Hearing Screening in the Community

Gabrielle Saunders, Melissa T. Frederick, Shien Pei C. Silverman, Tina Penman, Austin Gardner, Theresa H. Chisolm, Celia D. Escabi, Preyanca H. Oree, Laura C. Westermann, Victoria A. Sanchez, Michelle L. Arnold

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adults typically wait 7-10 yr after noticing hearing problems before seeking help, possibly because they are unaware of the extent of their impairment. Hearing screenings, frequently conducted at health fairs, community events, and retirement centers can increase this awareness. To our knowledge, there are no published studies in which testing conditions and outcomes have been examined for multiple "typical screening events." PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to report hearing screening outcomes for pure tones and self-report screening tests and to examine their relationship with ambient noise levels in various screening environments. STUDY SAMPLE: One thousand nine hundred fifty-four individuals who completed a hearing screening at one of 191 community-based screening events that took place in the Portland, OR, and Tampa, FL, metro areas. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The data were collected during the recruitment phase of a large multisite study. All participants received a hearing screening that consisted of otoscopy, pure-tone screening, and completion of the Hearing Handicap Inventory-Screening Version (HHI-S). In addition, ambient sound pressure levels were measured just before pure-tone testing. RESULTS: Many more individuals failed the pure-tone screening (n = 1,238) and then failed the HHI-S (n = 796). The percentage of individuals who failed the pure-tone screening increased linearly with age from <20% for ages <45 yr to almost 100% for individuals aged ≥85 yr. On the other hand, the percentage of individuals who failed the HHI-S remained unchanged at approximately 40% for individuals aged ≥55 yr. Ambient noise levels varied considerably across the hearing screening locations. They impacted the pure-tone screen failure rate but not the HHI-S failure rate. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to select screening locations with a quiet space for pure-tone screening, use headphones with good passive attenuation, measure sound levels regularly during hearing screening events, halt testing if ambient noise levels are high, and/or alert individuals to the possibility of a false-positive screening failure. The data substantiate prior findings that the relationship between pure-tone sensitivity and reported hearing loss changes with age. Although it might be possible to develop age-specific HHI-S failure criteria to adjust for this, such an endeavor is not recommended because perceived difficulties are the best predictor of hearing health behaviors. Instead, it is proposed that a public health focus on education about hearing and hearing loss would be more effective.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)145-152
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of the American Academy of Audiology
Volume30
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2019

Fingerprint

Hearing
Equipment and Supplies
Noise
Hearing Loss
Otoscopy
Health Fairs
Retirement
Health Behavior
Self Report
Public Health
Education
Pressure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Speech and Hearing

Cite this

Saunders, G., Frederick, M. T., Silverman, S. P. C., Penman, T., Gardner, A., Chisolm, T. H., ... Arnold, M. L. (2019). Hearing Screening in the Community. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 30(2), 145-152. https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.17103

Hearing Screening in the Community. / Saunders, Gabrielle; Frederick, Melissa T.; Silverman, Shien Pei C.; Penman, Tina; Gardner, Austin; Chisolm, Theresa H.; Escabi, Celia D.; Oree, Preyanca H.; Westermann, Laura C.; Sanchez, Victoria A.; Arnold, Michelle L.

In: Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, Vol. 30, No. 2, 01.02.2019, p. 145-152.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Saunders, G, Frederick, MT, Silverman, SPC, Penman, T, Gardner, A, Chisolm, TH, Escabi, CD, Oree, PH, Westermann, LC, Sanchez, VA & Arnold, ML 2019, 'Hearing Screening in the Community', Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 145-152. https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.17103
Saunders G, Frederick MT, Silverman SPC, Penman T, Gardner A, Chisolm TH et al. Hearing Screening in the Community. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. 2019 Feb 1;30(2):145-152. https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.17103
Saunders, Gabrielle ; Frederick, Melissa T. ; Silverman, Shien Pei C. ; Penman, Tina ; Gardner, Austin ; Chisolm, Theresa H. ; Escabi, Celia D. ; Oree, Preyanca H. ; Westermann, Laura C. ; Sanchez, Victoria A. ; Arnold, Michelle L. / Hearing Screening in the Community. In: Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. 2019 ; Vol. 30, No. 2. pp. 145-152.
@article{0d585d3aaa6147dd8323580a56fa3b14,
title = "Hearing Screening in the Community",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Adults typically wait 7-10 yr after noticing hearing problems before seeking help, possibly because they are unaware of the extent of their impairment. Hearing screenings, frequently conducted at health fairs, community events, and retirement centers can increase this awareness. To our knowledge, there are no published studies in which testing conditions and outcomes have been examined for multiple {"}typical screening events.{"} PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to report hearing screening outcomes for pure tones and self-report screening tests and to examine their relationship with ambient noise levels in various screening environments. STUDY SAMPLE: One thousand nine hundred fifty-four individuals who completed a hearing screening at one of 191 community-based screening events that took place in the Portland, OR, and Tampa, FL, metro areas. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The data were collected during the recruitment phase of a large multisite study. All participants received a hearing screening that consisted of otoscopy, pure-tone screening, and completion of the Hearing Handicap Inventory-Screening Version (HHI-S). In addition, ambient sound pressure levels were measured just before pure-tone testing. RESULTS: Many more individuals failed the pure-tone screening (n = 1,238) and then failed the HHI-S (n = 796). The percentage of individuals who failed the pure-tone screening increased linearly with age from <20{\%} for ages <45 yr to almost 100{\%} for individuals aged ≥85 yr. On the other hand, the percentage of individuals who failed the HHI-S remained unchanged at approximately 40{\%} for individuals aged ≥55 yr. Ambient noise levels varied considerably across the hearing screening locations. They impacted the pure-tone screen failure rate but not the HHI-S failure rate. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to select screening locations with a quiet space for pure-tone screening, use headphones with good passive attenuation, measure sound levels regularly during hearing screening events, halt testing if ambient noise levels are high, and/or alert individuals to the possibility of a false-positive screening failure. The data substantiate prior findings that the relationship between pure-tone sensitivity and reported hearing loss changes with age. Although it might be possible to develop age-specific HHI-S failure criteria to adjust for this, such an endeavor is not recommended because perceived difficulties are the best predictor of hearing health behaviors. Instead, it is proposed that a public health focus on education about hearing and hearing loss would be more effective.",
author = "Gabrielle Saunders and Frederick, {Melissa T.} and Silverman, {Shien Pei C.} and Tina Penman and Austin Gardner and Chisolm, {Theresa H.} and Escabi, {Celia D.} and Oree, {Preyanca H.} and Westermann, {Laura C.} and Sanchez, {Victoria A.} and Arnold, {Michelle L.}",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3766/jaaa.17103",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "145--152",
journal = "Journal of the American Academy of Audiology",
issn = "1050-0545",
publisher = "American Academy of Audiology",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Hearing Screening in the Community

AU - Saunders, Gabrielle

AU - Frederick, Melissa T.

AU - Silverman, Shien Pei C.

AU - Penman, Tina

AU - Gardner, Austin

AU - Chisolm, Theresa H.

AU - Escabi, Celia D.

AU - Oree, Preyanca H.

AU - Westermann, Laura C.

AU - Sanchez, Victoria A.

AU - Arnold, Michelle L.

PY - 2019/2/1

Y1 - 2019/2/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: Adults typically wait 7-10 yr after noticing hearing problems before seeking help, possibly because they are unaware of the extent of their impairment. Hearing screenings, frequently conducted at health fairs, community events, and retirement centers can increase this awareness. To our knowledge, there are no published studies in which testing conditions and outcomes have been examined for multiple "typical screening events." PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to report hearing screening outcomes for pure tones and self-report screening tests and to examine their relationship with ambient noise levels in various screening environments. STUDY SAMPLE: One thousand nine hundred fifty-four individuals who completed a hearing screening at one of 191 community-based screening events that took place in the Portland, OR, and Tampa, FL, metro areas. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The data were collected during the recruitment phase of a large multisite study. All participants received a hearing screening that consisted of otoscopy, pure-tone screening, and completion of the Hearing Handicap Inventory-Screening Version (HHI-S). In addition, ambient sound pressure levels were measured just before pure-tone testing. RESULTS: Many more individuals failed the pure-tone screening (n = 1,238) and then failed the HHI-S (n = 796). The percentage of individuals who failed the pure-tone screening increased linearly with age from <20% for ages <45 yr to almost 100% for individuals aged ≥85 yr. On the other hand, the percentage of individuals who failed the HHI-S remained unchanged at approximately 40% for individuals aged ≥55 yr. Ambient noise levels varied considerably across the hearing screening locations. They impacted the pure-tone screen failure rate but not the HHI-S failure rate. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to select screening locations with a quiet space for pure-tone screening, use headphones with good passive attenuation, measure sound levels regularly during hearing screening events, halt testing if ambient noise levels are high, and/or alert individuals to the possibility of a false-positive screening failure. The data substantiate prior findings that the relationship between pure-tone sensitivity and reported hearing loss changes with age. Although it might be possible to develop age-specific HHI-S failure criteria to adjust for this, such an endeavor is not recommended because perceived difficulties are the best predictor of hearing health behaviors. Instead, it is proposed that a public health focus on education about hearing and hearing loss would be more effective.

AB - BACKGROUND: Adults typically wait 7-10 yr after noticing hearing problems before seeking help, possibly because they are unaware of the extent of their impairment. Hearing screenings, frequently conducted at health fairs, community events, and retirement centers can increase this awareness. To our knowledge, there are no published studies in which testing conditions and outcomes have been examined for multiple "typical screening events." PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to report hearing screening outcomes for pure tones and self-report screening tests and to examine their relationship with ambient noise levels in various screening environments. STUDY SAMPLE: One thousand nine hundred fifty-four individuals who completed a hearing screening at one of 191 community-based screening events that took place in the Portland, OR, and Tampa, FL, metro areas. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The data were collected during the recruitment phase of a large multisite study. All participants received a hearing screening that consisted of otoscopy, pure-tone screening, and completion of the Hearing Handicap Inventory-Screening Version (HHI-S). In addition, ambient sound pressure levels were measured just before pure-tone testing. RESULTS: Many more individuals failed the pure-tone screening (n = 1,238) and then failed the HHI-S (n = 796). The percentage of individuals who failed the pure-tone screening increased linearly with age from <20% for ages <45 yr to almost 100% for individuals aged ≥85 yr. On the other hand, the percentage of individuals who failed the HHI-S remained unchanged at approximately 40% for individuals aged ≥55 yr. Ambient noise levels varied considerably across the hearing screening locations. They impacted the pure-tone screen failure rate but not the HHI-S failure rate. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to select screening locations with a quiet space for pure-tone screening, use headphones with good passive attenuation, measure sound levels regularly during hearing screening events, halt testing if ambient noise levels are high, and/or alert individuals to the possibility of a false-positive screening failure. The data substantiate prior findings that the relationship between pure-tone sensitivity and reported hearing loss changes with age. Although it might be possible to develop age-specific HHI-S failure criteria to adjust for this, such an endeavor is not recommended because perceived difficulties are the best predictor of hearing health behaviors. Instead, it is proposed that a public health focus on education about hearing and hearing loss would be more effective.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061963777&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85061963777&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3766/jaaa.17103

DO - 10.3766/jaaa.17103

M3 - Article

C2 - 30461404

AN - SCOPUS:85061963777

VL - 30

SP - 145

EP - 152

JO - Journal of the American Academy of Audiology

JF - Journal of the American Academy of Audiology

SN - 1050-0545

IS - 2

ER -