BACKGROUND: Deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) children may experience communication delays, irrespective of early intervention and technology. Australian Sign Language (Auslan) is one approach in early intervention to address language delays. Current prevalence of Auslan use among Australian families with DHH children is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: The first aim was to determine the proportion of families enrolled in an Australian statewide hearing loss databank who use Auslan with their DHH child. The second aim was to explore the relationships between indicators of child hearing loss (bilateral or unilateral hearing loss, degree of hearing loss, and device use: hearing aids and cochlear implants), family factors (maternal education, attendance at early intervention, family history of deafness, and socio-economic disadvantage) and the family\'s reported use of Auslan.
METHODS: We analysed the enrolment data from 997 families who participated in an Australian statewide hearing loss databank between 2012 and 2021. We described the proportion of families who used Auslan with their DHH child at home. The association between indicators of child hearing loss and family factors, and the parental reports of communication approach were examined using correlation analyses.
RESULTS: Eighty-seven of 997 parents (8.7%) reported using Auslan with their DHH child. Of these, 26 (2.6%) used Auslan as their primary language. The use of Auslan at home was associated with the following indicators of child hearing loss: bilateral hearing loss, profound compared to mild hearing loss, and cochlear implant and hearing aid use compared to no device use. The family factors associated with the use of Auslan were: referral or attendance at early intervention compared to those who did not attend, and a family history of deafness compared to those with none. No association was found between maternal education and socio-economic disadvantage and the use of Auslan.
CONCLUSIONS: This Australian study found a low proportion (8.7%) of families with a DHH child who reported using Auslan. Seven child hearing loss and family factors were considered, and five were significantly associated with using Auslan at home. Children with a greater degree of hearing loss, attendance at early intervention and family history of deafness tended to use Auslan.

UNASSIGNED: The communication barrier that deaf people face when seeking dental care can impact their experience and may potentially lead to exacerbated dental fear or anxiety. This study aimed to investigate the current attitudes and levels of knowledge and confidence of Australian oral and dental health students in treating a deaf patient.
UNASSIGNED: A 33-item cross-sectional questionnaire was distributed to Australian dental, oral health therapy and dental hygiene students across 13 tertiary institutions. The online questionnaire was distributed to students via their respective course coordinators.
UNASSIGNED: 271 viable survey responses were received. While 55.7% of participants reported previous exposure to deaf or hard-of-hearing people, 90.8% had never completed or attempted an Auslan class. These participants who answered \'Yes\' to having taken a prior Auslan class were reported to have significantly higher mean knowledge scores and confidence self-efficacy ratings than those who had answered \'No\' (p = 0.002). There was no statistically significant association between higher knowledge scores and higher confidence self-efficacy ratings. Most of these participants that answered \'Yes\' to having taken a prior Auslan class implied or stated that the party responsible for changing their communication behaviour was the dentist rather than the patient, in contrast to the inconsistent responses from the \'No\' group.
UNASSIGNED: Inadequate knowledge and cultural competency regarding the Deaf population was reported by Australian dental, oral health therapy and hygiene students. Incorporating more training pertinent to dental curricula is warranted to minimise oral health inequalities.

BACKGROUND: Auslan is used by the Australian deaf community and relies heavily on hand, wrist, and elbow movement. Upper limb injury or dysfunction may require surgical intervention to alleviate pain and provide a stable skeleton for function, leading to partial or complete reduction in motion. The aim of this study was to assess the wrist, forearm, and elbow motion required to communicate via Auslan, to tailor optimal interventions in this population.
METHODS: A biomechanical analysis was conducted on two native Auslan communicators, who signed 28 pre-selected and common Auslan words and phrases.
RESULTS: Sagittal plane wrist and elbow motion was found to be of greater importance than axial plane forearm rotation. Relative elbow flexion and generous wrist motion was common for many of the words and phrases, while end-range elbow extension was not recorded.
CONCLUSIONS: The maintenance of wrist and elbow motion should be prioritized when selecting surgical interventions for patients who communicate using Auslan.

Here, a moral case is presented as to why sign languages such as Auslan should be made compulsory in general school curricula. Firstly, there are significant benefits that accrue to individuals from learning sign language. Secondly, sign language education is a matter of justice; the normalisation of sign language education and use would particularly benefit marginalised groups, such as those living with a communication disability. Finally, the integration of sign languages into the curricula would enable the flourishing of Deaf culture and go some way to resolving the tensions that have arisen from the promotion of oralist education facilitated by technologies such as cochlear implants. There are important reasons to further pursue policy proposals regarding the prioritisation of sign language in school curricula.