Glue ear, hearing loss and IQ: an association moderated by the child's home environment.

BACKGROUND: Glue ear or otitis media with effusion (OME) is common in children and may be associated with hearing loss (HL). For most children it has no long lasting effects on cognitive development but it is unclear whether there are subgroups at higher risk of sequelae. OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between a score comprising the number of times a child had OME and HL (OME/HL score) in the first four/five years of life and IQ at age 4 and 8. To examine whether any association between OME/HL and IQ is moderated by socioeconomic, child or family factors. METHODS: Prospective, longitudinal cohort study: the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). 1155 children tested using tympanometry on up to nine occasions and hearing for speech (word recognition) on up to three occasions between age 8 months and 5 years. An OME/HL score was created and associations with IQ at ages 4 and 8 were examined. Potential moderators included a measure of the child's cognitive stimulation at home (HOME score). RESULTS: For the whole sample at age 4 the group with the highest 10% OME/HL scores had performance IQ 5 points lower [95% CI -9, -1] and verbal IQ 6 points lower [95% CI -10, -3] than the unaffected group. By age 8 the evidence for group differences was weak. There were significant interactions between OME/HL and the HOME score: those with high OME/HL scores and low 18 month HOME scores had lower IQ at age 4 and 8 than those with high OME/HL scores and high HOME scores. Adjusted mean differences ranged from 5 to 8 IQ points at age 4 and 8. CONCLUSIONS: The cognitive development of children from homes with lower levels of cognitive stimulation is susceptible to the effects of glue ear and hearing loss.

Does cochlear implantation improve speech recognition in children with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Cochlear implantation (CI) is a standard treatment for severe-profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). However, consensus has yet to be reached on its effectiveness for hearing loss caused by auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD). This review aims to summarize and synthesize current evidence of the effectiveness of CI in improving speech recognition in children with ANSD. DESIGN: Systematic review. STUDY SAMPLE: A total of 27 studies from an initial selection of 237. RESULTS: All selected studies were observational in design, including case studies, cohort studies, and comparisons between children with ANSD and SNHL. Most children with ANSD achieved open-set speech recognition with their CI. Speech recognition ability was found to be equivalent in CI users (who previously performed poorly with hearing aids) and hearing-aid users. Outcomes following CI generally appeared similar in children with ANSD and SNHL. Assessment of study quality, however, suggested substantial methodological concerns, particularly in relation to issues of bias and confounding, limiting the robustness of any conclusions around effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Currently available evidence is compatible with favourable outcomes from CI in children with ANSD. However, this evidence is weak. Stronger evidence is needed to support cost-effective clinical policy and practice in this area.

Prevalence and risk factors for mild and high-frequency bilateral sensorineural hearing loss at age 11 years old: a UK prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess prevalence and risk factors for mild/high-frequency bilateral sensorineural hearing loss within a UK population of children at age 11 years. DESIGN: Prospective birth cohort study. STUDY SAMPLE: Repeat hearing thresholds were measured in 5032 children, as part of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) at age 7, 9, and 11 years. Pregnancy, birth, and early medical history were obtained prospectively through parental questionnaires and medical records. RESULTS: Twenty children had mild and seven had high-frequency bilateral sensorineural hearing loss, giving a combined prevalence of 0.5% (95% CI 0.4-0.8%). These children were more likely than the rest of the study sample to have been admitted to hospital at 6-18 months (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.00-7.30). Parents of these children were more likely to have suspected a hearing problem when the children were 3 years old (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.05-5.60). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first UK prospective cohort study to investigate the prevalence of mild and high-frequency hearing loss. This study, which has the advantage of a large sample size and repeat hearing measures over a four year period, reports lower prevalence values than US cross-sectional studies.

Bilateral sequential cochlear implantation in the congenitally deaf child: evidence to support the concept of a 'critical age' after which the second ear is less likely to provide an adequate level of speech perception on its own.

This study attempts to answer the question of whether there is a 'critical age' after which a second contralateral cochlear implant is less likely to provide enough speech perception to be of practical use. The study was not designed to predict factors that determine successful binaural implant use, but to see if there was evidence to help determine the latest age at which the second ear can usefully be implanted, should the first side fail and become unusable.Outcome data, in the form of speech perception test results, were collected from 11 cochlear implant programmes in the UK and one centre in Australia. Forty-seven congenitally bilaterally deaf subjects who received bilateral sequential implants were recruited to the study. The study also included four subjects with congenital unilateral profound deafness who had lost all hearing in their only hearing ear and received a cochlear implant in their unilaterally congenitally deaf ear. Of those 34 subjects for whom complete sets of data were available, the majority (72%) of those receiving their second (or unilateral) implant up to the age of 13 years scored 60 per cent or above in the Bamford Kowal Bench (BKB) sentence test, or equivalent. In contrast, of those nine receiving their second or unilateral implant at the age of 15 or above, none achieved adequate levels of speech perception on formal testing: two scored 29 per cent and 30 per cent, respectively, and the rest seven per cent or less.A discriminant function analysis performed on the data suggests that it is unlikely that a second contralateral implant received after the age of 16 to 18 years will, on its own, provide adequate levels of speech perception. As more children receive sequential bilateral cochlear implants and the pool of data enlarges the situation is likely to become clearer.The results provide support for the concept of a 'critical age' for implanting the second ear in successful congenitally deaf unilateral cochlear implant users. This would argue against 'preserving' the second ear beyond a certain age, in order to use newer models of cochlear implant or for the purpose of hair cell regeneration and similar procedures in the future. The results suggest a new and more absolute reason for bilateral implantation of congenitally deaf children at an early age.