2016
DOI: 10.1097/mao.0000000000000922
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Systematic Review

Abstract: The overall quality of the included studies was poor. A major drawback was the quality of the (description of) audiometry, severity, and timing of hearing loss.A systematic review of the literature showed an incidence of hearing loss (>25 ± 5  dB) of 14% and an incidence of 5% for profound hearing loss (>90  dB). Patients with initial normal hearing after meningitis showed stable normal hearing over time. However, initial hearing loss related to meningitis can improve or deteriorate over time.We therefore reco… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A recent systematic review showed that the incidence of hearing loss was 11% (range, 2–35%) and that 5% of patients experienced profound hearing loss after having childhood bacterial meningitis ( 36 ). In addition, some other studies showed that seizures, serum C-reactive protein levels, and disease severity were risk factors for hearing impairment ( 37 , 38 ) after childhood bacterial meningitis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent systematic review showed that the incidence of hearing loss was 11% (range, 2–35%) and that 5% of patients experienced profound hearing loss after having childhood bacterial meningitis ( 36 ). In addition, some other studies showed that seizures, serum C-reactive protein levels, and disease severity were risk factors for hearing impairment ( 37 , 38 ) after childhood bacterial meningitis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Endoscopes are being increasingly used in otology, with significantly more visualization of every subregion of the middle ear when compared with the microscope [ 5 ]. Although endoscopic transcanal approaches afford good exposure of the lateral aspect of the geniculate ganglion and greater superficial petrosal nerve [ 2 ], they do not adequately access the more medial aspect of the geniculate ganglion and labyrinthine segment of facial nerve without significant breach of the inner ear, where hearing loss would be expected.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The aim of the literature search was to identify previous studies reporting the relative impact of these long-term outcomes on labor market outcomes compared with the general population. Several relevant studies were identified and selected based on completeness of outcomes, study design, and coverage of the U.S. population [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. From the literature search findings, we applied the relative measures of impact for each longterm outcomes e.g., hearing loss, permanent paralysis and cognitive impairment, and its impact on future employment and earnings losses in subjects with these conditions based on outcomes reported by Winsor (2019), Emmett and Frances (2015), and Newman (2011) in the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts [12,18,23] (S1 Table ).…”
Section: Mortality From Vaccine-preventable Infectionsmentioning
confidence: 99%