PubMed · 15341227
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Frank E Musiek. 2004. Auditory processing disorders.. https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.15.6.7
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Leiomyoma usually originates from the uterus and alimentary tract, but rarely from the soft tissue of the head and neck. It is extremely rare that leiomyoma appears in the external auditory canal. A 47-year-old male with left external auditory canal leiomyoma presented with conductive hearing impairment and post-auricular swelling. Tumor excision was successful via a retroauricular approach. The pathological examination demonstrated a vascular leiomyoma without malignant change. To date, including our case, only three cases of external auditory canal leiomyoma have been reported. The tumor occurs mainly in adult males aged around 50 and should be included in the differential diagnoses for external auditory canal tumor. The proper treatment of choice is complete excision. In case of an external auditory canal tumor, even if it is believed to be benign before surgery, precise pathologic examination is required to exclude the possibility of malignancy.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the hearing screening of pre-school children at nursery schools in Tyrol, Austria. METHODS AND SAMPLE: 47 nursery schools with a total of 2199 enrolled children participated in the study. At the screening, the children were presented a series of tones at frequencies 0.5 kHz (25dB), 1 kHz, 2 kHz, 3 kHz, and 4 kHz (20 dB each) from portable audiometers. The tones were presented over headphones for each ear separately and at irregular intervals. Failure to respond to any of the frequencies was considered failure of the screening. Parents were then advised in written form to have the child examined by an ENT-specialist. RESULTS: 1832 individuals were screened (coverage: 83% of nursery school children; corresponding to at least 63% of all Tyrolean children aged 3 to 5 years). Of these, 390 failed the test (referral rate: 21% of all screened). Examination through an ENT-specialist occurred with 217 children, and this confirmed the positive test in 139 children (hit rate: 64%). In most cases, a temporary conductive hearing loss due to external or middle ear problems (glue ear, tube dysfunction, cerumen, otitis media) was diagnosed. A sensorineural hearing loss was found in 4 children (in 3 of them bilateral). The need for therapy was recognized in 81 children (4% of all screened). CONCLUSION: Pre-school hearing screening identifies children with ear and hearing problems that need therapeutical intervention. Although the hearing problems are mostly of a temporary nature, some may require monitoring over some period. Also some children with permanent sensorineural hearing loss may be detected through this measure. Hearing screening is an efficient means of assessing ear and hearing problems in pre-school children. However, the follow-up rate needs to be improved for optimizing the efficacy.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of auditory steady-state response (ASSR) as a measure of hearing sensitivity in young children suspect for significant hearing loss. DESIGN: Within-subject comparisons of click auditory brainstem response (ABR) thresholds and ASSR thresholds. SUBJECTS: The study population comprised 42 children suspect for hearing loss and subsequently referred for hearing assessment using electrophysiologic techniques. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Electrophysiologic threshold responses for click ABR and ASSR stimuli (0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz) for right and left ears. RESULTS: Based on ABR and ASSR thresholds, 50% of the subjects demonstrated significant hearing loss in the severe to profound range. In some subjects, ASSRs were present at higher stimulus levels when click ABRs were absent. Significant correlations (P<.05) were found between high-frequency ASSR and click ABR thresholds for this study sample. For some subjects, ASSR findings suggested differences between ears that were not observable from the no-response click ABR results. CONCLUSIONS: Auditory steady-state response testing may provide additional information for children who demonstrate hearing levels in the severe to profound range. This information may be helpful when selecting the ear for cochlear implantation for a young hearing-impaired child. Multiple objective methods, such as ABR and ASSR testing, may be needed to determine accurate hearing sensitivity for young children being considered for sensory devices, and in particular, cochlear implants.