ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the functional outcomes of patients previously fitted with a bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) for unilateral conductive (UC), unilateral mixed (UM), or sensorineural (single-sided deafness [SSD]) hearing loss and compare them with those of patients with bilateral conductive hearing loss (BCHL). STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional cohort study. SETTING: The Institute for Reconstructive Sciences in Medicine (iRSM) at the Misercordia Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta. METHODS: Fifty patients with multiple types of hearing loss participated in this study. Postoperative subjective evaluation was completed with the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit questionnaire (APHAB). Objective evaluation was completed with the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT). RESULTS: The APHAB indicates that patients in all four groups find significant subjective improvement with their BAHA. SSQ data indicate that patients with BCHL and UCHL show a significantly higher preference for the sound quality of aided speech than patients with UMHL. Additionally, provision of a BAHA to patients with SSD does not allow them to subjectively localize sounds as well as it does the other groups. Significant improvements were found on the HINT in patients with BCHL, UCHL, and UMHL. There is no improvement in patients with SSD. CONCLUSION: BCHL, UCHL, and UMHL patients, both subjectively and objectively, do well with unilateral BAHA placement. Patients with SSD note subjective improvement but cannot localize sounds. More patients with UMHL and UCHL should be considered viable BAHA candidates. Patients with SSD should be cautioned that they may not experience similar objective benefits.
Subject(s)
Hearing Aids , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/therapy , Mastoid , Cross-Sectional Studies , Hearing Loss, Conductive/diagnosis , Hearing Loss, Conductive/therapy , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/diagnosis , Humans , Noise/adverse effects , Severity of Illness Index , Speech Perception , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of once-daily lansoprazole in the typical globus pharyngeus patient, who presents with a normal head and neck examination and without other sinister otolaryngologic complaints. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Outpatient otolaryngology office practice. METHODS: After meeting the inclusion criteria, patients were randomized to a 3-month course of either treatment (30 mg lansoprazole daily) or placebo (lactose). All patients were given a medication diary and instructed to take the medication daily on waking. During the office visit, counseling regarding lifestyle modifications for gastroesophageal reflux disease was provided to all patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The Glasgow-Edinburgh Throat Scale questionnaire was given prior to treatment and at 1- and 3-month intervals during treatment. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled between June 2005 and December 2006. Nineteen patients were randomized to the lansoprazole treatment arm, whereas 21 were enrolled in the placebo arm. Both groups were similar with regard to age, sex, and smoking history. The globus symptom score improved an average of 6.7 of 70 points in the treatment group and 2.9 points in the placebo group. There was no clinically or statistically significant difference between the two groups at any time point. CONCLUSION: The globus pharyngeus patient who presents with a normal head and neck examination and without sinister otolaryngologic complaints does not benefit from once-daily lansoprazole therapy.
Subject(s)
2-Pyridinylmethylsulfinylbenzimidazoles/administration & dosage , Pharyngeal Diseases/diagnosis , Pharyngeal Diseases/drug therapy , Adult , Ambulatory Care , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Humans , Lansoprazole , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Satisfaction , Pharynx/drug effects , Pharynx/physiopathology , Probability , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Reference Values , Risk Factors , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Antioxidants from a blueberry beverage may impact plasma vitamins. We examined vitamins/food selection in 12 college athletes during 30 days compared with placebo. Blood was collected before and after exercise at the beginning of the study (day 1) and then after a 30-day period of taking a daily supplemental beverage (day 30). The six trials involved blood that was drawn pre-beverage ingestion/pre-exercise (trials 1 and 4), post-beverage ingestion/pre-exercise (trials 2 and 5), and post-beverage ingestion/1 h post-exercise (trials 3 and 6), on day 1 (trials 1, 2, and 3) and day 30 (trials 4, 5, and 6). Analysis of variance revealed non-significant differences for macronutrient or gamma-tocopherol and vitamin C intakes by food frequency questionnaire or plasma vitamins by liquid chromatography. There was a trend (P = 0.083) in the group x time interaction for alpha-tocopherol intake by repeated-measures analysis of variance. Blueberry alpha-tocopherol (23.91 +/- 9.31 mg) was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than placebo alpha-tocopherol intake (7.59 +/- 0.95 mg) on day 1, but not on day 30 (blueberry, alpha-tocopherol = 9.04 +/- 2.35 mg, placebo, alpha-tocopherol = 11.46 +/- 3.65 mg) by pairwise comparisons. Blueberry supplementation did not affect plasma vitamin concentrations or gamma-tocopherol and vitamin C intakes, and may reduce alpha-tocopherol intake in those starting with a higher alpha-tocopherol intake, yet not altering athletes' eating habits.
