Factors that influence health service access in deaf and hard-of-hearing children: a narrative review

OBJECTIVES

Early diagnosis and intervention of deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children leads to improved language and psychosocial outcomes. However, many child, parent and provider related factors can influence access to early intervention services, including hearing devices. This narrative review aims to explore factors that influence health service access in DHH children.

DESIGN

A systematic search was conducted to identify articles that explored factors that influenced health service access in DHH children in countries with Universal Newborn Hearing Screening, published between 2010 and 2022.

STUDY SAMPLES

Fifty-nine articles met the inclusion criteria for data extraction. This included 4 systematic reviews, 2 reviews, 39 quantitative and 5 mixed methods studies and 9 qualitative studies.

RESULTS

The identified factors were grouped into the following themes: (a) demographic factors, (b) family related factors, (c) child related factors, (d) factors specific to hearing devices, (e) service delivery, f) telehealth and (g) COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

This review provided a comprehensive summary of multiple factors that affect access to health services in DHH children. Psychosocial support, consistent clinical advice, allocation of resources to rural communities and use of telehealth are possible ways to address barriers and improve health service access.

Socioeconomic status and pediatric cochlear implant usage during COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

COVID-19 (COVID) delayed access to speech and hearing services. The objective of this study was to identify interactions between socioeconomic status (SES) and cochlear implant (CI) usage during COVID.

METHODS

Consecutive pediatric patients (age 0-17) with CI and audiology visits between 2019 and 2022 at a tertiary care children's hospital were reviewed. Age, sex, race, insurance type, and proxy measures for SES using zip code were recorded. Hours spent with CI on and in different listening environments were compared between pre-COVID (1/1/2019-12/31/2019), COVID (4/1/2020-3/31/2021), and most recent (6/1/2021-5/31/2022) time periods.

RESULTS

Most patients were male (32/59, 54 % ears of 48 patients) and White, non-Hispanic (45/59, 76 %). Median age at implant was 2.0 years (range:0.6-12.2). There were no significant differences in hours spent with CI on during COVID compared with pre-COVID. However, children spent more time listening to louder noises (70-79 dB and ≥80 dB) recently compared with during COVID (p = 0.01 and 0.006, respectively). During COVID, children living in areas with greater educational attainment showed smaller reductions in total hours with CI on (β = 0.1, p = 0.02) and hours listening to speech in noise (β = 0.03, p = 0.005) compared with pre-COVID. In the most recent time period, children of minority race (β = -3.94 p = 0.008) and those who were older at implant (β = -0.630, p = 0.02) were more likely to experience reductions in total hours with CI on compared with during COVID.

CONCLUSION

Interventions which mitigate barriers of implant use and promote rich listening home-environments for at risk populations should be implemented during challenging future social and environmental conditions.

Socioeconomic Status and Cochlear Implant Usage: A Datalogging Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the associations between proxy measures of socioeconomic status (SES) and usage of cochlear implants.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

Usage outcomes were measured among patients with a cochlear implant and data logging at a tertiary care children's hospital between 2002 and 2017. Time per day with cochlear implant turned on, coil off, and listening to speech in noise and speech in quiet were extracted from audiology records, averaging right and left ear usage for those with bilateral implants. Associations between cochlear implant usage and demographic factors such as insurance type and median household income for zip code were assessed.

RESULTS

There were 142 total patients; 74 had bilateral usage data. Mean on air time was 10.76 hours (SD: 4.4). Those with private insurance had 1.2 hour more on air time/day (P = .047) and 0.9 hour more quiet time/day (P = .011) compared to those with public insurance. Younger age at last visit was associated with increased speech in quiet (B = -.08; 95% CI: -0.12-[-0.05], P < .001) and coil off (B = -0.06; 95% CI: -0.11-[-0.02], P = .006). Younger age at implant was associated with longer duration since last data logging visit (B = -10.46; 95% CI: -18.41-[-2.51], P = .010), more daily use (on air; B = -0.23; 95% CI: -0.43-[-0.03], P = .026), and increased time spent listening to speech in noise (B = -0.07; 95% CI: -0.14-[-0.01], P = .024). No other significant associations between datalogging output and each proxy SES factor were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of private insurance and older age at implantation decreased access to binaural hearing for children and young adults with cochlear implants.

Socioeconomic Status Among Cochlear Implant Candidates and Association With Surgical Pursuance

Importance

Despite the sizeable global burden of hearing loss, cochlear implants have poor penetrance among eligible hearing-impaired individuals. Identifying populations who may benefit from a cochlear implant but among whom penetrance is poor is an important aim in reducing the health-related and economic effects of hearing loss on both individuals and society.

Objectives

To explore the association of socioeconomic status (SES) with cochlear implant candidacy and the decision to undergo cochlear implantation.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study was performed in a tertiary academic center. All adult patients evaluated for cochlear implant candidacy from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2022, were included in the analysis.

Exposures

Household income quintile and rural or urban residence were used as proxies for SES based on zip code linkage to US Census and US Department of Agriculture data.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Odds of cochlear implant candidacy and surgery.

Results

A total of 754 individuals underwent candidacy evaluations and were included in the analysis (386 [51.2%] women; mean [SD] age, 64.0 [15.7] years). Of these, 693 (91.9%) were cochlear implant candidates, and 623 candidates (89.9%) underwent cochlear implantation. Multivariable analyses demonstrated that individuals in the highest income quintile had lower odds of cochlear implant candidacy compared with those in the lowest income quintile (odds ratio [OR], 0.26 [95% CI, 0.08-0.91]), and candidates in the highest income quintile had greater odds of undergoing cochlear implant surgery compared with those in the lowest quintile (OR, 2.59 [95% CI, 1.14-5.86]). Living in a small town or a micropolitan or rural area was associated with lower odds of undergoing cochlear implant surgery compared with living in a metropolitan core (OR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.04-0.83]) after controlling for distance to the primary implant center.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this cohort study suggest that individuals with higher SES are less likely to qualify for a cochlear implant; however, those who qualify are more likely to undergo surgery compared with those with lower SES. These findings highlight a hearing health care disparity that should be addressed through further studies to guide population-based initiatives.

The Risk of Meningitis After Cochlear Implantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to estimate the rate of postoperative meningitis (both immediate and long-term) in patients following cochlear implants (CIs). It aims to do so through a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies tracking complications after CIs.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library.

REVIEW METHODS

This review was performed in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies tracking complications following CIs in patients were included. Exclusion criteria included non-English language studies and case series reporting <10 patients. Bias risk was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analysis was performed through DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models.

RESULTS

A total of 116/1931 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, there were 112 cases of meningitis in 58,940 patients after CIs. Meta-analysis estimated an overall rate of postoperative meningitis of 0.07% (95% confidence interval [CIs], 0.03%-0.1%; I2  = 55%). Subgroup meta-analysis showed this rate had 95% CIs crossing 0% in implanted patients who received the pneumococcal vaccine, antibiotic prophylaxis, those with postoperative acute otitis media (AOM), and those implanted less than 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Meningitis is a rare complication following CIs. Our estimated rates of meningitis after CIs appear lower than prior estimates based on epidemiological studies in the early 2000s. However, the rate still appears higher than the baseline rate in the general population. The risk was very low in implanted patients who received the pneumococcal vaccine, antibiotic prophylaxis, received unilateral or bilateral implantations, developed AOM, those implanted with a round window or cochleostomy techniques, and those under 5 years.

Dynamic networks differentiate the language ability of children with cochlear implants

Background

Cochlear implantation (CI) in prelingually deafened children has been shown to be an effective intervention for developing language and reading skill. However, there is a substantial proportion of the children receiving CI who struggle with language and reading. The current study-one of the first to implement electrical source imaging in CI population was designed to identify the neural underpinnings in two groups of CI children with good and poor language and reading skill.

Methods

Data using high density electroencephalography (EEG) under a resting state condition was obtained from 75 children, 50 with CIs having good (HL) or poor language skills (LL) and 25 normal hearing (NH) children. We identified coherent sources using dynamic imaging of coherent sources (DICS) and their effective connectivity computing time-frequency causality estimation based on temporal partial directed coherence (TPDC) in the two CI groups compared to a cohort of age and gender matched NH children.

Findings

Sources with higher coherence amplitude were observed in three frequency bands (alpha, beta and gamma) for the CI groups when compared to normal hearing children. The two groups of CI children with good (HL) and poor (LL) language ability exhibited not only different cortical and subcortical source profiles but also distinct effective connectivity between them. Additionally, a support vector machine (SVM) algorithm using these sources and their connectivity patterns for each CI group across the three frequency bands was able to predict the language and reading scores with high accuracy.

Interpretation

Increased coherence in the CI groups suggest overall that the oscillatory activity in some brain areas become more strongly coupled compared to the NH group. Moreover, the different sources and their connectivity patterns and their association to language and reading skill in both groups, suggest a compensatory adaptation that either facilitated or impeded language and reading development. The neural differences in the two groups of CI children may reflect potential biomarkers for predicting outcome success in CI children.

Healthcare Disparities in Otolaryngology

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to summarize some of the recent research studies on healthcare disparities across various subspecialties within otolaryngology. This review also highlights the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on disparities and proposes potential interventions to mitigate disparities.

Recent Findings

Significant healthcare disparities in care and treatment outcomes have been reported across all areas of otolaryngology. Notable differences in survival, disease recurrence, and overall mortality have been noted based on race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), insurance status, etc. This is most well-researched in head and neck cancer (HNC) within otolaryngology.

Summary

Healthcare disparities have been identified by numerous research studies within otolaryngology for many vulnerable groups that include racial and ethnic minority groups, low-income populations, and individuals from rural areas among many others. These populations continue to experience suboptimal access to timely, quality otolaryngologic care that exacerbate disparities in health outcomes.

Socio-Economic Status and Language Development in Hearing Loss: A Critical Appraisal

The impact of language input on children's speech, language, and brain development was borne out of Hart and Risley's famous "30-million-word gap". A perspective bolstered by many studies in the last decade relates higher socio-economic status (SES) to better qualitative and quantitative differences in children's speech. The logic chains found in these studies suggest that literacy development depends on language and brain development. Thus, brain building develops based on environmental experience and language input depends on the brain's perception of the auditory information. This essay uses the latest published peer-reviewed research to outline the current landscape of the role of SES in the development of speech and language skills among children with hearing loss (HL) who are enrolled in auditory-driven habilitation programs. This essay argues that low SES families may provide sufficient input for their children. The outcome of auditory-driven programs implemented by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) seems to be detached from SES. The role of SES on this developmental trajectory remains unclear, and clinical practice may be related to other validated and robust parameters related to hearing loss.

Distance and Socieoeconomic Status as Barriers to Cochlear Implantation

OBJECTIVE

To assess the distance burden for access to cochlear implant (CI)-related services and to assess whether socioeconomic disadvantage or level of education and occupation influenced uptake of CIs.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case review.

SETTING

A CI services provider operating across multiple centers.

PATIENTS

All patients undergoing CI surgery in a 2-year period between March 2018 and February 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

Diagnosis of hearing loss, CI surgery, and subsequent habilitation and mapping.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Distance traveled by patients to their audiological diagnostic, CI surgery hospital, and habilitation sites; subjects' index of relative socioeconomic advantage and disadvantage (IRSAD) and index of education and occupation (IEO).

RESULTS

n = 201 children and n = 623 adults. There was a significant difference across IRSAD domains for children (p < 0.0001) and adults (p < 0.0001), and IEO in children (p = 0.015) and adults (p < 0.0001) when tested for equal proportions. The median driving distance from home to the diagnostic audiological site for children was 20 km (mean, 69 km; range, 1-1184 km; upper quartile, 79 km; lower quartile, 8 km). There was no significant difference between the driving distances from home to the CI surgery hospital site, or the mapping/habilitation sites between children and adults. There was no correlation for age at first surgery and either IRSAD/IEO.

CONCLUSIONS

The burden of distance for access to CI in Australia is significant for the upper quartile who may not live within the large city centers. Greater consideration needs to be given regarding barriers to CI for those in lower socioeconomic and educational groups to ensure equity of access across different socioeconomic and educational level backgrounds.

Reporting of Sociodemographic Data in Cochlear Implant Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the literature on the frequency of reporting of sociodemographic data (gender, race, ethnicity, education status, health insurance status, geographic location of residence, and socioeconomic status) among interventional clinical trials involving cochlear implant patients.

DATABASES REVIEWED

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and SCOPUS to identify peer reviewed research.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed, which included original prospective clinical trial research studies involving cochlear implantation and/or interventional trials involving cochlear implant patients. Collected data included funding type, level of evidence, race reporting, ethnicity reporting, socioeconomic status reporting, education level reporting, type of insurance, geographic location, and gender of patients.

RESULTS

A total of 644 articles were included for review. Gender was the most reported sociodemographic factor (70% of included studies). Reporting of other data among included studies was low: educational level (6%), socioeconomic status (2%), race (1%), ethnicity (1%), insurance status (0.3%), and geography (1%). The odds of reporting gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.51), education (OR = 1.81), and geography (OR = 2.72) increased with each subsequent publication date decade; however, this trend was not seen for reporting of race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or insurance. The reporting of gender was less likely to be reported in studies with the pediatric participants (OR = 0.62), level II evidence (OR = 0.14), and device programming interventional studies (OR = 0.26).

CONCLUSION

Reporting of sociodemographic data, other than gender, is low among prospective clinical trials involving cochlear implant patients. The lack of reporting of this key data may limit research rigor and generalizability. Clinical researchers are advised to prospectively collect these data to promote equity in cochlear implant research and clinical care.

Assessing Patient Barriers to Cochlear Implantation

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate barriers that deter adult patients from following through with cochlear implantation.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review and phone survey.

SETTING

Single tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Between January 2019 and August 2021, 113 patients, without a previous cochlear implant (CI), were determined to be candidates for cochlear implantation. Thirty-eight (33.6%) patients deferred cochlear implantation. Survey response rate was 61.1% (22/36).

INTERVENTION

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographic, socioeconomic, otologic history, and comorbidity factors associated with deferment of cochlear implantation. Patient survey assessment of factors that had the greatest impact, rated on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the most impactful), on their decision to defer a CI.

RESULTS

Out of the 113 patients who met inclusion criteria, 75 (66.3%) underwent cochlear implantation and 38 (33.6%) patients deferred. Comparing implanted versus deferred groups, there was no statistical difference in age (67.1 y versus 68.5 y; p = 0.690) or male sex (53.3% versus 57.9%; p = 0.692). The deferred group had higher mean neighborhood disadvantage state decile (5.3 versus 4.3; p = 0.064) and national percentile (73.0 versus 66.2; p = 0.106) scores, although neither were statistically significant. A greater proportion of the deferred group were not living independently at time of CI evaluation (13.2 versus 2.7%; p = 0.017). Fear of losing residual hearing was rated the highest among the survey respondents (mean rating of 5.1), followed by general medical health (4.9) and cost and financial concerns (3.6).

CONCLUSION

The greatest concern among the patients was the fear of losing residual hearing. Spending greater time educating patients about the success and failure rates of cochlear implantation may reduce patient hesitancy with implantation.

Socioeconomic position and hearing loss: current understanding and recent advances

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to describe recent literature examining the relationship between socioeconomic position (SEP) and hearing loss, including the impact of hearing loss on several socioeconomic outcomes over the life course. Additionally, we highlight current policy advances in recent years and review alternative models of hearing care that aim to address disparities related to SEP and hearing healthcare.

RECENT FINDINGS

Applying a social epidemiologic lens to hearing health gives insight into the role of material and social contexts in understanding and improving hearing health outcomes. Recent studies investigating the intersection of SEP and hearing health highlight the disparities that exist for individuals with low SEP as well as the influence of hearing loss on SEP. Individuals with hearing loss are more likely to be unemployed, have lower educational attainment, lower income, and are less likely to use hearing aids and access hearing care. Legislation addressing cost and access to hearing care as well as transforming the current landscape of hearing care, is essential to creating equitable care for individuals, especially older adults, with low SEP.

SUMMARY

With the expected rise in prevalence of hearing loss over the next 40 years, hearing care that is affordable and accessible is a public health priority. As hearing loss is associated with negative outcomes for individuals with low SEP, advances in legislation and care delivery models are necessary in order to include populations traditionally unserved by current hearing healthcare.

Sociodemographic disparities in pediatric cochlear implantation outcomes: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of sociodemographic factors on post-operative performance outcomes among PCI recipients across the world.

METHODS

A qualitative systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase was undertaken for studies analyzing the association of sociodemographic factors with measures of PCI outcomes published before July 18, 2021. Study quality assessment tools from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) were used to assess for risk of bias.

RESULTS

Out of 887 unique abstracts initially retrieved, 45 papers were included in the final qualitative systematic review. Sociodemographic disparities in PCI outcomes from 4702 PCI recipients were studied in 19 countries, with 14 studies conducted in the United States of America, published within the years of 1999 to 2021. Parental education and socioeconomic status (e.g. income) were the most investigated disparities in PCI outcomes with 24 and 17 identified studies, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Socioeconomic status was a consistently reported determinant of PCI outcomes in the USA and elsewhere, and parental education, the most reported disparity, consistently impacted outcomes in countries outside the USA. This study is limited by our inability to perform a meta-analysis given the lack of standardization across measures of sociodemographic variables and assessment measures for PCI outcomes. Future studies should address the literature gap on racial and ethnic disparities among PCI outcomes and use standardized measures for sociodemographic variables and PCI outcomes to facilitate meta-analyses on the topic. Targeting the mechanisms of these disparities may mitigate the impact of the sociodemographic factors on PCI outcomes.

Medial orbital wall decompression: Demographics influencing surgical follow-up and complications: Impacts on follow-up and complications

OBJECTIVE

Identify the impact of demographics and social determinants of health on surgical follow-up and complications after medial orbital wall decompression (MOWD) secondary to thyroid associated orbitopathy (TAO).

METHODS

Demographics and social determinants of health (age, sex, race, insurance status) for 46 patients undergoing MOWD secondary to TAO were correlated with post-operative compliance and surgical complications by chi-square analyses.

RESULTS

Among 46 patients, 23 were compliant with follow-up. There was no statistically significant difference between compliance and non-compliance based on age (60.25 vs 56.4, p = .41), sex (71.9 % female vs 85.7 % female, p = .31), race (65.6 % white vs 71.4 % white, p = .70) or insurance status (59.4 % private vs 42.9 % private, p = .30). Complications were noted in 50 % of patients of which sinus infection was most common (47.8 % of complications) and epistaxis rare (4.3 % of complications). No correlation was noted between development of complications and compliance (p = .20). Likewise, age, race and insurance status did not correlate with complications.

CONCLUSION

For patients undergoing MOWD, no correlations with compliance or complication rate were noted with age, sex, race, or insurance status. A larger cohort may be indicated to identify such patterns. The overall complication rate was 50 % and the increased number of visits may have economic impact.

KEY POINTS

This study provides a unique chance to assess demographic correlates of compliance and complication while controlling for surgeon preference. There was no association between sociodemographics and compliance or complications.

Underinsurance in children is associated with worsened quality of life after cochlear implantation

IMPORTANCE

Research has suggested that early cochlear implantation is associated with improved language outcomes. Select studies demonstrate that this translates into a higher quality of life following implantation. Previous work from our group has shown that underinsurance represents a risk factor for worsened auditory and language outcomes for implantees. However, to our knowledge, the effect of insurance status on quality of life outcomes following cochlear implantation has not been evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To assess quality of life outcomes for children receiving cochlear implants, accounting for age at implantation, insurance status, gender, surgeon, number of implants and duration of follow-up since implantation.

DESIGN

A retrospective study using the Glasgow Children's Benefit Inventory (GCBI), a validated questionnaire measuring quality of life across four domains: learning, emotion, vitality and physical heath. Multivariate linear regression was used to examine the effects of age at implantation, insurance status, number of implants, sex, surgeon, and duration of follow-up on GCBI scores. Age at implantation was assessed as both a continuous and dichotomous variable, comparing children implanted by 12 months of age with those implanted after 12 months.

SETTING

Children's National Health System in Washington, DC, a tertiary academic referral center.

PARTICIPANTS

The GCBI was administered telephonically to parents/guardians of prelingually deaf children aged 2-16 years who received cochlear implants at the center between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2018.

RESULTS

Of 169 prelingually deafened implantee children who met inclusion criteria, parents/guardians of 64 (37.9%) responded to the questionnaire. After excluding children with late implantation (≥7 years age at CI) and missing GCBI responses, the final analytic sample consisted of 57 children. The mean age (SD) of the children at the time of the study was 3.3 (1.9) years, 63.2% were publicly insured, and 73.7% were implanted after 12 months of age. Average duration of follow-up was 3.9 (2.8) years. On a scale of -100 to +100, GCBI scores ranged from 41.7 to 95.8 (mean (SD), 64.0 (10.3)). Public health insurance (β, -5.8 [95% CI, -10.6 to -0.01]), and older age at the time of implantation (β, -0.1 [95% CI, -0.3 to 0.0]), particularly implantation following 12 months of age (p < 0.05), were significantly associated with lower GCBI scores after implantation.

CONCLUSION

Publicly insured recipients of cochlear implants and children implanted at an older age, particularly after 12 months of age, experienced significantly lower quality of life measures.

Barriers to Pediatric Osseointegrated Bone-Conduction Hearing Devices

OBJECTIVE

To identify social, demographic, and clinical barriers for implantation with Osseointegrated Bone Conduction Devices (OBCD) in pediatric candidates.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study of 94 children who met standard OBCD implantation criteria.

SETTING

Tertiary stand-alone children's hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective chart review comparing demographic (age, race, state of residence, and insurance) and clinical (severity and etiology of hearing loss, medical comorbidities, and early intervention) factors impacting implantation. Members of the existing cohort were then contacted to obtain a better understanding of qualitative factors impacting surgical decision.

RESULTS

Of the identified 94 surgical candidates, 47 (50%) underwent OBCD implantation. State of residence significantly impacted implantation rates, with children from the District of Columbia and Virginia being less likely to receive an implant than those from Maryland. Private insurance, race, and ethnicity did not impact rate of implantation (OR 2.8 [95% CI 0.78-10]; 1.34 [95% CI 0.44-3.68]; and 1.0 [95% CI 0.42-2.43], respectively). Children with anotia or microtia and children younger than 10 years old were less likely to have an implant (OR 10.6 (95% CI 1.74-65). Thirty-nine children participated in the qualitative portion. Themes that emerged as reasons to forgo implantation included a child's young age, planned reconstruction for microtia or atresia, and overall device functionality and usage. Thirtyseven children (39%) of the cohort declined surgery and currently wear a nonsurgical bone conduction aid regularly.

CONCLUSION

Despite known benefits of implantation, only one-half of children who were candidates underwent OBCD. Unlike cochlear implantation, where insurance status is a major risk factor for implantation delay and underperformance, for OBCD, implantation barriers appear to be more multifactorial and include medical, demographic, and social factors.

Analysis of Health Disparities in the Screening and Diagnosis of Hearing Loss: Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Hearing Screening Follow-Up Survey

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to (a) provide introductory literature regarding cultural constructs, health disparities, and social determinants of health (SDoH); (b) summarize the literature regarding the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) Hearing Screening Follow-Up Survey (HSFS) data; (c) explore the CDC EHDI HSFS data regarding the contribution of maternal demographics to loss-to-follow-up/loss-to-documentation (LTF/D) between hearing screening and audiologic diagnosis for 2016, 2017, and 2018; and (d) examine these health disparities within the context of potential ethnoracial biases.

METHOD

This is a comprehensive narrative literature review of cultural constructs, hearing health disparities, and SDoH as they relate to the CDC EHDI HSFS data. We explore the maternal demographic data reported on the CDC EHDI website and report disparities for maternal age, education, ethnicity, and race for 2016, 2017, and 2018. We focus on LTF/D for screening and diagnosis within the context of racial and cultural bias.

RESULTS

A literature review demonstrates the increase in quality of the CDC EHDI HSFS data over the past 2 decades. LTF/D rates for hearing screening and audiologic diagnostic testing have improved from higher than 60% to current rates of less than 30%. Comparisons of diagnostic completion rates reported on the CDC website for the EHDI HSFS 2016, 2017, and 2018 data show trends for maternal age, education, and race, but not for ethnicity. Trends were defined as changes more than 10% for variables averaged over a 3-year period (2016-2018).

CONCLUSIONS

Although there have been significant improvements in LTF/D over the past 2 decades, there continue to be opportunities for further improvement. Beyond neonatal screening, delays continue to be reported in the diagnosis of young children with hearing loss. Notwithstanding the extraordinarily diverse families within the United States, the imperative is to minimize such delays so that all children with hearing loss can, at the very least, have auditory accessibility to spoken language by 3 months of age. Conscious awareness is essential before developing a potentially effective plan of action that might remediate the problem.

Conversations in Cochlear Implantation: The Inner Ear Therapy of Today

As biomolecular approaches for hearing restoration in profound sensorineural hearing loss evolve, they will be applied in conjunction with or instead of cochlear implants. An understanding of the current state-of-the-art of this technology, including its advantages, disadvantages, and its potential for delivering and interacting with biomolecular hearing restoration approaches, is helpful for designing modern hearing-restoration strategies. Cochlear implants (CI) have evolved over the last four decades to restore hearing more effectively, in more people, with diverse indications. This evolution has been driven by advances in technology, surgery, and healthcare delivery. Here, we offer a practical treatise on the state of cochlear implantation directed towards developing the next generation of inner ear therapeutics. We aim to capture and distill conversations ongoing in CI research, development, and clinical management. In this review, we discuss successes and physiological constraints of hearing with an implant, common surgical approaches and electrode arrays, new indications and outcome measures for implantation, and barriers to CI utilization. Additionally, we compare cochlear implantation with biomolecular and pharmacological approaches, consider strategies to combine these approaches, and identify unmet medical needs with cochlear implants. The strengths and weaknesses of modern implantation highlighted here can mark opportunities for continued progress or improvement in the design and delivery of the next generation of inner ear therapeutics.

Delayed cochlear implantation in congenitally deaf children-identifying barriers for targeted interventions

OBJECTIVES

Age of cochlear implantation (CI) is an important predictor of language development in those with congenital sensorineural hearing loss. Despite universal newborn hearing screening initiatives and the known benefits of early CI, a subset of congenitally deaf children continue to be evaluated for cochlear implants later in childhood. This study aims to identify the barriers to early cochlear implantation in these children.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted for all pediatric cochlear implants aged 3 years or older performed at a single academic institution between 2013 and 2017. Children implanted before the age three, those with a prior unilateral cochlear implant, and those with progressive or sudden hearing loss were excluded. Variables included newborn hearing screen results, age at hearing loss diagnosis, time of initiation and documented benefit of hearing aids, age of implantation, pre/post-implantation evaluation scores, and reason for delayed referral for cochlear implantation.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients were identified meeting these inclusion criteria. Twenty-one children were subject to UNBS in the U.S. Fourteen of those children failed their newborn hearing screening. Average age at implantation was 6.2 years. Four reasons were identified for increased age at cochlear implantation. Two categories represent delays related to (1) Amplification continually prescribed even though the range of hearing loss and speech development assessment suggests CI may have been more appropriate well before referral (N = 13) (2) Patients were not subject to newborn hearing screening and/or timely diagnosis of their hearing loss (N = 8). In other cases, patients were appropriately fit with hearing aids until evidence that they derived limited benefit and then referred for CI (N = 8). Lastly, in a few cases, records were indeterminate with regards to the timing and appropriate diagnosis of their hearing loss (N = 2).

CONCLUSION

Understanding the reasons for delayed cochlear implantation in congenitally deaf children might allow the development of targeted interventions to improve outcomes. Specifically, those children who were not referred before age 3 despite use of amplification with limited benefit offer one potential target population for earlier CI.

Infectious Complications Following Cochlear Implant: Risk Factors, Natural History, and Management Patterns

OBJECTIVE

To describe the natural history, detail the treatment patterns, and identify the risk factors for cochlear implant (CI) infections in a large US cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study based on insurance claims.

SETTING

Optum Data Mart database: 6101 patients who received CIs from 2003 to 2019.

METHODS

Infections, treatments patterns, and timelines were described. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to assess the association between postoperative oral antibiotics and CI infection.

RESULTS

The cohort includes 4736 (77.6%) adults and 1365 (22.4%) children. Between adult and pediatric patients, rates of CI infection (5.1% vs 4.5%, P = .18) and explantation (1.2% vs 0.8%, P = .11) were not significantly different. Infections typically occurred within 5 months of surgery. Children were diagnosed with CI infection earlier than adults (median difference, -1.5 months; P = .001). Postoperative oral antibiotic supply was not associated with lower risk of CI infection in either children or adults. However, among adults, otitis media was associated with higher odds of CI infection (odds ratio, 1.41; P < .001), while higher income was associated with lower odds of CI infection (odds ratio, 0.71; P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative oral antibiotics were not associated with lower risk of infection or interventions. Otitis media episodes and lower income were associated with increased risk of infection among adults as well as intervention overall. Infection typically presented within the first 6 months after surgery, with children presenting earlier than adults. Overall, our findings serve as a resource for providers to consider in their care of patients with CIs.

Defining Disparities in Cochlear Implantation through the Social Determinants of Health

Hearing loss is a global public health problem with high prevalence and profound impacts on health. Cochlear implantation (CI) is a well-established evidence-based treatment for hearing loss; however, there are significant disparities in utilization, access, and clinical outcomes among different populations. While variations in CI outcomes are influenced by innate biological differences, a wide array of social, environmental, and economic factors significantly impact optimal outcomes. These differences in hearing health are rooted in inequities of health-related socioeconomic resources. To define disparities and advance equity in CI, there is a pressing need to understand and target these social factors that influence equitable outcomes, access, and utilization. These factors can be categorized according to the widely accepted framework of social determinants of health, which include the following domains: healthcare access/quality, education access/quality, social and community context, economic stability, and neighborhood and physical environment. This article defines these domains in the context of CI and examines the published research and the gaps in research of each of these domains. Further consideration is given to how these factors can influence equity in CI and how to incorporate this information in the evaluation and management of patients receiving cochlear implants.

Selection of the optimal first ear for sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in children

OBJECTIVES

When there is a difference in hearing on both ears, where to perform the first cochlear implantation (CI) becomes an important issue. The purpose of the study was to evaluate which ear should be chosen for the first implantation in sequential bilateral CI with a long inter-implant period.

METHODS

The study population consisted of 34 severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss pediatrics with the inter-implant period of ≥3 years between the first CI (CI-1) and the second CI (CI-2) before the age of 19 (mean of inter-implant period: 7.1-year). The patients were classified into Group A (CI-1 was performed on the ear with better hearing), Group B (CI-1 on the ear with worse hearing), or Group C (symmetrical hearing in both ears). Speech intelligibility test results were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The monosyllabic word scores of CI-1 were excellent in Groups A (91.7±7.9%) and B (92.5±3.6%) but slightly lower in Group C (85.7±14.9%) before the second implantation (P = .487). At 3 years after the second implantation, all groups demonstrated excellent scores in the bilateral CI condition (95.9±3.0% in Group A; 99.1±.8% in Group B; 97.5±2.9% in Group C, P = .600). However, when the patients were tested in using CI-2 only in Groups A and B after using bilateral CI for 3 years, the scores were inconsistent in Group A (79.6±23.9%; range: 22.2-94.4%), while those were higher and more constant in Group B (92.9±4.8%; 86.8-100.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

The first CI is strongly recommended to perform on a worse hearing ear if they had different hearing levels between ears. Even with the first CI on a worse hearing ear, its performance never deteriorates. In addition, if they receive the second CI several years later, it will be likely that the second one functions better.

Exploring Factors Responsible for Delay in Pediatric Cochlear Implantation

OBJECTIVE

To identify and characterize demographic and socioeconomic factors associated with delays in cochlear implantation (CI) in children.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective.

SETTING

Tertiary pediatric CI referral center.

PATIENTS

All patients under 18 years of age receiving CI between March 2018 and February 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

CI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome measures included age at implantation and time from hearing loss diagnosis and candidacy evaluation to CI.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were identified (44% women, average age at implantation 4.9 yr). Age at implantation was older in patients with public, rather than private, insurance (6.0 ± 0.8 yr versus 3.1 ± 0.7 yr, p = 0.007) and those from low-income areas (8.6 ± 7.6 yr versus 2.4 ± 3.0 yr, p = 0.007). Time between hearing loss diagnosis and implantation was longer in publicly insured patients (4.1 ± 0.6 yr versus 2.2 ± 0.5 yr, p = 0.014). Time between identification as a CI candidate and implantation was longer in publicly insured patients (721 ± 107d versus 291 ± 64 d, p = 0.001). Among children with congenital profound hearing loss, publicly insured patients continued to be older at implantation (1.9 ± 0.2 versus 1.0 ± 0.2 yr, p = 0.008). Latinx children were more often publicly insured whereas white children were more often privately insured (p < 0.05). Publicly insured patients had delays in the pre-CI workup, including, in no particular order, vestibular evaluation (621 ± 132 d versus 197 ± 67 d, p = 0.007), developmental evaluation (517 ± 106 d versus 150 ± 56 d, p = 0.003), speech evaluation (482 ± 107 d versus 163 ± 65 d, p = 0.013), and children's implant profile (ChIP) assessment (572 ± 107d versus 184 ± 59d, p = 0,002). On ChIP evaluation, concerns regarding educational environment and support were higher in Spanish-speaking children (p = 0.024; p = 2.6 × 10-4) and children with public insurance (p = 0.016; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities in access to CI continue to affect timing of pediatric cochlear implantation.

Health Disparities in Otology: A PRISMA-Based Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Social determinants of health (SDOHs), including but not limited to sex, race, socioeconomic status, insurance status, and education level, play a significant role in health disparities and affect health outcomes. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine health disparities in otology within the United States and highlight areas warranting further research.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE.

REVIEW METHODS

Our search encompassed all years through January 10, 2021. All peer-reviewed primary literature of any design and publication date regarding health disparities and otology outcomes in the United States was eligible for inclusion. Eligibility assessment was performed via 3 independent investigators.

RESULTS

Of the 6326 unique abstracts identified, 188 studies underwent full-text review, and 52 remained in the final review. The most frequently examined otologic condition was hearing loss (36.5%), followed by cochlear implantation (28.8%) and infection/effusion (15.4%). Vertigo/dizziness (1.9%), Ménière's disease (1.9%), and tinnitus (1.9%) were the least represented otologic conditions. Comprehensive articles on multiple disparity topics were the most common (n = 18), followed by articles on race/ethnicity (n = 11) and socioeconomic status (n = 9). Language (n = 2), education (n = 2), and gender (n = 1) were the least discussed. Over 5-fold the number of articles were published between 2011 and 2020 compared to the preceding decade (42 vs 8).

CONCLUSION

This study captures the existing literature regarding health disparities and outcomes in otology. The lack of robust data suggests the need for future quality studies aimed at investigating disparities in otologic care, as well as a broader push for recording and reporting SDOHs.

Integrating community health workers into a community hearing health collaborative to understand the social determinants of health in children with hearing loss

BACKGROUND

Children with hearing loss (HL) require coordination of care to navigate medical and social services. Strong evidence supports the role of community health workers (CHWs) to identify and address social barriers.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of integrating CHWs into the medical teams of children with HL and identify the social needs associated with their caregivers at a large urban hospital center.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted for 30 children with HL whose caregivers enrolled in a CHW program between August 1, 2017 and December 31, 2019. Baseline demographic data were collected, including social circumstances such as food and housing insecurity, status of social security supplemental income (SSI), and need for referral to early intervention (EI) or preschool/school services. Caregivers were assessed for confidence in self-management; baseline distress level was measured via a distress thermometer.

RESULTS

Of the 30 charts reviewed, 93% demonstrated social needs including food insecurity (24%) and educational service needs (45%). Eighty-seven percent of caregivers reported a sense of control over the child's condition, yet 73% reported a stress level of four or greater on the distress thermometer scale. At 3 months follow-up, 70% of patients completed referrals; a significant number of patients had obtained hearing aids and cochlear implants compared to baseline (p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Caregivers of children with HL face multiple social obstacles, including difficulties connecting to educational and financial resources. CHWs are instrumental in identifying social needs and connecting caregivers to services.

The survey of parents' and adults recipients' satisfaction with cochlear implantation determined by the place of residence

&lt;b&gt;Introduction:&lt;/b&gt; The use of cochlear implants (CI) has been a remarkable success in reducing disabilities in patients with impaired hearing. The definition of success for those patients means improvement of hearing ability for adults, possibility to develop speech and language for children, quality of life improvement and satisfaction with the whole CI implantation procedure. &lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;The aim:&lt;/b&gt; To examine patient satisfaction, determined by their place of residence, with all activities in progress during CI implantation including care in subsequent years. Material and methods: The study was conducted prospectively. Online surveys were sent to 1,906 CI patients, with the response rate reaching 33%; thus 630 surveys were analyzed. Demographic data of the respondents were collected: gender, age of implantation, one- or two-sided implantation, place of residence and implanting clinic. A detailed statistical analysis of the obtained data was performed. &lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;Results:&lt;/b&gt; One of the problems observed was the aspect of waiting time for qualification, implantation and replacement of the speech processor. The second problem was the travel time to the CI center and that was strictly connected with the place of the residence of a patient. Patients' satisfaction with the control visit was high for majority of them. &lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/b&gt; This research highlighted the limitations of the current CI service delivery. Significant differences concerning the CI pathway were found for particular regions of Poland. One of the future goals for healthcare providers should be to level out the differences in access to CI services between different regions of Poland.

Barriers to Receiving Necessary Hearing Care Among US Children

OBJECTIVE

We aim to clarify the national scope of unmet pediatric hearing care needs and identify specific barriers to hearing care.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study of a nationally representative data set.

SETTING

This study is based on the combined 2016 and 2017 National Survey of Children's Health. This survey covers the physical and emotional health, access to care, and social context of US children and adolescents aged 0 to 17 years.

METHODS

Analysis of parent-reported responses of children's hearing status, access to care, and perceived barriers.

RESULTS

Overall, 0.3% (n = 206,200) of US children surveyed reported needing hearing care, which was not received. A further 1.3% (n = 934,000) reported deafness or problems with hearing, and of these, 6.4% (n = 60,000) reported not receiving necessary hearing care. Rates of insurance coverage between children with deafness/hearing problems and the general population were similar (91.7% vs 93.9%); however, deaf or hard-of-hearing children with unmet hearing care needs were more likely to be from non-White backgrounds (P = .009) and to lack health insurance coverage (P = .001). Rates of unfulfilled hearing care by reason were as follows: 57.5% without eligibility for the service, 45.4% reporting the service was not available in their area, 53.7% with difficulty obtaining an appointment, and 53.5% reporting issues with cost.

CONCLUSION

Over 200,000 children annually do not receive necessary hearing-related care despite high rates of insurance coverage, and nearly 60,000 of these children are deaf or hard of hearing. Cost, eligibility for and distribution of services, and timely appointments are the primary barriers to hearing health care.

Sociodemographic Disparities in Pediatric Cochlear Implantation Access and Use: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Pediatric cochlear implantation (CI) is a multistep process, which exposes a healthcare system's potential weaknesses in ability to deliver timely care to deaf children. The current systematic review aims to determine the sociodemographic disparities that predict pediatric CI access and use among CI candidates and recipients across the world. We hypothesize that sociodemographic factors independently influence CI access and use within a given country.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A qualitative systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase databases was conducted for studies investigating the association of sociodemographic factors such as race, income, or insurance status with measures of pediatric CI access, such as age at CI or CI rate.

RESULTS

Out of 807 unique abstracts initially retrieved, 39 papers were included in the final qualitative systematic review. Twenty-seven thousand seven hundred and fifty-one CI-candidate children (6,623 CI recipients) were studied in 14 countries, with 21 studies conducted in the United States of America, published within the years of 1993 to 2020.

CONCLUSION

Some measures of CI access, such as age at CI and rates of CI, are consistently reported in the CI disparities literature while others such as access to rehabilitation services, willingness to undergo CI, and daily CI use are rarely measured. There are persistently reported disparities in a few key measures of CI access in a few populations, while there are some populations with a paucity of data. Future studies should delineate the nuances in the mechanisms of disparities by conducting multivariable analysis of representative sample data. Laryngoscope, 2021.

Sound Opportunities: Factors That Impact Referral for Pediatric Cochlear Implant Evaluation

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To identify barriers to and opportunities for referral among children who could be considered for cochlear implantation.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

METHODS

Audiological and medical records were reviewed on all children who had diagnostic or hearing aid care through a statewide healthcare system over 5-year span to identify children who met newly established clinical cochlear implant (CI) referral criteria. Data were collected for 869 potential CI candidates regarding demographic, socio-economic, audiological, medical, and family factors that may influence referral. A binomial logistic regression was completed to investigate the potential contributions of these predictors toward referral for a CI evaluation.

RESULTS

Children who met traditional candidacy criteria of severe-to-profound bilateral hearing loss were referred at very high rates, while nontraditional candidates were referred less frequently. Factors influencing referral included race, age, insurance source, hearing thresholds, audiologist, physician, and family request.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that bilateral traditional candidates are being referred at high percentages; however, current practices and trends in pediatric cochlear implantation should be shared with families and providers to increase referral rates for nontraditional candidates.  LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 2021.

Parental views on informational counselling provided by audiologists for children with permanent childhood hearing loss

Background

The absence of best practice guidelines on informational counselling, has caused lack of clarity regarding the information audiologists should provide to parents and caregivers following the diagnosis of a hearing loss. Research shows that informational counselling provided by audiologists is limited and often biased, with little evidence of how parents experience this service.

Objectives

To explore the nature and practice of informational counselling by audiologists.

Method

This study was descriptive in nature and adopted a survey design to obtain information on the current practices of informational counselling from the perspective of parents and primary caregivers. Ninety-seven face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted across KwaZulu-Natal province of South Africa. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis using Nvivo software were conducted.

Results

The majority of the parents reported receiving some form of informational counselling. However, the information provided by audiologists was considered to be biased as it included a favoured communication option, school and rehabilitative technology. There was a lack of information related to aural rehabilitation and family-centred intervention. The provision of all communication options, school options and rehabilitative technology were identified as gaps that contribute to an unfavourable decision-making process.

Conclusion

There are inefficiencies experienced by families of deaf and hard of hearing children during informational counselling. However, this understanding, together with the identified gaps by parents, can help address the professional response to caring for families with deaf and hard of hearing children.

Impact of Patient Socioeconomic Disparities on Time to Tympanostomy Tube Placement

OBJECTIVES

Extensive literature exists documenting disparities in access to healthcare for patients with lower socioeconomic status (SES). The objective of this study was to examine access disparities and differences in surgical wait times in children with the most common pediatric otolaryngologic surgery, tympanostomy tubes (TT).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed at a tertiary children's hospital. Children ages <18 years who received a first set of tympanostomy tubes during 2015 were studied. Patient demographics and markers of SES including zip code, health insurance type, and appointment no-shows were recorded. Clinical measures included risk factors, symptoms, and age at presentation and first TT.

RESULTS

A total of 969 patients were included. Average age at surgery was 2.11 years. Almost 90% were white and 67.5% had private insurance. Patients with public insurance, ≥1 no-show appointment, and who lived in zip codes with the median income below the United States median had a longer period from otologic consult and preoperative clinic to TT, but no differences were seen in race. Those with public insurance had their surgery at an older age than those with private insurance (P < .001) and were more likely to have chronic otitis media with effusion as their indication for surgery (OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.2-2.5, P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

Lower SES is associated with chronic otitis media with effusion and a longer wait time from otologic consult and preoperative clinic to TT placement. By being transparent in socioeconomic disparities, we can begin to expose systemic problems and move forward with interventions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Identification of Potential Barriers to Timely Access to Pediatric Hearing Aids

Importance

Despite various barriers identified to early pediatric access to cochlear implantation, barriers to timely access to pediatric hearing aids are not well characterized.

Objective

To identify socioeconomic, demographic, and clinical factors that may be associated with pediatric access to hearing aids.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study included 90 patients aged 1 to 15 years who were referred for auditory brainstem response (ABR) testing and evaluation for hearing aids at a single tertiary care academic medical center from March 2004 to July 2018. Children who did not receive both ABR testing and hearing aids at the same center were excluded from analysis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Associations of insurance type (private vs public), race/ethnicity (white vs other), primary language (English vs other), cause of hearing loss (complex vs not complex), zip code, hearing aid manufacturer, and severity of hearing loss (in decibels) with the duration of intervals from newborn hearing screening to ABR testing, from ABR testing to ordering of hearing aids, and from ABR testing to dispensing of hearing aids.

Results

Of the 90 patients, mean (SD) age was 5.6 (3.7) years, 56% were female, and 77 (86%) were non-Hispanic. Results of χ2 tests indicated significant assocations existed between public insurance and race/ethnicity and between public insurance and primary language other than English. Variables associated with the interval from newborn hearing screening to ABR testing included insurance type (mean difference, 7.4 months; 95% CI, 2.6-12.2 months) and race/ethnicity (mean difference, 6.9 months; 95% CI, 2.7-11.1 months). Increased delays between birth and a child's first ABR test were associated with public insurance (mean difference, 6.0 months; 95% CI, 1.8-10.2 months) and race/ethnicity other than white (mean difference, 6.0 months; 95% CI, 2.3-9.7 months). The mean time from birth to initial ABR testing was a mean of 6 months longer for patients from non-English-speaking families than for those from English-speaking families (mean [SD] interval, 14.9 [16.3] months vs 9.0 [8.5] months), although the difference was not statistically significant. Severity of hearing loss was associated with a decrease in the interval from ABR testing to ordering of hearing aids after accounting for other potential barriers (odds ratio, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9). Zip code and complexity of the child's medical condition did not appear to be associated with timely access to pediatric hearing aids.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study's findings suggest that insurance type, race/ethnicity, and primary language may be barriers associated with pediatric access to hearing aids, with the greatest difference observed in time to initial ABR testing. Clinical severity of hearing loss appeared to be associated with a significant decrease in time from ABR testing to ordering of hearing aids. Greater efforts to assist parents with ABR testing and coordination of follow-up may help improve access for other at-risk children.

Healthcare Disparities in Laryngology: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

This scoping review aims to map out existing disparities research within the subspecialty of laryngology in order to highlight gaps in knowledge and guide future research.

STUDY DESIGN

Scoping Review.

METHODS

We completed a scoping review of PubMed, Ovid Embase, and the Cochrane Library for primary research focused on evaluating the existence and impact of disparities in race/ethnicity, sex/gender, insurance status, education level, income, geography, and LGBTQ identity in the context of various laryngological conditions. Publications of any design and date, performed in the United States, and focusing on the adult population exclusively were included.

RESULTS

Of the 4,999 unique abstracts identified, 51 articles were ultimately included. The most frequently examined condition in relation to disparities was laryngeal cancer (27 of 51), followed by voice disorders (15 of 51), deglutitive disorders (eight of 51), and airway disorders (one of 51). Sources of inequity evaluated from most common to least common were race/ethnicity (43 of 51), sex/gender (39 of 51), insurance status (23 of 51), geography (23 of 51), income (21 of 51), and education level (16 of 51). No study examined the association of LGBTQ identity with inequity.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review highlights the limited extent of disparities research in laryngology and establishes the need for further scholarship on the impact of disparities in laryngology care. The pathologies studied were, in decreasing order of frequency: laryngeal cancer, voice disorders, deglutitive disorders, and airway disorders. Race/ethnicity and sex/gender were the most common disparities examined, with no evaluation of LGBTQ-related care inequity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA Laryngoscope, 2020.

Cochlear implantation in different socioeconomic groups - bursting the myth

OBJECTIVES

Cochlear implantation does wonders for children suffering from severe to profound hearing loss, especially when the child is less than 12 months of age. However, most studies indicate that detection and implantation are done well beyond that age, owing to poor socioeconomic status, parental education, and income. Taking into account The Chief Minister's Comprehensive Health Insurance Scheme in Tamil Nadu, which provides cochlear implantation free of cost, this study aims to describe ages at presentation and nutritional factors among different socioeconomic classes.

METHODS

A randomized retrospective comparative study was done between two groups of children based on the socioeconomic status of the family. Group A included children with a parental income of less than Rs. 72,000 and the cost of surgery covered by the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister's Comprehensive Health Insurance Scheme and group B included children with a parental income of more than 72,000 and the cost of surgery covered by the family. Three parameters were considered and compared-the age at presentation to the hospital for diagnosis and management and the weight and hemoglobin. The results were computed, and statistical analysis done.

RESULTS

There was a negligible difference between the age at presentation between the two groups with the mean age for children belonging to group A being 2.906563 and the mean age for children belonging to group B being 3.540625. Weight among the two groups showed a significant difference with a p-value of 0.023664 at p < 0.05. The difference in hemoglobin values was found to be insignificant, with mean values being 11.0375 g/dl and 11.7375 g/dl for groups A and B respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study has concluded sufficient awareness among different strata of society, despite economical differences, over cochlear implant programs owing to government initiatives of educating people and supporting them with necessary health benefits. Tamil Nadu, as a responsible state of a developing nation, has been proactive in ensuring the accessibility and reach of the health care system in this regard.

Socioeconomic Disparities in Pediatric Single-Sided Deafness

OBJECTIVE

To explore socioeconomic disparities in pediatric single-sided deafness (SSD) treatment.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

Tertiary referral academic center.

METHODS

The charts of 190 pediatric patients with SSD were reviewed for demographic and clinical characteristics. Socioeconomic variables included race and insurance status. ZIP codes were used to obtain additional socioeconomic data from the American Community Survey, including mean and median income, percentage of families below the poverty level, and employment status. Socioeconomic status (SES) was classified by insurance status and income. Treatment outcomes were analyzed by socioeconomic variables.

RESULTS

There were 105 males and 85 females with a mean follow-up of 55.2 months and a mean age at diagnosis of 4.4 years. Sixty-three percent of children received treatment at last follow-up. Thirty-five percent of children had public insurance and 65% had private insurance. Treatment rates were similar in the private and public insurance groups (60.6% vs 66.7%, P = .42), but device type was different between groups (P = .02). Consistent device use was associated with private insurance (47.5% vs 38.9%, P = .003) and high SES (94.4% vs 80%, P = .04) on univariate but not on multivariate analysis. Aided audiometry results were similar between SES groups. No association was found between sex, race, income level, poverty level, or employment status and treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Insurance type and SES were not associated with SSD treatment outcomes in children, although device use may be higher in children with private insurance and higher SES. Further research should focus on strategies to reduce barriers to treatment and improve adherence.

A survey of pediatric cochlear implant recipients as young adults

OBJECTIVES

To identify the influence of pediatric cochlear implantation on long term communication modality, education, and income.

METHODS

A telephone survey was conducted with 56 young adults who had received cochlear implants (CI) as children. The participants were, on average, 10.6 (SD = 64) when they received their CI and 21 (SD = 2.29) when they participated in this study. All of the participants used a unilateral CI at the time of the survey. Where applicable, survey results were compared to the general population of similar aged individuals in Ontario using chi-squared tests of proportionality.

RESULTS

Participants (49/56, 88%) indicated that they used their CI all waking hours and 75% (42/56) reported using spoken language as their primary mode of communication. They attended post-secondary school at higher rates than the general population (χ²(1) = 14.35, p < .001); a wide range of study areas were identified with a greater proportion involved in fine arts than the general population (χ²(1) = 25.50, p < .001). The rates of employment in this group were below general rates (χ²(1) = 21.87, p < .001). However, those who were employed reported salaries similar to their hearing peers.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this study suggest that young adults who received a unilateral CI in childhood typically continue to use their CIs to support spoken language. Their increased rates of post-secondary education are encouraging and they may be choosing unique areas of study. Longer term studies are required to further investigate lower rates of employment in this cohort.

The characteristics of social maturity in infants and children with cochlear implants in China

OBJECTIVE

The primary aim of the current study was to examine the social maturity of infants and children with cochlear implants in China. A secondary aim was to document the associated information using a General Condition Questionnaire for further cohort study in this population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cross-sectional observational study and a pilot study. Between July and December 2017, data from all implantees between the ages of 6 months and 14 years who presented to the Hearing and Speech Center of Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital for mapping were collected. There were 119 non-overlapping cases in total. Data were collected via the Infants-Junior Middle School Students' Social-Life Abilities Scale (S-M scale) and a structured General Condition Questionnaire. The S-M scale was used for social adaptability measurement for children aged between 6 months to 14 yearsold. The General Condition Questionnaire, which was completed by the parents or primary caregivers of the implantees, gathered 3 aspects of personal information: the patient's history of hearing loss, personal history of rehabilitation and their past medical history.

RESULTS

Results showed that in 119 cases, 89 implantees (74.8%) were at or above a normal social maturity level. Thirty implantees (25.2%) scored lower than normal on the S-M standard score. Spearman's rank correlation indicated that the age at which hearing loss was noticed, the age of initial rehabilitation and the age at implantation were significantly correlated with the patients' scores on the S-M scale.

CONCLUSION

In summary, most of the cochlear implantees showed normal social maturity, with the exception of 25.2% of implantees who performed at a lower level than their normal hearing peers. These findings suggest potential targets to investigate in future cohort studies in cochlear implantees.

Health related quality of life in adolescent cochlear implant users

Objective: Children with significant hearing loss (HL) are at risk for lower self-esteem and lower perceived quality of life (QoL). This study examined how self-reported QoL of adolescents cochlear implant (CI) users compared to that of adolescents with normal hearing, and examined if factors such as socioeconomic status (SES) and communication methodology affect QoL and speech recognition. Methods: Forty-three adolescent CI users completed a 34-item questionnaire that included questions adapted from the QoL of Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing Youth questionnaire (Seattle Quality of Life Group SEAQOL. 2010 Quality of life of deaf or hard-of-hearing youth (YQOL-DHH). Seattle, Washington) and from the Kidscreen-10 Index (The KIDSCREEN Group, Europe, 2006, the KIDSCREEN questionnaires - quality of life questionnaires for children and adolescents handbook. Lengerich: Pabst Science Publishers. All subjects received their first CI prior to the age of 5, and ranged in age from 10-17 years at the time of survey completion. Results: Adolescents with CIs demonstrated self-reported QoL scores similar to children with normal hearing. Lower SES and communication mode appear to influence speech recognition, and also appear to impact self-reported QoL in different ways. Conclusions: Examination of communication outcomes, along with other factors that influence QoL, such as SES, will help clinicians identify children at risk for low QoL. Such identification will help generate appropriate referrals to enhance QoL in adolescent CI users.

The Ethics of Cranial Nerve Implants

This overview of ethical and social issues pertaining to cranial nerve implants covers informed consent; risk-benefit assessments; security against unauthorized reprogramming or privacy intrusion; explantation; psychological side effects; equity and social distribution, cultural effects, for instance, on the deaf subculture; enhancement; and research ethics.

Barriers to Rehabilitation Care in Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess barriers to rehabilitation care for pediatric cochlear implant (CI) recipients.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional questionnaire study.

SETTING

Tertiary medical center.

PATIENTS

Parents of children who received a CI from October 1996 to June 2013.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Factors related to access to and barriers in audiology and speech therapy services, factors related to CI use, and performance with CI using the Parents' Evaluation of Aural/Oral Performance of Children (PEACH).

RESULTS

Thirty-five parents participated in the study (21 rural residents and 14 urban residents). Distance was a significant barrier to audiology services for rural participants compared with urban participants (p = 0.01). Consistent CI use was complicated by mechanical complications or malfunction in 70% of rural children compared with 33% of urban children (p = 0.05). Only 10% of rural children were able to access speech therapy services at diagnosis compared with 42% of urban children (p = 0.04). Low socioeconomic (SES) status and Medicaid insurance were associated with a lack of local speech therapists and medical/mechanical CI complications. Higher parental educational attainment was associated with higher PEACH scores in quiet conditions compared with families with lower parental education (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Rural children are often delayed in receipt of CI rehabilitation services. Multiple barriers including low SES, insurance type, and parental education can affect utilization of these services and may impact the recipient language development. Close follow-up and efforts to expand access to care are needed to maximize CI benefit.

Morphological Accuracy in the Speech of Bimodal Bilingual Children with CIs

Sign language use in the (re)habilitation of children with cochlear implants (CIs) remains a controversial issue. Concerns that signing impedes spoken language development are based on research comparing children exposed to spoken and signed language (bilinguals) to children exposed only to speech (monolinguals), although abundant research demonstrates that bilinguals and monolinguals differ in language development. We control for bilingualism effects by comparing bimodal bilingual (signing-speaking) children with CIs (BB-CI) to those with typical hearing (BB-TH). Each child had at least one Deaf parent and was exposed to ASL from birth. The BB-THs were exposed to English from birth by hearing family members, while the BB-CIs began English exposure after cochlear implantation around 22-months-of-age. Elicited speech samples were analyzed for accuracy of English grammatical morpheme production. Although there was a trend toward lower overall accuracy in the BB-CIs, this seemed driven by increased omission of the plural -s, suggesting an exaggerated role of perceptual salience in this group. Errors of commission were rare in both groups. Because both groups were bimodal bilinguals, trends toward group differences were likely caused by delayed exposure to spoken language or hearing through a CI, rather than sign language exposure.

Current Profile of Adults Presenting for Preoperative Cochlear Implant Evaluation

Considerable advancements in cochlear implant technology (e.g., electric acoustic stimulation) and assessment materials have yielded expanded criteria. Despite this, it is unclear whether individuals with better audiometric thresholds and speech understanding are being referred for cochlear implant workup and pursuing cochlear implantation. The purpose of this study was to characterize the mean auditory and demographic profile of adults presenting for preoperative cochlear implant workup. Data were collected prospectively for all adult preoperative workups at Vanderbilt from 2013 to 2015. Subjects included 287 adults (253 postlingually deafened) with a mean age of 62.3 years. Each individual was assessed using the minimum speech test battery, spectral modulation detection, subjective questionnaires, and cognitive screening. Mean consonant-nucleus-consonant word scores, AzBio sentence scores, and pure-tone averages for postlingually deafened adults were 10%, 13%, and 89 dB HL, respectively, for the ear to be implanted. Seventy-three individuals (25.4%) met labeled indications for Hybrid-L and 207 individuals (72.1%) had aidable hearing in the better hearing ear to be used in a bimodal hearing configuration. These results suggest that mean speech understanding evaluated at cochlear implant workup remains very low despite recent advancements. Greater awareness and insurance accessibility may be needed to make cochlear implant technology available to those who qualify for electric acoustic stimulation devices as well as individuals meeting conventional cochlear implant criteria.

A Predictive Model for Cochlear Implant Outcome in Children with Cochlear Nerve Deficiency

The outcome of cochlear implantation (CI) in patients with cochlear nerve deficiency (CND) is variable, resulting in a wide range of speech perception performance, from degrees of environmental sound perception to conversation without lip-reading. Twenty-five cochlear implantees with CND were enrolled retrospectively to determine the factors correlated with CI outcome in patients with CND and to develop a predictive model for CI outcome. CI outcome was evaluated using the Categories of Auditory Performance (CAP) score at 2 years after CI. Patients with negative auditory brainstem response (ABR) showed a significantly lower CAP score than those with positive ABR (2.5 ± 1.7, 4.8 ± 0.7; p = 0.001). The area ratio of vestibulocochlear nerve (VCN) to facial nerve (FN) at the cerebellopontine angle on magnetic resonance images was positively correlated with CI outcome (p < 0.001). With multiple regression analysis, a predictive equation accounting for 66% of variance of CAP score at 2 years after CI was \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\bf{deduced}}:{\bf{CAP}}\,{\bf{score}}{\boldsymbol{=}}{\bf{0.7}}{\boldsymbol{+}}{\bf{1.9}}{\boldsymbol{\ast }}{\boldsymbol{(}}{\bf{ABR}}{\boldsymbol{)}}{\boldsymbol{+}}{\bf{1.2}}{\boldsymbol{\ast }}(\frac{{\boldsymbol{V}}{\boldsymbol{C}}{\boldsymbol{N}}}{{\boldsymbol{F}}{\boldsymbol{N}}})$$\end{document}deduced:CAPscore=0.7+1.9∗(ABR)+1.2∗(VCNFN). We found that preoperative ABR and area ratio of VCN to FN at the cerebellopontine angle could predict CI outcome in patients with CND. Preoperative counselling based on our predictive model might be helpful to determine treatment modality for auditory rehabilitation and which ear to implant.

Effects of socioeconomic status on children with hearing loss

OBJECTIVE

Health care disparities are noted between different socioeconomic groups; it is crucial to recognize and correct disparities, if present, that extend to children with hearing loss. The objective of the study is to evaluate the effect of socioeconomic status (SES) on access to hearing rehabilitation and speech and language therapy and outcomes in children with hearing loss.

METHODS

Retrospective Chart Review of children diagnosed with hearing loss at 3 tertiary care academic centers from 2010 to 2012. Two hundred patients were then randomly selected from each institution for analysis. International and self-pay patients were excluded. They were separated into two groups based on SES using insurance coverage as proxy for financial status (private insurance versus Medicaid). Main outcome measures included number of hearing aid evaluations recommended andcompleted, compliance with hearing aids use, diagnosis on speech therapy evaluations, participation in speech therapy, and outcomes noted on the last speech therapy session in patients' medical record at time of study completion.

RESULTS

600 patients were identified by random selection out of total of 3679 patients. 18 were excluded because they were international pay or self-pay. Of 582 patients, 299 (51.4%) had private insurance and 283 (48.6%) had Medicaid. The pure tone average (PTA) at initial diagnosis did not differ between the two populations (left ear p = 0.74, right ear p = 0.68). There was no significant difference in the number of hearing aid evaluations recommended (p = 0.49), hearing aid evaluation completed (p = 0.68), or documented hearing aid compliance (p = 0.68) between the two populations. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the presence of speech delay (p = 0.62), the receipt of speech therapy (p = 0.49), or speech language outcomes between the two groups (p = 0.45).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that despite lower socioeconomic status, in children with hearing loss, Medicaid allows equivalent access to hearing rehabilitation and speech therapy as their privately insured counterparts and children achieve similar speech and language outcomes.

Trends in sociodemographic disparities of pediatric cochlear implantation over a 15-year period

OBJECTIVE

Sociodemographic disparities of cochlear implantation in children have been reported. This study sought to determine if disparities in children receiving cochlear implants have narrowed, widened or remained constant.

METHODS

Children 18 years or younger who underwent cochlear implantation from 1997 to 2012 were selected using the Kids' Inpatient Database. Demographic data included primary insurance payer, income quartile and race. The Cochran-Armitage test was used to determine if trends were significant. Prevalence rates of cochlear implantation by race were generated. A Poisson regression model was used to evaluate the rates of cochlear implantation within each racial group.

RESULTS

The proportion of children receiving cochlear implants with private insurance decreased from 79.3% to 42.6% (p < .0001), whereas children with Medicaid increased from 17.4% to 35.2% (p < .0001). Proportion of implanted children from the lowest two income quartiles increased from 15.5% to 24.4% (p < .0001) and 10.3%-21.8% (p < .0035), respectively. Rates of implantation among children from income quartile four decreased from 50.9% to 35.3% (p < .0001). White children were implanted twice as often as Black or Hispanic children (p = .007 and p = .0012 respectively). Asian children were implanted more than twice as often as Black or Hispanic Children (p = .0154 and p = .0098 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Income and insurance disparities have narrowed within the inpatient pediatric cochlear implantation cohort. Racial disparities still exist. White and Asian children are implanted at higher rates than Black or Hispanic children.

Prevalence and risk factors associated with non-attendance in neurodevelopmental follow-up clinic among infants with CHD

BACKGROUND

Neurodevelopmental impairment is increasingly recognised as a potentially disabling outcome of CHD and formal evaluation is recommended for high-risk patients. However, data are lacking regarding the proportion of eligible children who actually receive neurodevelopmental evaluation, and barriers to follow-up are unclear. We examined the prevalence and risk factors associated with failure to attend neurodevelopmental follow-up clinic after infant cardiac surgery.

METHODS

Survivors of infant (<1 year) cardiac surgery at our institution (4/2011-3/2014) were included. Socio-demographic and clinical characteristics were evaluated in neurodevelopmental clinic attendees and non-attendees in univariate and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 552 patients were included; median age at surgery was 2.4 months, 15% were premature, and 80% had moderate-severe CHD. Only 17% returned for neurodevelopmental evaluation, with a median age of 12.4 months. In univariate analysis, non-attendees were older at surgery, had lower surgical complexity, fewer non-cardiac anomalies, shorter hospital stay, and lived farther from the surgical center. Non-attendee families had lower income, and fewer were college graduates or had private insurance. In multivariable analysis, lack of private insurance remained independently associated with non-attendance (adjusted odds ratio 1.85, p=0.01), with a trend towards significance for distance from surgical center (adjusted odds ratio 2.86, p=0.054 for ⩾200 miles).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of infants with CHD at high risk for neurodevelopmental dysfunction evaluated in this study are not receiving important neurodevelopmental evaluation. Efforts to remove financial/insurance barriers, increase access to neurodevelopmental clinics, and better delineate other barriers to receipt of neurodevelopmental evaluation are needed.