TITLE: Early Screening, Detection, and Amplification of Hearing Loss: Impact on Health- Related Quality of Life

Transcription

1 TITLE: Early Screening, Detection, and Amplification of Hearing Loss: Impact on Health- Related Quality of Life DATE: 13 May 1009 RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the evidence for the effect of early screening, detection, and amplification of hearing loss on health-related quality of life in children up to 18 years of age? METHODS: A limited literature search was conducted on key health technology assessment resources, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2009), University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) databases, ECRI, EuroScan, international health technology agencies, and a focused Internet search. The search was limited to English language articles published between 2004 and May No filters were applied to limit the retrieval by study type. Internet links were provided, where available. RESULTS: HTIS reports are organized so that the higher quality evidence is presented first. Therefore, health technology assessment reports, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses are presented first. These are followed by randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, observational studies, and evidence-based guidelines. Two health technology assessment reports, three systematic reviews, five observational studies, and two evidence-based guidelines were identified pertaining to the evidence for the effect of early screening, detection, and amplification of hearing loss on health-related quality of life in children up to 18 years of age. Most information pertains to the amplification of hearing loss rather than the effect of screening or detection. No relevant randomized or controlled clinical trials were identified. Additional information that may be of interest has been included in the appendix. Disclaimer: The Health Technology Inquiry Service (HTIS) is an information service for those involved in planning and providing health care in Canada. HTIS responses are based on a limited literature search and are not comprehensive, systematic reviews. The intent is to provide a list of sources of the best evidence on the topic that CADTH could identify using all reasonable efforts within the time allowed. HTIS responses should be considered along with other types of information and health care considerations. The information included in this response is not intended to replace professional medical advice, nor should it be construed as a recommendation for or against the use of a particular health technology. Readers are also cautioned that a lack of good quality evidence does not necessarily mean a lack of effectiveness particularly in the case of new and emerging health technologies, for which little information can be found, but which may in future prove to be effective. While CADTH has taken care in the preparation of the report to ensure that its contents are accurate, complete and up to date, CADTH does not make any guarantee to that effect. CADTH is not liable for any loss or damages resulting from use of the information in the report. Copyright: This report contains CADTH copyright material and may contain material in which a third party owns copyright. This report may be used for the purposes of research or private study only. It may not be copied, posted on a web site, redistributed by or stored on an electronic system without the prior written permission of CADTH or applicable copyright owner. Links: This report may contain links to other information available on the websites of third parties on the Internet. CADTH does not have control over the content of such sites. Use of third party sites is governed by the owners own terms and conditions.

2 Health technology assessments 1. Universal neonatal hearing screening [assessment report]. Canberra (AU): Medical Services Advisory Committee; Available: 75AD0082FD8F/$File/ref17.pdf (accessed 2. Screening for hearing loss in infants. Kuala Lumpur (MY): Malaysian Health Technology Assessment Unit (MHTAU); Available: (accessed CRD abstract: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses 3. Bamford J, Fortnum H, Bristow K, Smith J, Vamvakas G, Davies L, et al. Current practice, accuracy, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the school entry hearing screen. Health Technol Assess 2007;11(32):1-168, iii-iv. PubMed: PM Neonatal screening for early detection of hearing impairment. Final report S Cologne (DE): Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG); Available: (accessed CRD abstract: 5. Puig T, Municio A, Meda C. Universal neonatal hearing screening versus selective screening as part of the management of childhood deafness. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005;(2):CD PubMed: PM Randomized controlled trials No literature identified. Controlled clinical trials No literature identified. Observational studies 6. Schorr EA, Roth FP, Fox NA. Quality of life for children with cochlear implants: perceived benefits and problems and the perception of single words and emotional sounds. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2009;52(1): PubMed: PM Kunst SJ, Hol MK, Mylanus EA, Leijendeckers JM, Snik AF, Cremers CW. Subjective benefit after BAHA system application in patients with congenital unilateral conductive hearing impairment. Otol Neurotol 2008;29(3): PubMed: PM Stacey PC, Fortnum HM, Barton GR, Summerfield AQ. Hearing-impaired children in the United Kingdom, I: auditory performance, communication skills, educational achievements, Early Screening, Detection, and Amplification of Hearing Loss 2

3 quality of life, and cochlear implantation. Ear Hear 2006;27(2): PubMed: PM Huber M. Health-related quality of life of Austrian children and adolescents with cochlear implants. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2005;69(8): PubMed: PM Wake M, Hughes EK, Collins CM, Poulakis Z. Parent-reported health-related quality of life in children with congenital hearing loss: a population study. Ambul Pediatr 2004;4(5): PubMed: PM Guidelines and recommendations 11. Cochlear implants for children and adults with severe to profound deafness [technology appraisal guidance 166]. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; Available: (accessed 12. Universal screening for hearing loss in newborns: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Pediatrics 2008;122(1): Available: (accessed 2009 May 6). PubMed: PM PREPARED BY: Kristen Moulton, BA, Research Assistant Carolyn Spry, MLIS, Information Specialist Health Technology Inquiry Service htis@cadth.ca Tel: Early Screening, Detection, and Amplification of Hearing Loss 3

4 APPENDIX FURTHER INFORMATION: Guidelines 13. Sutton G, Wood S, Mason S. Guidelines for the early audiological assessment and management of babies referred from the newborn hearing screening programme. In: NHS Newborn Hearing Screening Programme: audiological assessment [website]. Manchester (UK): Medical Research Council Hearing & Communication Group; Available: (accessed Policy bulletins 14. Bone-anchored hearing aid. In: Clinical policy bulletins [no. 0403]. Hartford (CT): Aetna; Available: (accessed 15. Cochlear implants and auditory brainstem implants. In: Clinical policy bulletins [no. 0013]. Hartford (CT): Aetna; Available: (accessed Observational studies 16. Huber M, Wolfgang H, Klaus A. Education and training of young people who grew up with cochlear implants. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2008;72(9): PubMed: PM McDermott AL, Williams J, Kuo MJ, Reid AP, Proops DW. The role of bone anchored hearing aids in children with Down syndrome. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2008;72(6): PubMed: PM Lassaletta L, Castro A, Bastarrica M, Perez-Mora R, Madero R, De Sarria J, et al. Does music perception have an impact on quality of life following cochlear implantation? Acta Otolaryngol 2007;127(7): PubMed: PM Wheeler A, Archbold S, Gregory S, Skipp A. Cochlear implants: the young people's perspective. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2007;12(3): PubMed: PM Sahli S, Belgin E. Comparison of self-esteem level of adolescents with cochlear implant and normal hearing. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2006;70(9): PubMed: PM Review articles 21. Ali W, O'Connell R. The effectiveness of early cochlear implantation for infants and young children with hearing loss [technical brief]. Christchurch (NZ): New Zealand Health Technology Assessment (NZHTA); Available: (accessed 2009 May 13). CRD abstract: Moeller MP. Current state of knowledge: psychosocial development in children with hearing impairment. Ear Hear 2007;28(6): PubMed: PM Early Screening, Detection, and Amplification of Hearing Loss 4

5 23. Universal newborn hearing screening. Stockholm: Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU); Available: (accessed 2009 May 13). CRD abstract: Additional references 24. Storbeck C, Pittman P. Early intervention in South Africa: moving beyond hearing screening. Int J Audiol 2008;47(Suppl 1):S36-S43. PubMed: PM Early Screening, Detection, and Amplification of Hearing Loss 5