A New Standardized Format for Reporting Hearing Outcome in Clinical Trials

Gurgel, Richard K.; Jackler, Robert K.; Dobie, Robert A.; Popelka, Gerald R.

doi:10.1177/0194599812458401

Cited by 405 publications

(393 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

381

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Stapedotomy employing either the 0.4 or 0.6 mm prostheses resulted in comparable hearing in the main outcome measures recommended for the evaluation of surgical treatment of conductive hearing loss [18,19] . Within the groups analysis showed significant post-stapedotomy improvement in AC-PTA and closure of the ABG with preserved WRS%, while no advantage was demonstrated for one of the study groups in neither of these parameters nor the number of decibels closure of the ABG.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The audiological outcome measures were adopted from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery guidelines for the evaluation of results of treatment of conductive hearing loss [19] and the recommended presentation format of pure tone threshold-word recognition scattergrams [18] .…”

Section: Outcome Measures Behavioral Audiometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The stapedotomy success rate was defined as the percentage of patients having air-bone gap closure within 10 dB HL [18] . Air-bone gap gain (GAINabg): The difference in dB HL between the preoperative and postoperative ABG.…”

Section: Air-bone Gap (Abg)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors identified several confounding parameters in most previous studies, including the variety of prosthesis type employed in the treatment groups, lacking information about the fenestration size, insufficient reporting of the preoperative hearing thresholds or missing comparison of preoperative hearing between the treatment groups, and heterogeneous reporting of hearing outcome that many times did not adhere to recommended guidelines [18,19] . Also, randomization was carried out only in one of the studies, and blinding of the hearing outcome assessors was mostly deficient.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Hearing and Otoacoustic Emissions Outcome of Stapedotomy: Does the Prosthesis Diameter Matter?

Faranesh

Zaaroura²,

Zeidan³

et al. 2017

Int Adv Otol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE:To compare the hearing and otoacoustic emissions (OAE) outcome of stapedotomy employing 0.4 and 0.6 mm diameter prostheses. MATERIALS and METHODS:In total, 18 patients with otosclerosis participated in a prospective, double-armed, randomized cohort study. All the patients underwent small fenestra drill stapedotomy employing the Causse fluroplastic large loop piston prostheses. The patients were randomly assigned to groups of 0.4 mm (n=9) and 0.6 mm (n=9) diameter prostheses. The results of pure tone air and bone audiometries, speech audiometry, and OAE conducted 12 months post operatively were compared within and between the groups. RESULTS:The within-group analysis showed significant post-stapedotomy improvements in the average air conduction pure tone thresholds in both groups (52.9±9.6 vs. 25.6±5.2 dB HL; p<0.0001 and 54.6±10.4 vs. 22.2±8.2 dB HL; p<0.0001 for the 0.4 and 0.6 mm groups, respectively) and average air-bone gap (ABG; 37.1±8.5 vs. 8.1±3.9 dB HL; p<0.0001 and 38.3±7.5 vs. 9.9±4.5 dB HL; p<0.0001 in the 0.4 and 0.6 mm groups, respectively). No significant differences were found between the groups in these outcome measures, as well as in the rate of ABG closure within 10 dB HL and the word recognition scores. Favorable outcome in the post-stapedotomy bone conduction (BC) was found for the 0.6 mm prosthesis group, reflecting superior cancellation of the Carhart phenomenon for the 500-3000 Hz pure tone thresholds average (−1.7±3.7 vs. 3.9±6.2 dB HL for the 0.4 and 0.6 mm groups, respectively; p<0.04) and 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz average (−2.6±4.33 vs. 3.9±7.8 dB HL for the 0.4 and 0.6 mm groups, respectively; p<0.05). Small signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) values of the transient-evoked OAE (TEOAE) and distortion product OAE (DPOAE) were found at baseline and follow-up evaluation with no consistent changes post stapedotomy.CONCLUSION: Similar post-stapedotomy hearing results were found for the 0.4 and 0.6 mm prostheses with small but statistically significant advantage in BC gain and the overclosure parameter for the 0.6 mm prosthesis. OAE testing was not found to be of clinical value in the evaluation of stapedotomy hearing outcome.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Outcome Measures Behavioral Audiometrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Air-bone Gap (Abg)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Hearing and Otoacoustic Emissions Outcome of Stapedotomy: Does the Prosthesis Diameter Matter?

Faranesh

Zaaroura²,

Zeidan³

et al. 2017

Int Adv Otol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The average value of pure tone audiometry (PTA) thresholds was calculated according to the widely used system of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) (1969), that is, the three-frequency average (3FA) method (0.5, 1, and 2 kHz) and the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) standards for reporting hearing loss including PTA at 0.5, 1, 2, and 3 kHz (4FA) [8] .…”

Section: Classification and Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%