Article

Screening for Hearing Loss in Older Adults: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Annals of internal medicine (Impact Factor: 16.1). 03/2014; 160(11). DOI: 10.7326/M14-0496
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Update of the 2003 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for dementia.
The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits, harms, and sensitivity and specificity of screening instruments for cognitive impairment in older adults and the benefits and harms of commonly used treatment and management options for older adults with mild cognitive impairment or early dementia and their caregivers.
This recommendation applies to universal screening with formal screening instruments in community-dwelling adults in the general primary care population who are older than 65 years and have no signs or symptoms of cognitive impairment.
The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for cognitive impairment. (I statement).

1 Follower
 · 
51 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper describes the development of a speech-in-noise test for hearing screening and surveillance in Brazilian Portuguese based on the evaluation of suprathreshold acuity performances. The SUN test (Speech Understanding in Noise) consists of a list of intervocalic consonants in noise presented in a multiple-choice paradigm by means of a touch screen. The test provides one out of three possible results: "a hearing check is recommended" (red light), "a hearing check would be advisable" (yellow light), and "no hearing difficulties" (green light) (Paglialonga et al., Comput. Biol. Med. 2014). This novel test was developed in a population of 30 normal hearing young adults and 101 adults with varying degrees of hearing impairment and handicap, including normal hearing. The test had 84% sensitivity and 76% specificity compared to conventional pure-tone screening and 83% sensitivity and 86% specificity to detect disabling hearing impairment. The test outcomes were in line with the degree of self-perceived hearing handicap. The results found here paralleled those reported in the literature for the SUN test and for conventional speech-in-noise measures. This study showed that the proposed test might be a viable method to identify individuals with hearing problems to be referred to further audiological assessment and intervention.
    BioMed Research International 08/2014; 2014:652838. DOI:10.1155/2014/652838 · 2.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hearing loss leads to impaired social functioning and quality of life. Hearing loss is also associated with sleeping disorders and cardiometabolic risk factors. Here, we determined whether subclinical hearing loss is associated with sleep duration and cardiometabolic risk factors in a cross-sectional and longitudinal study of healthy Japanese general population. 48,091 men and women aged 20-79 years who underwent medical checkups were included in a cross-sectional study, and 6,674 were included in an 8-year longitudinal study. The prevalence of audiometrically determined hearing loss (>25 dB) at 4000 and 1000 Hz increased significantly with increasing sleep duration in any age strata. Logistic regression analysis showed that compared with reference sleep duration (6 h) longer sleep duration (≥8 h) was significantly associated with hearing loss, even after adjusting for potential confounding factors. Simultaneously, hearing loss was significantly associated with male sex, diabetes, and no habitual exercise. In the longitudinal study, the risk of longer sleep duration (≥8 h) after 8 years was significantly greater in subjects with hearing loss at 4000 Hz at baseline. In conclusion, current results suggest a potential association of subclinical hearing loss with longer sleep duration and cardiometabolic risk factors in a Japanese general population.
    International Journal of Otolaryngology 08/2014; 2014:218218. DOI:10.1155/2014/218218
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Population screening might provide a mechanism to enable early detection of dementia. Yet the potential benefits, harms or acceptability of such a large-scale intervention are not well understood. This research aims to examine the attitudes and preferences of the general public, health care professionals, people with dementia and their carers towards population screening for dementia. A systematic review of the international literature was undertaken. A search of fifteen bibliographic databases was conducted (up to 12 July 2012; no language restriction) using terms related to dementia, screening, specific screening tools, case finding, and attitudes and preferences; genetic screening and biomarkers were excluded. All study designs were included except opinion-based papers. Included papers were doubly quality assessed and thematically analysed using NVivo. 29,910 papers were identified of which 29 met the inclusion criteria. We identified seventeen themes relating to the 3 phases of the screening process (pre-, in- and post-screen) - none emerged as more of a facilitator than a barrier to the acceptance of dementia screening. Seven themes emerged in relation to the patient, carer and general population: existing health state; lifestyle and life view; awareness of dementia; role of clinician; communication; benefit; and role of the family. Ten themes emerged in relation to the clinician and healthcare professional: patient's existing health and comorbidities; awareness of dementia; confidence; duration of patient contact; suitability of screening tool; cost; disclosure; time; treatment and prognosis; and stigma. As for all screening programmes, screening for dementia raises complex issues around preference and choice for clinicians and the public, and it is unclear what specific factors promote or reduce screening acceptance the most. Overall, the level of evidence is low, few large scale studies have been undertaken and none were conducted in representative samples, all affecting the generalizability of identified themes across healthcare contexts. Nevertheless, our findings suggest that population screening for dementia may not be acceptable to either the general public or health care professionals, and highlight where focused efforts are needed to gain insights into dementia specific issues.
    BMC Genetics 06/2015; 15(66). DOI:10.1186/s12877-015-0064-6 · 2.36 Impact Factor