Physical outcome measures for conductive and mixed hearing loss treatment: A systematic review

Johansson, Martina; Tysome, James R.; Hill-Feltham, Penny; Hodgetts, William E.; Ostevik, Amberley; McKinnon, Brian J.; Monksfield, Peter; Sockalingam, Ravi; Wright, Tracy

doi:10.1111/coa.13131

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 163 publications

(153 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study aims to identify the outcome measures published in the hearing core area through a scoping review, which are then grouped into domains. This has already been performed for the physical core area, (Johansson et al 2018), with similar work in progress for psychosocial and economic core areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hearing outcome measures for conductive and mixed hearing loss treatment in adults: a scoping review

Hill-Feltham

Johansson

Hodgetts

et al. 2020

International Journal of Audiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Rehabilitation options for conductive and mixed hearing loss are continually expanding, but without standard outcome measures comparison between different treatments is difficult. To meaningfully inform clinicians and patients core outcome sets (COS), determined via a recognised methodology, are needed. Following our previous work that identified hearing, physical, economic and psychosocial as core areas of a future COS, the AURONET group reviewed hearing outcome measures used in existing literature and assigned them into different domains within the hearing core area. Design: Scoping review. Study Sample: Literature including hearing outcome measurements for the treatment of conductive and/or mixed hearing loss. Results: The literature search identified 1434 studies, with 278 subsequently selected for inclusion. A total of 837 hearing outcome measures were reported and grouped into nine domains. The largest domain constituted pure-tone threshold measurements accounting for 65% of the total outcome measures extracted, followed by the domains of speech testing (20%) and questionnaires (9%). Studies of hearing implants more commonly included speech tests or hearing questionnaires compared with studies of middle ear surgery. Conclusions: A wide range of outcome measures are currently used, highlighting the importance of developing a COS to inform individual practice and reporting in trials/research.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%