Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
1.
2.
Atten Percept Psychophys ; 84(3): 1016-1042, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1792350

ABSTRACT

Hearing in noise is a core problem in audition, and a challenge for hearing-impaired listeners, yet the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood. We explored whether harmonic frequency relations, a signature property of many communication sounds, aid hearing in noise for normal hearing listeners. We measured detection thresholds in noise for tones and speech synthesized to have harmonic or inharmonic spectra. Harmonic signals were consistently easier to detect than otherwise identical inharmonic signals. Harmonicity also improved discrimination of sounds in noise. The largest benefits were observed for two-note up-down "pitch" discrimination and melodic contour discrimination, both of which could be performed equally well with harmonic and inharmonic tones in quiet, but which showed large harmonic advantages in noise. The results show that harmonicity facilitates hearing in noise, plausibly by providing a noise-robust pitch cue that aids detection and discrimination.


Subject(s)
Hearing Aids , Speech Perception , Auditory Perception , Auditory Threshold , Hearing , Hearing Tests , Humans , Noise , Pitch Discrimination
3.
Am J Otolaryngol ; 43(2): 103379, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1664635

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 infection can cause a wide spectrum of symptoms. The audio-vestibular system can also be involved, but there is still debate about this so findings need to be considered carefully. Furthermore, mother to fetus intrauterine transmission of COVID-19 infection in pregnant women is controversial. Few studies are available about the audio-vestibular symptomatology of newborns with intrauterine COVID19 exposure. OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the possible correlation between the COVID19 gestational infection and hearing impairment onset in newborns. The involvement of hearing in COVID19 is verified so the timing and methodology of audiological evaluation of children can be planned. METHODS: Children were subject to newborn hearing screening and audiological evaluation. Newborn hearing screening is carried out prior to hospital discharge using the Automatic Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions test. Audiological evaluation is performed within the child age of 4 months by using maternal, pregnancy, and perinatal case history, COVID19 case history, otoscopy, acoustic immittance test, Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions test, and the Auditory Brainstem Response test. RESULTS: 63 children were included in the study. 82.5% of these children were subjects of the newborn hearing screening program. The remaining 11 newborns were not subjected to hearing screening due to isolation measures and their audiological evaluation was carried out directly. Only one of 52 screened neonates showed a bilateral REFER test result but hearing threshold was normal at audiological evaluation. Audiological evaluation showed normal bilateral ABR thresholds in 59/63 children. Four children (6.3% of the total) had ABR threshold alterations but two showed normal threshold at ABR retest performed within 1 month of the first. The other two infants showed monolateral ABR alterations but one of these had a concomitant middle ear effusion. In conclusion, only one child (1.6% of the sample) had an altered ABR. This child had shown one positive SARS-CoV-2 swab in the absence of risk factors for hearing loss. CONCLUSION: This study finds no evidence that maternal COVID19 infection is a risk factor in the development of congenital hearing loss in newborns.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mothers , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem , Female , Hearing Tests/methods , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Neonatal Screening/methods , Otoacoustic Emissions, Spontaneous/physiology , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2
4.
S Afr J Commun Disord ; 69(1): e1-e12, 2022 Jan 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1662742

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is slow progress in early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) services within South Africa. Audiologists are EHDI gatekeepers and can provide valuable insights into the barriers and facilitators that can progressively move EHDI towards best practice in South Africa. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to determine the barriers and facilitators to EHDI in KwaZulu-Natal as reported by audiologists/speech therapists and audiologists (A/STAs). METHOD: A descriptive qualitative approach was used. Telephonic interviews were conducted with 12 A/STAs working in public and private healthcare facilities, using the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats (SWOT) conceptual framework. Data was analysed using thematic analysis in conjunction with NVivo software. RESULTS: One of the main barriers perceived by A/STAs, affecting EHDI was the lack of resources in healthcare facilities. The participants indicated that although there was a guideline in place to guide practice, it may be more suited to an urban area versus a rural area. Poor knowledge and awareness of EHDI was also identified as a barrier. Information provided from A/STAs at grassroots level, in the various provinces, may benefit in developing a more contextually relevant and practical guideline. Facilitators included; development of task teams specifically for EHDI programmes, creation of improved communication networks for collaboration and communication, training of healthcare professionals and improving data management systems. CONCLUSION: Strategies such as an increase in resources, further education and training, development of contextually relevant, culturally, and linguistically diverse practices and protocols need to be in place to improve EHDI implementation. Further research, clinical implications and limitations are provided emanating from the study.


Subject(s)
Hearing Tests , Hearing , Audiologists , Early Diagnosis , Humans , Qualitative Research , South Africa
5.
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 148(2): 166-172, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1598049

ABSTRACT

Importance: Developing a telemedicine tool to discriminate between patients who need urgent treatment for sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) from those who do not takes on special importance during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: To explore the feasibility of a telemedicine model to assist in the evaluation of new-onset unilateral sudden hearing loss (SHL) among patients who do not have access to medical resources, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort investigation of a telemedicine model was conducted at a tertiary referral medical center between May 2020 and January 2021, with the interpreting physician blinded to the results of formal audiograms. The study included a consecutive sample of adult patients (aged ≥18 years) referred to the otolaryngology emergency department in our medical center with the chief complaint of new-onset unilateral SHL. Interventions: The telemedicine model comprised 2 sequential steps: a Weber test using the Hum Test and a smartphone-based vibration, and uHear app-based audiometry. Main Outcomes and Measures: Discrimination between patients with and without SSNHL by using the telemedicine model. All diagnoses subsequently confirmed by a formal audiogram. Results: Fifty-one patients with new-onset unilateral SHL participated in the study study (median age, 45 [range, 18-76] years; 28 [54.9%] men). The sensitivity and specificity of the telemedicine model for fulfilling the audiometric criteria of SSNHL (loss of ≥30 dB in ≥3 consecutive frequencies) were 100% (95% CI, 84%-100%) and 73% (95% CI, 54%-88%), respectively. The PPV was 72% (95% CI, 53%-87%), the NPV was 100% (95% CI, 85%-100%), and the accuracy was 84.3% (95% CI, 71%-93%). Although 8 participants had false-positive results, all of them had SSNHL that did not meet the full audiometric criteria. Conclusions and Relevance: The telemedicine model presented in this study for the diagnosis of SSNHL is valid and reliable. It may serve as a primary tool for the discrimination between patients in need of urgent care for SSNHL from those who are not, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hearing Loss, Sudden/diagnosis , Telemedicine/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Audiometry , Cohort Studies , Feasibility Studies , Female , Hearing Tests , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Smartphone , Young Adult
6.
Am J Audiol ; 31(1): 91-100, 2022 Mar 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1597923

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This investigation aims to provide outcomes from a clinical perspective on the validity and efficacy of a wireless automated audiometer system that could be used in multiple settings when a sound booth is not accessible. Testing was conducted in a clinical setting under modified protocols meeting safety precautions during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: Four doctoral students in audiology served as examiners. Participants were 69 adults between the ages of 20 and 69 years, with normal hearing (≤ 25 dB HL; n = 110 ears) or hearing loss (> 25 dB HL; n = 25 ears). Two versions of a pure-tone air-conduction threshold test following a modified Hughson-Westlake approach were performed and compared at 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, 6000, and 8000 Hz (a) in a sound-treated test booth using standard manual audiometry and (b) in a quiet, nonsound-treated clinical room (sound booth free) using automated KUDUwave audiometry. Participants were asked to complete a five-item feedback questionnaire, and examiners were interviewed to report on their experience. RESULTS: Clinical validity to within ±10 dB of standard audiometry was demonstrated for 94.5% of the total thresholds (n = 937) measured with the sound booth-free approach. Less accuracy (73.3%) was observed using a ±5 dB comparison. When comparing the mean thresholds, there were significant differences (p < .01) between the mean thresholds at most frequencies, with mean sound booth thresholds being higher than the sound booth-free mean thresholds. A strong threshold correlation (.91-.98) was found between the methods across frequencies. Participant and examiner feedback supported the efficacy of the sound booth-free technology. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support sound booth-free, automated software-controlled audiometry with active noise monitoring as a valid and efficient procedure for pure-tone hearing threshold assessment. This method offers an effective alternative when circumstances require more transportable hearing assessment technology or do not allow for standard manual audiometry in a sound booth.


Subject(s)
Hearing Tests , Sound , Adult , Aged , Audiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hearing Tests/methods , Humans , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Reproducibility of Results , Young Adult
7.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 166(4): 603-604, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1582718

ABSTRACT

Early detection and intervention for congenital hearing loss are critical for speech and language development. Newborns should receive hearing screening, diagnosis, and intervention by 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused delays in each step of this process. Increased out-of-hospital births and shortages of essential health care services likely reduced the proportion of newborns completing screening. Additional factors have contributed to delayed diagnosis. We estimate that up to 50% of infants born with hearing loss in Maryland in 2021 may be delayed in diagnosis. Hearing loss interventions have been affected due to delayed initiation, reduced availability, and lack of in-person services. Delayed diagnosis and treatment of congenital hearing loss are likely to have significant effects on individual patients and public health, the full magnitude of which will not be known for years. Opportunities exist for providers to mitigate the negative effects of COVID-19 on pediatric hearing health care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Child , Hearing , Hearing Tests , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Neonatal Screening , Pandemics
8.
Ear Hear ; 43(1): 41-44, 2021 11 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1528197

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Viral infections are known to be a risk factor for neonatal hearing loss. COVID-19 infection has been reported to affect hearing test results in one small sample sized study. We aimed to investigate the incidence the risk of neonatal hearing loss in infants of mothers who had COVID-19 infection during pregnancy, regarding their trimesters, by evaluating the neonatal hearing screening results. DESIGN: In this retrospective case-control study, neonatal hearing test results of 458 women with a history of COVID-19 infection in pregnancy were compared with 339 women who gave birth before the pandemic. Data of pregnant women who attended the COVID-19 outpatient clinic of the emergency service of a tertiary pandemic hospital and who had confirmed infection with a reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test were determined from the hospital's records and their neonatal hearing screening results were analyzed from the national database. Neonates born before <34 weeks, and with reported risk factors in the database such as congenital anomaly or known TORCH infection during pregnancy were excluded. The screening tests, Automated Auditory Brainstem Response or Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission (TEOAE), were used for screening, and patients who failed the first screening were reevaluated at least 2 weeks apart with a second screening. RESULTS: The incidence of failed second screening was 1.3% in the COVID-19 group and 2.9% in controls, and no significant difference was observed between the two groups according to the final screening results on the second test. Among the 458 mothers, 8 were infected in first trimester, 126 in second trimester, 127 in third trimester but did not deliver within 15 days after infection and 197 were positive at birth. Six neonates in the infected group failed the second screening (3 [2.4%] in the second trimester, 1 [0.8%] third trimester, and 2 [1.0%] positive at birth). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 infection during pregnancy was not found to be a risk factor for hearing loss, according to the newborn hearing screening results.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Case-Control Studies , Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem , Female , Hearing Tests , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Mothers , Neonatal Screening , Otoacoustic Emissions, Spontaneous , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
9.
J Obstet Gynaecol Res ; 48(1): 113-118, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1470449

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Congenital infections can cause newborn hearing loss. Although vertical transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection is theoretically possible, this has not been proven yet. To our knowledge, there is no previous report on whether COVID-19 infection during pregnancy can cause congenital hearing loss. This paper aimed to find an answer to this question. METHOD: This retrospective, single-center study was performed between April 2020 and May 2021 at a tertiary care referral center in Turkey. A total of 422 pregnant women who had coronavirus infection during pregnancy were followed and 203 of them gave birth in our institution. Results of hearing screening tests of 199 newborns were assessed retrospectively. RESULTS: Of patients included in the study, 23 (11.6%) had the disease in the first trimester, 62 (31.2%) in the second trimester, and 114 (57.3%) in the third trimester. In the first hearing test performed on newborns, unilateral hearing loss was observed in 21 babies (10.5%). Hearing tests of these newborns were found to be normal in the second test performed 15 days later. CONCLUSION: Considering the incidence of congenital hearing loss, the absence of hearing loss in our newborn population does not confirm the argument that coronavirus infection does not cause congenital hearing loss. This issue should be evaluated with larger patient series. In addition, it should be kept in mind that hearing loss can occur at later ages as well.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Female , Hearing , Hearing Tests , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical , Mothers , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/diagnosis , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Turkey/epidemiology
10.
Am J Otolaryngol ; 43(1): 103241, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1432762

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: During the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic a reduction in the diagnosis of many otorhinolaryngological and audiological disorders has been widely reported. The main aim of this investigation was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 outbreak on the incidence of acute hearing and vestibular disorders. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients evaluated in an audiology tertiary referral centre for acute cochleo-vestibular impairment between March 1st 2020 and February 28th 2021 (Pandemic Year Period, PYP). Results were compared to patients presenting with the same disorders during two previous periods (March 1st 2019 to February 29th 2020 and March 1st 2018 to February 28th 2019; First Precedent Year Period, FPYP and Second Precedent Year Period, SPYP, respectively). RESULTS: The annual incidence of total acute audio-vestibular disorders (number of annual diagnoses divided by total number of annual audiological evaluations) was 1.52% during the PYP, 1.31% in FPYP and 1.20% in SPYP. Comparison between the pandemic period and previous periods did not show a significant difference (p > 0.05). The overall incidence of SSNHL and combined acute cochlear-vestibular involvement was significantly higher during the PYP compared to the previous periods (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in the absolute number of acute audio-vestibular disorders during the pandemic compared to previous periods. Although not significant, the SSNHL during the pandemic appeared worse in terms of pure-tone average with a higher incidence of associated vestibular involvement. Further studies are needed to clarify the role of SARS-CoV-2 on audio-vestibular disorders incidence and pathophysiology.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hearing Loss, Sudden/epidemiology , Vestibular Diseases/epidemiology , Female , Hearing Tests , Humans , Incidence , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers
12.
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol ; 146: 110754, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1213280

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The current study aimed to investigate possible association of maternal SARS-CoV-2 with newborn hearing loss. We compared hearing screening outcomes in neonates born to women with positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results during pregnancy with healthy controls. METHODS: Neonates born between April and December 2020 in our hospital to mothers with positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results during pregnancy were included in this study. Neonates with risk factors for universal newborn hearing screening (NHS) were excluded. Neonates born to mothers with positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results during pregnancy were compared with healthy controls in terms of newborn hearing screening results and independent variables. RESULTS: Neonates in the COVID-19 group were more likely to have a "refer" result in auditory brainstem responses (ABR) compared with the control group (53/118 and 28/118, respectively; p = 0.001). The second ABR test results did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.618). Logistic regression revealed that birth week and type of birth were not associated with the "refer" result. PCR positivity in the second trimester was more likely to produce the "refer" result in the first ABR test (p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity in pregnancy is significantly associated with an increased risk of abnormal NHS results. Also, the timing of PCR positivity in pregnancy (trimester) may be related to abnormal NHS results.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hearing Disorders/diagnosis , Hearing Tests , Neonatal Screening , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem , Female , Hearing Disorders/virology , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/virology , Pregnancy Outcome , Pregnant Women , SARS-CoV-2
13.
J Laryngol Otol ; 135(1): 21-27, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1065743

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate the feasibility of continuing cochlear implantation during the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis and to report on trends of referrals via the neonatal hearing screening programme. METHODS: A prospective case series was conducted on children who underwent cochlear implantation during the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis in the UK and a sample of referrals via the neonatal hearing screening programme. A step-by-step description of peri-operative management is included. RESULTS: Regionally, between February and May 2020, 106 babies were referred via the neonatal hearing screening programme to paediatric audiology. Eleven children were operated on during the coronavirus disease 2019 study period. None of the 11 children developed coronavirus symptoms. DISCUSSION: It is widely recognised that the demands of managing the current pandemic may compromise screening, clinical assessment and elective surgery. Time-sensitive issues such as cancer management have gained prominence, but a similar need exists for timely paediatric cochlear implantation. CONCLUSION: Implantation in the paediatric population during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic is feasible with careful planning.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cochlear Implantation , Deafness/surgery , Neonatal Screening , Child, Preschool , Cochlear Implantation/statistics & numerical data , Feasibility Studies , Female , Hearing Tests , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Prospective Studies , Referral and Consultation/trends , United Kingdom
14.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 69(2): 307-316, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1059709

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Age-related hearing loss (ARHL) is a widely prevalent yet manageable condition that has been linked to neurocognitive and psychiatric comorbidities. Multiple barriers hinder older individuals from being diagnosed with ARHL through pure-tone audiometry. This is especially true during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has resulted in the closure of many outpatient audiology and otolaryngology offices. Smartphone-based hearing assessment apps may overcome these challenges by enabling patients to remotely self-administer their own hearing examination. The objective of this review is to provide an up-to-date overview of current mobile health applications (apps) that claim to assess hearing. DESIGN: Narrative review. MEASUREMENTS: The Apple App Store and Google Play Store were queried for apps that claim to assess hearing. Relevant apps were downloaded and used to conduct a mock hearing assessment. Names of included apps were searched on four literature databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) to determine which apps had been validated against gold standard methods. RESULTS: App store searches identified 44 unique apps. Apps differed with respect to the type of test offered (e.g., hearing threshold test), cost, strategies to reduce ambient noise, test output (quantitative vs qualitative results), and options to export results. Validation studies were identified for seven apps. CONCLUSION: Given their low cost and relative accessibility, smartphone-based hearing apps may facilitate screening for ARHL, particularly in the setting of limitations on in-person medical care due to COVID-19. However, app features vary widely, few apps have been validated, and user-centered designs for older adults are largely lacking. Further research and validation efforts are necessary to determine whether smartphone-based hearing assessments are a feasible and accurate screening tool for ARHL. Key Points Age-related hearing loss is a prevalent yet undertreated condition among older adults. Why Does this Paper Matter? Smartphone-based hearing test apps may facilitate remote screening for hearing loss, but limitations surrounding app validation, usability, equipment calibration, and data security should be addressed.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss/diagnosis , Hearing Tests/methods , Mobile Applications/statistics & numerical data , Smartphone/instrumentation , Aged , Equipment Design/instrumentation , Hearing Tests/instrumentation , Humans
15.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 69(2): 307-316, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-991554

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Age-related hearing loss (ARHL) is a widely prevalent yet manageable condition that has been linked to neurocognitive and psychiatric comorbidities. Multiple barriers hinder older individuals from being diagnosed with ARHL through pure-tone audiometry. This is especially true during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has resulted in the closure of many outpatient audiology and otolaryngology offices. Smartphone-based hearing assessment apps may overcome these challenges by enabling patients to remotely self-administer their own hearing examination. The objective of this review is to provide an up-to-date overview of current mobile health applications (apps) that claim to assess hearing. DESIGN: Narrative review. MEASUREMENTS: The Apple App Store and Google Play Store were queried for apps that claim to assess hearing. Relevant apps were downloaded and used to conduct a mock hearing assessment. Names of included apps were searched on four literature databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) to determine which apps had been validated against gold standard methods. RESULTS: App store searches identified 44 unique apps. Apps differed with respect to the type of test offered (e.g., hearing threshold test), cost, strategies to reduce ambient noise, test output (quantitative vs qualitative results), and options to export results. Validation studies were identified for seven apps. CONCLUSION: Given their low cost and relative accessibility, smartphone-based hearing apps may facilitate screening for ARHL, particularly in the setting of limitations on in-person medical care due to COVID-19. However, app features vary widely, few apps have been validated, and user-centered designs for older adults are largely lacking. Further research and validation efforts are necessary to determine whether smartphone-based hearing assessments are a feasible and accurate screening tool for ARHL. Key Points Age-related hearing loss is a prevalent yet undertreated condition among older adults. Why Does this Paper Matter? Smartphone-based hearing test apps may facilitate remote screening for hearing loss, but limitations surrounding app validation, usability, equipment calibration, and data security should be addressed.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss/diagnosis , Hearing Tests/methods , Mobile Applications/statistics & numerical data , Smartphone/instrumentation , Aged , Equipment Design/instrumentation , Hearing Tests/instrumentation , Humans
16.
Am J Case Rep ; 21: e927519, 2020 Nov 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-994257

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND Few reports have described the association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and sudden hearing loss. The precise pathophysiological mechanism causing this symptom is unknown. This report describes a case of sudden hearing loss in a patient with COVID-19 pneumonia due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. CASE REPORT A 67-year-old woman with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), as confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing from nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs, was examined. She experienced sudden hearing loss in her right ear and disabling tinnitus. She underwent combined corticosteroid therapy (oral and intratympanic), resulting in an isolated improvement of 250 kHz in the right ear (from 60 dB, the threshold became 15 dB) and of 4, 6, and 8 kHz in the left ear (from 35 dB, 20 dB, and 35 dB, the thresholds became 15 dB, 5 dB and 20 dB, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Although rare, hearing loss appears to be a possible sequela to SARS-CoV-2 infection and deserves attention because it is a medical emergency requiring immediate clinical treatment. Additional studies are needed to assess the pathophysiological mechanisms involved in and the long-term characteristics of this type of hearing loss.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/etiology , Hearing Loss, Sudden/etiology , Hearing/physiology , RNA, Viral/analysis , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , Female , Hearing Loss, Sudden/diagnosis , Hearing Loss, Sudden/physiopathology , Hearing Tests , Humans , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
17.
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis ; 138(5): 363-375, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-885178

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Access to diagnosis and treatments for auditory disorders and related pathologies has regressed in France during the COVID-19 pandemic, posing a risk to the patient's chance of recovery. This best practice recommendations guide aims to list the existing technological solutions for the remote examination of a patient with hearing complaint, and to outline their benefits and, where applicable, their limitations. METHODS: The recommendations were developed both from the clinical experience of the medical experts who drafted the guide, and from an extensive review of the literature dealing with clinical practice recommendations for tele-audiology. Tele-audiometry solutions were identified on the basis of a search engine query carried out in April 2020, prior to verification of their availability on the European market. RESULTS: Video otoscopy solutions allow for the teletransmission of images compatible with a high-quality diagnosis, either by connecting via internet to a tele-health platform or using a smartphone or a tablet with an iOS or Android operating system. Using the same telecommunication methods, it is possible to remotely conduct a pure-tone audiometry test in accordance with standard practice, a speech-in-quiet or a speech-in-noise audiometry test, as well as objective measures of hearing. Clinical and paraclinical examinations can be accessed by the physician to be interpreted on a deferred basis (asynchronous tele-audiology). Examinations can also be conducted in real time in a patient, at any age of life, as long as a caregiver can be present during the installation of the transducers or the acoumetry. Tele-audiology solutions also find application in the remote training of future healthcare professionals involved in the management of deafness and hearing impairment. CONCLUSION: Under French law, tele-otoscopy is a medical procedure that is either a tele-expertise (asynchronous adive) or a teleconsultation act (synchronous advice). Subjective and objective evaluation of the patient's hearing functions can be done remotely provided that the listed precautions are respected.


Subject(s)
Audiology/methods , Hearing Disorders/diagnosis , Telemedicine , Audiometry/methods , Decision Trees , Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem , France , Hearing Tests , Humans , Otoacoustic Emissions, Spontaneous , Otoscopy , Smartphone , Video Recording
18.
Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol ; 34: 2058738420941754, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-639031

ABSTRACT

Aim of this communication is to remind clinical professionals to be aware of ototoxic side effects of several specific drugs proposed for the treatment of the new virus SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19). In particular, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, as well as antiviral drugs such as remdesivir, favipiravir and lopinavir can all present potential ototoxic side effects. The data in the literature do not offer specific information on their potential synergetic effects nor on their interactions.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/complications , Drug Monitoring , Hearing Disorders/chemically induced , Hearing Disorders/complications , Ototoxicity , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Antimalarials/adverse effects , Antimalarials/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/adverse effects , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hearing Disorders/therapy , Hearing Tests , Humans , Pandemics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL