- MedOne ComSci
- ChapterSource: Gelfand S, ed. Essentials of Audiology. 4th Edition. Thieme; 2015. doi:10.1055/b-006-161125Comment: Physical attributes such as a person’s height, body temperature, or blood sugar can be measured directly. This is not so for sensory and perceptual capabilities such as hearing. To find out about what a person can hear and how these sounds are perceived we must, in effect, ask her. In other words, hearing assessment relies for the most part on presenting a stimulus and measuring the response to that stimulus. Raising one’s hand when a sound is heard, repeating a test word, judging which of two sounds is louder than the other, and even the electrical activity of the nervous system (“brain waves,” so to speak) elicited by a sound are all responses. The trick is to contrive the stimulus-response situation in a way that is valid, which means that we are really testing what we think is being tested, and reliable, which means that the same results will be obtained if the test is repeated.
Adult Swallow Screening and Clinical Swallow Evaluation, Chapter 4, Assessing and Treating Dysphagia: A Lifespan Perspective, Debra Suiter and Memorie Gosa, 2019Source: Suiter D, Gosa M, ed. Assessing and Treatment Dysphagia: A Lifespan Perspective. 1st Edition. Thieme; 2019. doi:10.1055/b-006-149650Comment: The literature provides a plethora of swallow-screening options. The discerning clinician must make an informed decision about what screen is desired for use. Considerations are multifactorial. The clinician must first consider the quality of the research, ensuring adequate statistical evidence for clinical use, and methodology that is well substantiated by evidence from the literature. Other factors that must be taken into account include ease of administration, time of administration, and any necessary equipment to carry out the screen. The screen should provide the clinician with a clear pass/fail choice and explicitly state what action should be taken after completion of the screen.
- CockpitComment: AW was born with bilateral atresia and microtia at 33 weeks of gestation, weighing 4 lb and 6 ounces. His family history was unremarkable for similar anomalies and no other medical history was significant. This condition was unknown prior to his birth. A newborn hearing screening was bypassed and an unsedated auditory brainstem response (ABR) shortly after birth revealed a moderate conductive hearing loss, for clicks, 500 and 4,000 Hz, in both ears. Masked bone conduction ABR testing for a click yielded a response within normal limits. A bone conduction hearing device was recommended.
- CockpitComment: BC is a 73-year-old male referred by his geriatrician to the audiology clinic following assessment 1 month earlier in the geriatric assessment clinic. The geriatrician had diagnosed BC with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and was aware of recent evidence linking hearing loss with cognitive decline. As a part of the recommendations, the geriatrician stated, “Hearing impairment is a known risk factor for development of cognitive decline. Although the patient’s audiology assessment 6 months ago was normal, it would not be unwise to repeat this assessment at this time.” This case study is particularly relevant to current practice in audiology given the rapidly aging population. Age is the greatest risk factor for dementia and, as longevity increases, it is increasingly likely that audiologists will need to understand how to effectively manage hearing loss in patients with cognitive impairment because they will be called upon to provide rehabilitation for older patients with cognitive decline.
- E-JournalSource: Hitchcock E. 2019; 40(02): 1 - 9.Comment: Featuring six review articles.
Short link: https://medone.thieme.com/VWK5C