暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Early detection of long-term, often asymptomatic, middle ear infection in young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children is more likely to be achieved when ear health and hearing checks are routinely undertaken in primary healthcare. Evidence consistently demonstrates the adverse impacts of this condition on the development and wellbeing of children and their families. We aimed to develop feasible, evidence- and consensus-based primary healthcare recommendations addressing the components and timing of ear health and hearing checks for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children aged under 6 years, not already known to have, nor being actively managed for, ear and hearing problems.
METHODS: A 22-person working group comprising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous members from the primary healthcare, ear, hearing, and research sectors provided guidance of the project. A systematic scoping review addressed research questions relating to primary health ear health and hearing checks for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and other populations at increased risk of persistent ear health problems. Twelve primary studies and eleven guidelines published between 1998 and 2020 were identified and reviewed. Quality and certainty of evidence and risk of bias ratings were completed for studies and guidelines. In the absence of certain and direct evidence, findings and draft recommendations were presented for consensus input to a 79-member expert panel using a modified e-Delphi process. Recommendations were finalised in consultation with working group members and presented to expert panel members for input on considerations relating to implementation.
RESULTS: Overall, the quality, certainty, and directness of evidence in the studies and guidelines reviewed was low. However, the findings provided a basis and structure for the draft recommendations presented during the consensus-building process. After two e-Delphi rounds, seven goals and eight recommendations on the components and timing of Ear Health and Hearing Checks in primary healthcare for young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children were developed.
CONCLUSIONS: The systematic scoping review and consensus-building process provided a pragmatic approach for producing strong recommendations within a reasonably short timeframe, despite the low quality and certainty of evidence, and paucity of studies pertaining to primary healthcare settings.

UNASSIGNED: Implantable hearing devices represent a modern and innovative solution for hearing restoration. Over the years, these high-tech devices have increasingly evolved but their use in clinical practice is not universally agreed in the scientific literature. Congresses, meetings, conferences, and consensus statements to achieve international agreement have been made. This work follows this line and aims to answer unsolved questions regarding examinations, selection criteria and surgery for implantable hearing devices.
UNASSIGNED: A Consensus Working Group was established by the Italian Society of Otorhinolaryngology. A method group performed a systematic review for each single question to identify the current best evidence on the topic and to guide a multidisciplinary panel in developing the statements.
UNASSIGNED: Twenty-nine consensus statements were approved by the Italian Society of Otorhinolaryngology. These were associated with 4 key area subtopics regarding pre-operative tests, otological, audiological and surgical indications.
UNASSIGNED: This consensus can be considered a further step forward to establish realistic guidelines on the debated topic of implantable hearing devices.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of literature specific to single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for large vestibular schwannomas (VS), maximum diameter ≥ 2.5 cm and/or classified as Koos Grade IV, and to present consensus recommendations on behalf of the International Stereotactic Radiosurgery Society (ISRS).
METHODS: The Medline and Embase databases were used to apply the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach. We considered eligible prospective and retrospective studies, written in the English language, reporting treatment outcomes for large VS; SRS for large post-operative tumors were analyzed in aggregate and separately.
RESULTS: 19 of the 229 studies initially identified met the final inclusion criteria. Overall crude rate of tumor control was 89% (93.7% with no prior surgery vs 87.7% with prior surgery). Rates of salvage microsurgical resection, need for shunt, and additional SRS in all series versus those with no prior surgery were 9.6% vs 3.3%, 4.7% vs 6.4% and 1% vs 0.9%, respectively. Rates of facial palsy and hearing preservation in all series versus those with no prior surgery were 1.3% vs 3.4% and 34.2% vs 40.4%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Upfront SRS resulted in high rates of tumor control with acceptable rates of facial palsy and hearing preservation as compared to the results in those series including patients with prior surgery (level C evidence). Therefore, although large VS are considered classic indication for microsurgical resection, upfront SRS can be considered in selected patients and we recommend a prescribed marginal dose from 11 to 13 Gy (level C evidence).

For decades, monosyllabic word-recognition in quiet (WRQ) has been the default test of speech recognition in routine audiologic assessment. The continued use of WRQ scores is noteworthy in part because difficulties understanding speech in noise (SIN) is perhaps the most common complaint of individuals with hearing loss. The easiest way to integrate SIN measures into routine clinical practice would be for SIN to replace WRQ assessment as the primary test of speech perception. To facilitate this goal, we predicted classifications of WRQ scores from the QuickSIN signal to noise ratio (SNR) loss and hearing thresholds.
We examined data from 5808 patients who underwent audiometric assessment at the Stanford Ear Institute. All individuals completed pure-tone audiometry, and speech assessment consisting of monaural WRQ, and monaural QuickSIN. We then performed multiple-logistic regression to determine whether classification of WRQ scores could be predicted from pure-tone thresholds and QuickSIN SNR losses.
Many patients displayed significant challenges on the QuickSIN despite having excellent WRQ scores. Performance on both measures decreased with hearing loss. However, decrements in performance were observed with less hearing loss for the QuickSIN than for WRQ. Most important, we demonstrate that classification of good or excellent word-recognition scores in quiet can be predicted with high accuracy by the high-frequency pure-tone average and the QuickSIN SNR loss.
Taken together, these data suggest that SIN measures provide more information than WRQ. More important, the predictive power of our model suggests that SIN can replace WRQ in most instances, by providing guidelines as to when performance in quiet is likely to be excellent and does not need to be measured. Making this subtle, but profound shift to clinical practice would enable routine audiometric testing to be more sensitive to patient concerns, and may benefit both clinicians and researchers.

BACKGROUND: Cogan\'s syndrome is a rare form of vasculitis mainly affecting young subjects of whatever gender, associating cochleovestibular and ophthalmological damage. Despite medical treatment, auditory prognosis is uncertain, with 50-60% of patients showing irreversible severe to profound hearing loss, thus being candidates for cochlear implantation. Following CARE guidelines, we report 10 cases of cochlear implantation in Cogan\'s syndrome, with assessment of speech reception threshold and maximum intelligibility after a minimum 1 year\'s experience with the implant.
METHODS: Ten patients from 4 centers received cochlear implants (14 implants) for Cogan\'s syndrome between 2005 and 2020. After 1 year\'s experience, there was significant improvement in speech reception threshold (P=0.0002) and maximum intelligibility (P=0.0002).
CONCLUSIONS: Audiovestibular signs associated with ophthalmological manifestations should suggest Cogan\'s syndrome. Hearing impairment is usually irreversible. Cochlear implantation may be necessary and improves hearing performance.

There is a growing demand for comprehensive, evidence-based, and accessible clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to address virtual service delivery. This demand was particularly evident within the field of hearing healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic, when providers were faced with an immediate need to offer services at a distance. Considering the recent advancement in information and communication technologies, the slow uptake of virtual care, and the lack of knowledge tools to support clinical integration in hearing healthcare, a Knowledge-to-Action Framework was used to address the virtual care delivery research-to-practice gap.
This paper outlines the development of a CPG specific to provider-directed virtual hearing aid care. Clinical integration of the guideline took place during the COVID-19 pandemic and in alignment with an umbrella project aimed at implementing and evaluating virtual hearing aid care incorporating many different stakeholders.
Evidence from two systematic literature reviews guided the CPG development. Collaborative actions around knowledge creation resulted in the development of a draft CPG (v1.9) and the mobilisation of the guideline into participating clinical sites.
Literature review findings are discussed along with the co-creation process that included 13 team members, from various research and clinical backgrounds, who participated in the writing, revising, and finalising of the draft version of the guideline.

This study aimed to assess the quality of global guidelines or consensus statements for newborn and childhood hearing screening, as well as to compare various guidelines between other countries and China.
A PROSPERO registered systematic review (number CRD42021242198) was conducted. Multiple electronic databases and government websites including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, Cochrane Library, and BMJ Best Practice were searched from inception until May 2021. The latest national and international guidelines, consensus statements, technical specifications, and recommendations regarding newborn or childhood hearing screening that were published in Chinese or English medical journals or elsewhere with the full version available online. The following information was extracted independently by two reviewers for comparative analysis: titles, authors, publication year, country, the source organization, and main key recommendations using systems for assigning the level of evidence and strength of recommendations. The quality of the guidelines was assessed by three independent reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, 2nd edition. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to assess among-reviewer agreement.
We assessed 15 newborn and 6 childhood hearing screening guidelines, respectively. Most newborn guidelines recommend the 1-3-6 guidelines and pre-discharge screening; however, the specific screening times differ. 93.33% of newborn hearing guidelines recommend \"primary screening-re-screening-diagnosis-intervention\" for well-babies while 73.33% of the guidelines recommend \"initial screening-diagnosis-intervention\" for newborns in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU); 33.33% of the newborn hearing guidelines recommended initial screening coverage of > 95% while 46.66% did not mention it. Further, 26.66% of the newborn hearing guidelines recommended a referral rate to diagnosis within 4% while 60% did not mention it. Regarding childhood hearing screening guidelines, the screening populations differed across guidelines (age range: 0-9 years); most guidelines recommend pediatric hearing screening for all preschoolers. Only 50% of the guidelines specify screening and re-screening techniques, including pure-tone hearing screening, OAE, tympanometry, and others. The \"Clarity of Presentation\" domain achieved the highest mean score, and the lowest was \"Editorial Independence\" both in newborn and childhood guidelines. Overall score of newborn hearing screening guidelines ranged from 3 (2018 Europe) to 7 (2019 America), with an average score of 5.33. Average score of childhood hearing screening guidelines was 4.78, with the score ranging from 4 (2017 England, 2012 Europe, 2016 WHO) to 6.67 (2011 America). ICC analysis revealed excellent agreement across 21 guidelines (> 0.75).
These findings indicated newborn hearing screening guidelines had superior quality over childhood ones. Comparative analysis suggested that recommendations of the Chinese newborn and pediatric hearing screening protocols are consistent with the mainstream international opinion. Moreover, this analysis demonstrated that \"Editorial Independence\" and \"Stakeholder Involvement\" have the greatest opportunities for improvement. These results may help to advance the quality of hearing screening guidelines in clinical practice and guide evidence-based updates.

More children with single-sided deafness (SSD) are receiving cochlear implants (CIs) due to the expansion of CI indications. This unique group of pediatric patients has different needs than the typical recipient with bilateral deafness and requires special consideration and care. The goal of cochlear implantation in these children is to provide bilateral input to encourage the development of binaural hearing. Considerations for candidacy and follow-up care should reflect and measure these goals. The purpose of this document is to review the current evidence and provide guidance for CI candidacy, evaluation, and management in children with SSD.

The WHO uses the better ear PTA(0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0 kHz) to infer speech recognition in noise (SRN) ability. The purpose of this study was to determine the ability of this measure to detect an SRN disorder.
The reference standard was the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT). The index test was better ear PTA(0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0 kHz). Diagnostic accuracy was determined with receiver operating characteristic curves and the area under the curve (AUC) for data sets with and without complete audibility of the HINT stimuli.
Data from previously published studies (n = 381) were retrospectively divided into disordered and control groups.
For the All Data analysis, better ear PTA(0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0 kHz) was a significant predictor of an SRN disorder, however, the AUC was just above chance (AUC = 0.59, p < 0.001). For the Partial Audibility analysis, better ear PTA(0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0 kHz) was a significant predictor of the target disorder (AUC = 0.85, p = 0.001).
The utilization of better ear PTA(0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0 kHz) to infer SRN ability is questionable for individuals with complete audibility of the reference test speech and noise stimuli.