHL. Participants were 146 adults who had diagnosed hearing loss and used a hearing aid. Results revealed the AAQ-AHL has a single latent structure, correlated to other similar constructs (psychological flexibility and hearing aid efficacy), and not correlated to unrelated constructs (hearing loss severity). These results suggest that the AAQ-AHL is a valid instrument to assess psychological flexibility as it relates to hearing aid use. Together, the findings imply the AAQ-AHL has strong psychometric properties and justification to use in a clinical setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]