Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A Parving

Publications and source records attributed to A Parving.

130 records · Page 8Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Clinical study of hearing instruments: a cross-sectional longitudinal audit based on consumer experiences.

The objective of the present audit was to document improvements/changes in hearing instrument (HI) benefit in terms of use and satisfaction throughout the 1990s and compare the benefit in consumers fitted with analogue (A), programmable (P), and digital signal processing (DSP) HIs. The audit data are based on a questionnaire mailed to subjects fitted with HIs 3 to 4 months after the fitting, including questions concerning satisfaction with the HI, use of the HI, ability to manage the HI, and satisfaction with the overall services in the department. Information was obtained from 32,694 subjects (i.e., 71.2 per cent of those fitted with HIs throughout the last decade), with a median age at fitting of 78 years (range, 18-102), with a preponderance of females. No significant differences in age, gender distribution, and hearing instrument distribution were found between the respondents and non-respondents. The audit shows that there are no significant differences in any of the benefit parameters throughout the decade, irrespective of the introduction of P-HIs in 1995 and of the DSP-HIs in 1998. Thus, from the consumers' perspective, no changes have appeared in the last decade. A comparative analysis of the A-HIs, P-HIs, and DSP-HIs shows that among those provided with P-HIs and DSP-HIs, only 69.6 per cent (CI 68.1-71.0) and 65.5 per cent (CI 60.2-78.8), respectively, were very satisfied/satisfied with the HI, which is significantly less than the 73.5 per cent (CI 72.4-74.5) in those fitted with A-HIs. The daily/weekly use of all three types of HIs was similar. However, the group fitted with DSP-HIs was significantly less satisfied with the general services compared with those fitted with A-HIs and P-HIs, respectively. Based on these audit data, it is concluded that, according to the consumers, the outcome from HIs has not changed over the last decade, and a comparison between the traditional A-HIs with both P-HIs and DSP-HIs is in favour of the traditional A-HIs.

Aged↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Some experiences with hearing disability/handicap and quality of life measures.

To achieve detailed information on the outcome of hearing rehabilitation in a clinical setting, measurements of hearing disability and hearing handicap have been introduced, and the present study describes the preliminary experiences with these measures in a series of hearing-impaired subjects referred for audiological evaluation. To outline hearing disability/hearing handicap (HD/HH), before continuation or initiation of treatment, the Gothenburg profile and a generic health-related quality of life--the SF-36 questionnaire--were used to evaluate any adverse effects resulting from hearing disorders. The Gothenburg profile and the SF-36 questionnaire were mailed to 634 subjects appointed for audiological examination with a request to complete the questionnaires at home. Three questions were enclosed concerning the capacity to complete the questionnaires, showing that 1.9 per cent were incapable of completing them, 17.5 per cent needed assistance, 43.5 per cent completed the questionnaires, and 37.1 per cent did not respond to them. Thus the response rate was only 55.5 per cent and, in addition, these responses were characterised by missing data. An arbitrary criterion of an average score per question of >3 for the averaged HD and HH items respectively was applied, resulting in 72.7 per cent indicating HD, whereas 30.3 per cent indicated HH according to the items in the profile. Significant differences in hearing levels were found between those experiencing HD and HH having a score >3 and those with a score <3. When analysing the general health status, general perception of health and social functioning, significantly lower scores were found for those experiencing HD/HH, whereas no significant differences were found between the total sample of hearing-impaired subjects and the age-matched population for these parameters. It is concluded that the present procedure cannot be implemented as a routine outcome measure in a clinical setting and alternative outcome measures should be considered.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Audiometric and ophthalmological findings in rubella deafness.

In an attempt to study the relevance of ophthalmological changes to the diagnosis of cochlear hearing impairment due to fetal rubella infection, a survey of the literature combined with a clinical investigation was carried out. Based on the investigation of 57 patients, 31% had congenital hearing impairment due to fetal rubella infection. Of these patients, 61% had typical rubella retinal changes. In the remaining 69%, ophthalmoscopy revealed no abnormality, except in 1 patient. As the cause of the hearing impairment in this patient was unknown, it was concluded that the mother had suffered from subclinical rubella infection in the first trimester of her pregnancy. It is concluded that rubella retinitis is found with such a high incidence in rubella children that it can be used as a tool in the diagnosis of cochlear hearing impairment due to fetal rubella infection. Patients with congenital hearing impairment ought to undergo a routine ophthalmoscopy which will detect eventual pigmentary changes.

Adolescent↗