Cargando…
Comparison of hearing recovery criteria in sudden sensorineural hearing loss
The countless methods available to analyze hearing recovery in idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSHL) cases hinder the comparison of the various treatments found in the literature. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to compare the different criteria for hearing recovery in ISSHL found in the l...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9446180/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22714846 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1808-86942012000300009 |
_version_ | 1784783592277147648 |
---|---|
author | Inoue, Daniel Paganini Bogaz, Eduardo Amaro Barros, Flávia de Oliveira Penido, Norma |
author_facet | Inoue, Daniel Paganini Bogaz, Eduardo Amaro Barros, Flávia de Oliveira Penido, Norma |
author_sort | Inoue, Daniel Paganini |
collection | PubMed |
description | The countless methods available to analyze hearing recovery in idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSHL) cases hinder the comparison of the various treatments found in the literature. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to compare the different criteria for hearing recovery in ISSHL found in the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is an observational clinical cohort study from a prospective protocol in patients with ISSHL, treated between 2000 and 2010. Five criteria were considered for significant hearing recovery and four for complete recovery by pure tone audiometry, using non-parametric tests and multiple comparisons at a significance level of 5%. After determining the stricter criteria for hearing recovery, vocal audiometry parameters were added. RESULTS: There was a significant difference between the criteria (p < 0.001) as they were analyzed together. Mild auditory recovery occurred in only 35 (27.6%) patients. When speech audiometry was added, only 34 patients (26.8%) showed significant improvement. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of consistency among the criteria used for hearing recovery. The criterion of change of functional category by one degree into at least mild hearing recovery was the stricter. Speech audiometry did not prove essential to define significant hearing recovery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9446180 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94461802022-09-09 Comparison of hearing recovery criteria in sudden sensorineural hearing loss Inoue, Daniel Paganini Bogaz, Eduardo Amaro Barros, Flávia de Oliveira Penido, Norma Braz J Otorhinolaryngol Original Article The countless methods available to analyze hearing recovery in idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (ISSHL) cases hinder the comparison of the various treatments found in the literature. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to compare the different criteria for hearing recovery in ISSHL found in the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is an observational clinical cohort study from a prospective protocol in patients with ISSHL, treated between 2000 and 2010. Five criteria were considered for significant hearing recovery and four for complete recovery by pure tone audiometry, using non-parametric tests and multiple comparisons at a significance level of 5%. After determining the stricter criteria for hearing recovery, vocal audiometry parameters were added. RESULTS: There was a significant difference between the criteria (p < 0.001) as they were analyzed together. Mild auditory recovery occurred in only 35 (27.6%) patients. When speech audiometry was added, only 34 patients (26.8%) showed significant improvement. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of consistency among the criteria used for hearing recovery. The criterion of change of functional category by one degree into at least mild hearing recovery was the stricter. Speech audiometry did not prove essential to define significant hearing recovery. Elsevier 2015-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9446180/ /pubmed/22714846 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1808-86942012000300009 Text en . https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Inoue, Daniel Paganini Bogaz, Eduardo Amaro Barros, Flávia de Oliveira Penido, Norma Comparison of hearing recovery criteria in sudden sensorineural hearing loss |
title | Comparison of hearing recovery criteria in sudden sensorineural hearing loss |
title_full | Comparison of hearing recovery criteria in sudden sensorineural hearing loss |
title_fullStr | Comparison of hearing recovery criteria in sudden sensorineural hearing loss |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of hearing recovery criteria in sudden sensorineural hearing loss |
title_short | Comparison of hearing recovery criteria in sudden sensorineural hearing loss |
title_sort | comparison of hearing recovery criteria in sudden sensorineural hearing loss |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9446180/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22714846 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1808-86942012000300009 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT inouedanielpaganini comparisonofhearingrecoverycriteriainsuddensensorineuralhearingloss AT bogazeduardoamaro comparisonofhearingrecoverycriteriainsuddensensorineuralhearingloss AT barrosflavia comparisonofhearingrecoverycriteriainsuddensensorineuralhearingloss AT deoliveirapenidonorma comparisonofhearingrecoverycriteriainsuddensensorineuralhearingloss |