Romola S Bucks1, Patrick D Dunlop2, Dunay Schmulian Taljaard3,4,5, Christopher G Brennan-Jones3,5, Michael Hunter6,7, Keith Wesnes8,9,10, Robert H Eikelboom3,5,11. 1. School of Psychology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia. romola.bucks@uwa.edu.au. 2. School of Psychology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia. 3. Ear Sciences Centre, School of Surgery, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia. 4. Audiology Department, Princess Margaret Hospital, Subiaco, Australia. 5. Ear Science Institute Australia, Subiaco, Australia. 6. Busselton Population Medical Research Institute, Busselton, Australia. 7. School of Population Health, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Australia. 8. Centre for Human Psychopharmacology, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia. 9. Wesnes Cognition Ltd., Streatley on Thames, United Kingdom. 10. Department of Psychology, University of Northumbria, Newcastle, United Kingdom. 11. Department of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine the relationship between peripheral hearing loss (HL) in baby boomers (better-ear measure) and cognitive function, taking into account the impact of depression or cognitive reserve on this relationship and exploring binaural hearing. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, epidemiology study. METHODS: Data from 1,969 participants aged 45 to 66 years were collected in the Busselton Healthy Ageing Study. Participants were assessed using pure-tone air-conduction thresholds at octave frequencies (250; 500; 1,000; 2,000; 4,000; and 8,000 Hz). Hearing loss was grouped using 1) pure-tone averages across 4 frequencies (500 to 4000Hz) in the better ear (BE4FA) or 2) latent profile analysis (LPA) using all thresholds from both ears. Cognition was tested with the Cognitive Drug Research System, verbal fluency, and National Adult Reading Test (premorbid-IQ). Regression was used to determine the impact of HL relative to no HL on age and education-adjusted cognition, controlling for mood, sex, and premorbid-IQ. RESULTS: According to BE4FA, 4.7% had mild (26-40 dB) HL; 0.8% had moderate (41-60 dB) HL; and 0.3% had severe (61-80 dB) HL. Based on the LPA, 20.5% had high-frequency HL; 7.8% had mid- to high-frequency HL; and 1.9% had significant HL across all frequencies. The HL group was not a predictor of cognitive performance in any domain using BE4FA and explained just 0.5% and 0.4% of variance in continuity-of-attention and speed-of-memory retrieval using LPA. Critically, those with the worst hearing did not differ cognitively from those with the best. CONCLUSION: Hearing loss is not an important determinant of contemporaneous attention, memory, or executive function in middle-aged adults once age, education, depression, cognitive reserve, and sex are controlled. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 126:2367-2375, 2016.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine the relationship between peripheral hearing loss (HL) in baby boomers (better-ear measure) and cognitive function, taking into account the impact of depression or cognitive reserve on this relationship and exploring binaural hearing. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, epidemiology study. METHODS: Data from 1,969 participants aged 45 to 66 years were collected in the Busselton Healthy Ageing Study. Participants were assessed using pure-tone air-conduction thresholds at octave frequencies (250; 500; 1,000; 2,000; 4,000; and 8,000 Hz). Hearing loss was grouped using 1) pure-tone averages across 4 frequencies (500 to 4000Hz) in the better ear (BE4FA) or 2) latent profile analysis (LPA) using all thresholds from both ears. Cognition was tested with the Cognitive Drug Research System, verbal fluency, and National Adult Reading Test (premorbid-IQ). Regression was used to determine the impact of HL relative to no HL on age and education-adjusted cognition, controlling for mood, sex, and premorbid-IQ. RESULTS: According to BE4FA, 4.7% had mild (26-40 dB) HL; 0.8% had moderate (41-60 dB) HL; and 0.3% had severe (61-80 dB) HL. Based on the LPA, 20.5% had high-frequency HL; 7.8% had mid- to high-frequency HL; and 1.9% had significant HL across all frequencies. The HL group was not a predictor of cognitive performance in any domain using BE4FA and explained just 0.5% and 0.4% of variance in continuity-of-attention and speed-of-memory retrieval using LPA. Critically, those with the worst hearing did not differ cognitively from those with the best. CONCLUSION: Hearing loss is not an important determinant of contemporaneous attention, memory, or executive function in middle-aged adults once age, education, depression, cognitive reserve, and sex are controlled. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 126:2367-2375, 2016.
Authors: David G Loughrey; Michelle E Kelly; George A Kelley; Sabina Brennan; Brian A Lawlor Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: Carla R Schubert; Karen J Cruickshanks; Mary E Fischer; Yanjun Chen; Barbara E K Klein; Ronald Klein; A Alex Pinto Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 6.053