Literature DB >> 27021402

The Sensitivity of Adolescent Hearing Screens Significantly Improves by Adding High Frequencies.

Deepa L Sekhar1, Thomas R Zalewski2, Jessica S Beiler3, Beth Czarnecki4, Ashley L Barr4, Tonya S King5, Ian M Paul6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: One in 6 US adolescents has high-frequency hearing loss, often related to hazardous noise. Yet, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) hearing screen (500, 1,000, 2,000, 4,000 Hertz) primarily includes low frequencies (<3,000 Hertz). Study objectives were to determine (1) sensitivity and specificity of the AAP hearing screen for adolescent hearing loss and (2) if adding high frequencies increases sensitivity, while repeat screening of initial referrals reduces false positive results (maintaining acceptable specificity).
METHODS: Eleventh graders (n = 134) participated in hearing screening (2013-2014) including "gold-standard" sound-treated booth testing to calculate sensitivity and specificity.
RESULTS: Of the 43 referrals, 27 (63%) had high-frequency hearing loss. AAP screen sensitivity and specificity were 58.1% (95% confidence interval 42.1%-73.0%) and 91.2% (95% confidence interval 83.4-96.1), respectively. Adding high frequencies (6,000, 8,000 Hertz) significantly increased sensitivity to 79.1% (64.0%-90.0%; p = .003). Specificity with repeat screening was 81.3% (71.8%-88.7%; p = .003).
CONCLUSIONS: Adolescent hearing screen sensitivity improves with high frequencies. Repeat testing maintains acceptable specificity.
Copyright © 2016 Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adolescents; Hazardous noise; High-frequency hearing loss; Primary care; Screening

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27021402     DOI: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.02.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Adolesc Health        ISSN: 1054-139X            Impact factor:   5.012


  2 in total

1.  Screening in High Schools to Identify, Evaluate, and Lower Depression Among Adolescents: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Deepa L Sekhar; Eric W Schaefer; James G Waxmonsky; Leslie R Walker-Harding; Krista L Pattison; Alissa Molinari; Perri Rosen; Jennifer L Kraschnewski
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-11-01

2.  Missed opportunities: Do states require screening of children for health conditions that interfere with learning?

Authors:  Delaney Gracy; Anupa Fabian; Corey Hannah Basch; Maria Scigliano; Sarah A MacLean; Rachel K MacKenzie; Irwin E Redlener
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.