Ear and Hearing最新文献

Objectives: Cochlear implants are an option for children with sensorineural hearing loss who do not benefit from hearing aids. Although bilateral cochlear implantation (CI) has been shown to enhance hearing performance and quality of life, its cost-effectiveness remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of bilateral CI compared with bimodal hearing for children with sensorineural hearing loss in Taiwan from both the perspectives of patients and Taiwan's National Health Insurance Administration (TNHIA).

Design: A four-state Markov model was utilized in the study, including "use the first internal device," "use the second internal device," "use the third internal device," and "death." Health utility values were obtained from a local survey of health professionals and then adjusted by a scale to reflect both the negative impact of aging on hearing and the time needed to develop the full benefit of treatment in the earliest years of life. The cost data were derived from a caregiver survey, hospital databases, clinical experts, and the TNHIA. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated over the lifetime horizon and presented as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of simultaneous bilateral CI, sequential bilateral CI, and bimodal hearing. In addition, one-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to investigate the impact of uncertainty and the robustness of the model.

Results: The base-case analysis showed that children with bilateral CI gained more QALYs while incurring more costs when compared with those with bimodal hearing. From the TNHIA perspective, compared with bimodal hearing, the ICER of simultaneous bilateral CI was New Taiwan Dollars 232,662 per QALY whereas from the patient perspective, the ICER was New Taiwan Dollars 1,006,965 per QALY. Moreover, simultaneous bilateral CI dominated sequential bilateral CI from both perspectives. Compared with bimodal hearing, the ICER of sequential bilateral CI did not exceed twice the gross domestic product per capita in Taiwan from either perspective. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the utility gain of bilateral CI compared with bimodal hearing was the most impactful parameter from both perspectives. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the base-case analysis results.

Conclusions: Our findings reveal that bilateral CI was cost-effective when using the threshold of one to three times the 2022 gross domestic product per capita in Taiwan from both the TNHIA and patient perspectives. Future research incorporating cost and effectiveness data from other dimensions is needed to help decision-makers assess the cost-effectiveness of bilateral CI more comprehensively.

Objectives: A vestibulo-ocular reflex called the ocular counter-roll can be used to assess how well the otolith organs are functioning. The video ocular counter-roll (vOCR) test is a recent addition to the videonystagmography test battery that allows for video recording and quantitative ocular counter-roll analysis. The purpose of this study is to investigate potential discrepancies in vOCR measurements obtained from a 30° lateral head tilt in the roll plane versus measurements obtained from a 30° tilt of the head and body.

Design: Thirty otologically, and neurologically healthy subjects aged 18 to 30 (M = 23.32 years, SD = 2.66 years; 8 men, 22 women) participated in this study. Pure-tone audiometry, oculomotor tests, and vOCR evaluation were performed for all participants. The vOCR assessment was performed in 2 positions, 30° lateral head tilt, and 30° body tilt position. The degree of static vOCR eye position and vOCR asymmetry in both positions were calculated and compared.

Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the vOCR findings obtained in the right and left 30° lateral head tilt ( p = 0.546) and body tilt ( p = 0.114). vOCR asymmetry was determined as median (interquartile range) 0.08 (0.07) in lateral head tilt position and 0.09 (0.06) in body tilt position. The degree of static vOCR (8.75° [1.91]) detected during body tilt was statistically greater than the static vOCR (6.62 [1.69]) detected during head tilt ( p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of ocular counter-roll asymmetry detected between head tilt and body tilt ( p = 0.918).

Conclusions: Our study shows a significant difference in the vOCR responses during head tilt and body tilt, a finding that should be considered during clinical evaluation of vestibular function. There was no significant asymmetry between the responses with either head or body tilt.

For vestibulocochlear diseases, traditional clinical history-taking, and the terminology of widely taught nosologic taxonomy, have misleading implications that can lead to errors in diagnosis and therefore in treatment. In the interest of facilitating differential diagnosis while simultaneously recognizing that many of these diseases may not be as discrete as textbooks suggest, we propose a data visualization approach focusing on several continuous scalar dimensions in the domains of anatomy, physiology, and chronology. We illustrate the application of this approach to several categories of clinical presentation.

Objectives: Electrocochleography (ECochG) is increasingly recognized as a biomarker for assessing inner ear function in cochlear implant patients. This study aimed to objectively determine intraoperative cochlear microphonic (CM) amplitude patterns and correlate them with residual hearing in cochlear implant recipients, addressing the limitations in current ECochG analysis that often depends on subjective visual assessment and overlook the intracochlear measurement location.

Design: In this prospective study, we investigated intraoperative pure-tone ECochG following complete electrode insertion in 31 patients. We used our previously published objective analysis method to determine the maximum CM amplitude and the associated electrode position for each electrode array. Using computed tomography, we identified electrode placement and determined the corresponding tonotopic frequency using Greenwood's function. Based on this, we calculated the tonotopic shift, that is, the difference between the stimulation frequency and the estimated frequency of the electrode with the maximum CM amplitude. We evaluated the association between CM amplitude, tonotopic shift, and preoperative hearing thresholds using linear regression analysis.

Results: CM amplitudes showed high variance, with values ranging from -1.479 to 4.495 dBµV. We found a statistically significant negative correlation ( ) between maximum CM amplitudes and preoperative hearing thresholds. In addition, a significant association ( ) between the tonotopic shift and preoperative hearing thresholds was observed. Tonotopic shifts of the maximum CM amplitudes occurred predominantly toward the basal direction.

Conclusions: The combination of objective signal analysis and the consideration of intracochlear measurement locations enhances the understanding of cochlear health and overcomes the obstacles of current ECochG analysis. We could show the link between intraoperative CM amplitudes, their spatial distributions, and preoperative hearing thresholds. Consequently, our findings enable automated analysis and bear the potential to enhance specificity of ECochG, reinforcing its role as an objective biomarker for cochlear health.

Objectives: This study investigated the efficiency of a multiplexed amplitude-modulated (AM) stimulus in eliciting auditory steady-state responses. The multiplexed AM stimulus was created by simultaneously modulating speech-shaped noise with three frequencies chosen to elicit different neural generators: 3.1, 40.1, and 102.1 Hz. For comparison, a single AM stimulus was created for each of these frequencies, resulting in three single AM conditions and one multiplex AM condition.

Design: Twenty-two bilaterally normal-hearing participants (18 females) listened for 8 minutes to each type of stimuli. The analysis compared the signal to noise ratios (SNRs) and amplitudes of the evoked responses to the single and multiplexed conditions.

Results: The results revealed that the SNRs elicited by single AM conditions were, on average, 1.61 dB higher than those evoked by the multiplexed AM condition ( p < 0.05). The single conditions consistently produced a significantly higher SNR when examining various stimulus durations ranging from 1 to 8 minutes. Despite these SNR differences, the frequency spectrum was very similar across and within subjects. In addition, the sensor space patterns across the scalp demonstrated similar trends between the single and multiplexed stimuli for both SNR and amplitudes. Both the single and multiplexed conditions evoked significant auditory steady-state responses within subjects. On average, the multiplexed AM stimulus took 31 minutes for the lower bound of the 95% prediction interval to cross the significance threshold across all three frequencies. In contrast, the single AM stimuli took 45 minutes and 42 seconds.

Conclusions: These findings show that the multiplexed AM stimulus is a promising method to reduce the recording time when simultaneously obtaining information from various neural generators.

Objectives: Hispanic/Latino adults are less likely than non-Hispanic White adults to seek treatment for hearing disability. While differential socioeconomic factors may contribute to this finding, differences in phonology and syntax in the Spanish, versus English, language may also influence patient perception of hearing disability. The objective of this study is to investigate the association between primary language spoken and participant perception of hearing disability.

Design: This study represents a cross-sectional cohort study using National Health and Nutrition Examination Study cycles 2015-2016 and 2017-2020 data. Multivariable logistic regressions estimated the association between respondent-selected interview language, which was used as a proxy for primary spoken language, and participant perception of hearing disability. Models were adjusted for age, gender, highest degree of education, pure-tone average, and self-reported general health. Participants included 4687 individuals from the United States population who elected to speak English (n = 4083) or Spanish (n = 604) during the interview. Perception of hearing disability was assessed by (1) frequency of reported difficulty in following a conversation in noise, (2) frequency with which hearing caused respondents to experience frustration when talking with members of their family or friends, and (3) participants' subjective overall assessment of their hearing.

Results: Speaking Spanish, versus English, as a primary language was associated with a 42% lower odds of reporting difficulty hearing and understanding in background noise (odds ratio [OR]: 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48 to 0.70). Spanish speakers had 28% lower odds of reporting feeling frustrated when talking to family members or friends due to hearing (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.88) as compared with the English-speaking cohort. Speaking Spanish additionally conferred 31% lower odds of describing their own general hearing as "a little trouble to deaf" than participants speaking English (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.90). These observed associations were independent of age, gender, highest degree of education, better pure-tone average? and self-reported general health.

Conclusions: Primary Spanish speakers may be less likely than English speakers to report hearing-related disability, an effect which may be independent of ethnicity. Patient perception of hearing-related disability is an important component of the assessment of and counseling for hearing-related disability and discussion of the need for amplification or other hearing intervention.