Taylor and Emanuel (2013) conducted retrospective and prospective studies to assess the efficacy and offer suggestions to strengthen college hearing screening programs. Researchers assessed low return rates, addressed high ambient noise levels in therapy rooms, and considered the effects on results when excluding 6000 Hz. Retrospective records from 1999 to 2011 were analyzed at a university. A small percentage of students were referred for follow-up testing after failing their screening, yet only a third of the students returned for diagnostic testing. Students with hearing loss were not accurately identified due to the therapy rooms being poorly treated, resulting in unreliable findings. The prospective study included a smaller number of students who took part in a required screening and agreed to participate in a …show more content…
Program directors’ decision to only test frequencies at 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz, while excluding 6000 Hz, will inevitably miss students with a hearing loss in higher frequencies. Assessing the efficacy of the hearing screening program led researchers to make recommendations for other universities to implement. Examples include, advocating the importance of follow-up to students to improve return rates, and having proper sound treatment to enhance screening results. Finally, adding 6000 Hz into the screening program may help to accurately identify students with early signs of high frequency hearing loss. In conclusion, the study was useful in acknowledging weaknesses such as assessing the low follow-up rates, noticing high levels of noise, and examining the impact on results when hearing screening programs choose to omit 6000 Hz. Recognizing the limitations of the hearing screening program allows for given recommendations to strengthen the efficacy of existing hearing screening
1) Review the teacher checklists used to determine educational effects of hearing loss, along with common functional outcomes measures. Readings include:
In 1998, I was involved with a newborn hearing screening research project that helped determine if otoacoustic emissions (OAE) could be measured one hour or less after birth. At the time, there were no laws mandating newborn hearing screening, and
I struggled to listen to the instructor and found myself having to work very hard to understand her then about an hour into class I began to lose focus and stopped paying attention. In this instance, I empathized with the children who have an unidentified hearing loss and struggle to pay attention in school. These children are often identified as having attention and behavior issues when in reality their hearing is the problem. This further emphasized the importance of services such as hearing aids, FM systems or other amplification methods to ensure that these children do not have to work so hard to understand
Advanced, high-quality, invisible, digital, Bluetooth hearing aids from all manufacturers to suit each individual’s hearing needs and budget
Riedner and Efros (1995) stressed that “nonorganic hearing loss signals that not all is right with the child” (p. 197). Unfortunately, there are cases where the child falsifies a hearing loss because help is needed. A study conducted by Riedner and Efros (1995) looked at three
Hearing is very important for learning. Hearing status is strongly correlated with academic performance so these children need to be identified to help ensure positive outcomes. A mild loss may go unnoticed but can have detrimental effects on learning. Classrooms can be noisy environments which are challenging for normal hearing listeners and even more so for children with hearing losses. Providing integrated audiological and speech services through the school system helps identify children who are at risk for difficulties and provide interventions to help ensure a smooth transition to school. The school is a good access point for these services because it is close to the child’s home, parents have a direct contact, wait times can be shorter
As a veteran, John was exposed to loud noises while on duty many years ago. Due to his prolonged exposure, John developed severe sensorineural hearing loss. Along with hearing loss, he also suffers from tinnitus. This interview was conducted in a quiet environment and directly facing John. John began the interview
In 1993, the average age for identification of a hearing impairment in the United States was approximately three years old (NIH, 1993). Consequently, the first three years of a child’s life are most important for speech and language development and, therefore, are crucial years for detecting hearing loss. Without an ability to hear, children lack proper development of speech and language. Therefore, a lack of efficacy in previous infant hearing screening protocols fueled innovation of universal newborn hearing screenings. These universal hearing screening methods were the first to address means of screening all infants born in hospitals. This paper will discuss: (a) limitations of previous protocols which paved a path for new protocols and
The purpose of this paper is to revisit previous literature on universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS), review current practices of UNHS, and evaluate the factors relating to UNHS. The importance of identifying hearing loss before 3 months, and receiving intervention by 6 months of age relates to the children’s speech, language, academic, and social/emotional development. Early diagnosis allows a longer period of time for families to obtain information and receive support that may be needed (Yoshinaga-Itano, 2003). The ultimate goal of UNHS is to detect hearing loss early in order to treat hearing loss sooner, potentially preventing a delay in children’s overall development (NIH, 1993).
Many international health organizations say that this is the leading disability throughout the world and much of it can be prevented, since many of the causes can be fixed by changing the person’s approach to it. For example, if someone is attending a concert, it would be a good idea to get earplugs according to Susan Kaplan, an audiologist with the UC Davis health system (Meyer). However, not many people do this and as a result, have substantial hearing loss. A symptom of hearing loss, tinnitus, is being seen in teenagers ever increasingly suggests a study done in Brazil (“Earbuds Threaten Hearing”). Tinnitus is ear noise like hissing, buzzing, roaring, beating, pulsing, chirping, ringing, whistling, clicking, or different noises in one or both ears or in the head, with no external cause. There are two types of tinnitus, objective or subjective. Subjective is usually connected with hearing loss, since it means only the person experiencing the problem can hear the sounds. There are many ways to test people to see if they have tinnitus or some kind of hearing loss. A few ways are a physical examination of the person’s head and neck, The Rinne and Weber tests, magnetic resonance angiography or venography, or a blood count (“Tinnitus”). These can tell which ear is damaged and even
I’ve enjoyed reading your post. The universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) programs have been very instrumental in identifying hearing loss at an early age and creating intervention measures for children that suffer from hearing loss (Walker et al., 2014). In the US, the UNHS programs are the routine procedure for newborn screening (Walker et al., 2014). Even with those good measures in place, some newborns do not have access to those resources (Walker et al., 2014). Some children develop hearing loss at later ages, viewed as “postnatal onset hearing loss” (Walker et al, 2014, p.117). These factors may also play a role in the case that we read. So I agree that the nurses should have completed an auditory assessment of the child’s hearing
Right now, I would not feel comfortable performing a hearing screening during a kindergarten round up. However, I would feel comfortable and prepared administering a hearing screening after I've practiced a few times. I have performed a hearing screening on classmates during undergrad and recently I observed my clinical supervisor administer a hearing screening during an
Recently in the United States, there has been a drive at both the state and national level to provide universal screening for newborns to detect hearing loss. Although the idea of a universal screening in newborns is a new phenomenon, research has examined the impact of early intervention and screening for children with hearing loss. “Most professionals in the field feel strongly that early identification of hearing loss and early implementation of intervention enhances the child’s social, communicative, and academic development” (Calderon, 1998, p. 54). With that, the two studies used participants in the same early intervention program and mainly focused on the importance of the age of enrollment. Furthermore, the age of enrollment
Hearing screenings are just as important as a routine doctor’s check-up. The younger generation, such as college students, may not pay much attention to their hearing. Universities all over the country have made a point to provide hearing services to some of their students. Taylor & Emanuel’s article, Assessment of the Efficacy of a Hearing Screening Program for College Students, studies the effectiveness of a hearing screening program and proposes improvements that can be made to university hearing screening programs. This article discusses the importance of sensitivity and specificity when determining the effectiveness of a screening program. There were plenty of outside sources within this article, but a lot of these studies had insufficient
One way that this can be accomplished is by allowing my practice to help screen your patients who may have hearing losses (even mild ones) at earlier ages