International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology · 2019
Predicting hearing loss in children according to the referrer and referral cause.
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Y Slovik, R Gorali, Y Dizitzer, Bz Joshua, S Kordeliuk, V Novack, M Kraus
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Hearing assessment in children is considered necessary in all cases involving a doubt regarding hearing acuity. Due to the fact that the number of referrals may be much greater than the actual capacity of a hearing institute, it would be desirable to have a filtering tool in order to detect the cases with higher suspicion of hearing loss.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether anamnesis details can be used as a sorting tool for detection of highly suspicious cases of hearing loss in preschool children. The anamnesis details may be one or more of the following: the reason for performing hearing test, which caregiver indicated the need for hearing evaluation, the parent's comprehension of their child hearing, and the medical history.
METHODS: the parents of preschool children, who were referred to the hearing institute at Soroka university medical center, were asked to fill a questionnaire containing 18 questions. The questions referred to details such as: the reason for performing the hearing test; who suggested the existence of hearing impairment; medical history issues and questions regarding details that may indicate a risk of hearing loss. Details such as Otoscopy results were taken from the medical record of the patient.
RESULTS: 317 preschool and school patients were recruited to the study. Hearing loss was found in 42% of the cases. The most common reason for performing the hearing test was speech disturbance (33%). In cases which the parents were those who raised the suspicion of hearing loss - hearing impairment was found in 61% of the cases, compared to 36% when the speech therapist was the one raising the doubts and to only 18% when the kindergarten teacher was the one raising the doubt. The positive predictive value of patient that their parents suspected the hearing loss combined with pathologic otoscopy result was 82.6% when the reason for the test was hearing impairment suspicion, and 91.3% when the reason for the hearing test was speech disturbance.
CONCLUSIONS: Parents are the best in assessing their child's hearing followed by the speech therapist and the least sensitive is the school teacher.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether anamnesis details can be used as a sorting tool for detection of highly suspicious cases of hearing loss in preschool children. The anamnesis details may be one or more of the following: the reason for performing hearing test, which caregiver indicated the need for hearing evaluation, the parent's comprehension of their child hearing, and the medical history.
METHODS: the parents of preschool children, who were referred to the hearing institute at Soroka university medical center, were asked to fill a questionnaire containing 18 questions. The questions referred to details such as: the reason for performing the hearing test; who suggested the existence of hearing impairment; medical history issues and questions regarding details that may indicate a risk of hearing loss. Details such as Otoscopy results were taken from the medical record of the patient.
RESULTS: 317 preschool and school patients were recruited to the study. Hearing loss was found in 42% of the cases. The most common reason for performing the hearing test was speech disturbance (33%). In cases which the parents were those who raised the suspicion of hearing loss - hearing impairment was found in 61% of the cases, compared to 36% when the speech therapist was the one raising the doubts and to only 18% when the kindergarten teacher was the one raising the doubt. The positive predictive value of patient that their parents suspected the hearing loss combined with pathologic otoscopy result was 82.6% when the reason for the test was hearing impairment suspicion, and 91.3% when the reason for the hearing test was speech disturbance.
CONCLUSIONS: Parents are the best in assessing their child's hearing followed by the speech therapist and the least sensitive is the school teacher.