These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The ages of suspicion, diagnosis, amplification, and intervention in deaf children.
    Author: Jafari Z, Malayeri S, Ashayeri H.
    Journal: Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2007 Jan; 71(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 16997387.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: The present study sought to determine the average ages of suspicion, diagnosis, and amplification of profound hearing loss and intervention in deaf children and to compare at-risk and not-at-risk children based on the studied ages. METHODS: This study was conducted on 86 children under 6 years of age with profound bilateral hearing loss in Newsha Aural Rehabilitation Center in Tehran from July to December 2005. Data were gathered through the completion of a questionnaire by the children's parents, and the children's medical and rehabilitative records were utilized in order to determine the kind and degree of hearing loss. RESULTS: The mean ages of suspicion, diagnosis, amplification, and intervention were 12.6+/-8.9, 15.2+/-9.3, 20.5+/-11.1, and 22.3+/-11.6 months, respectively; there being statistically significant differences between them. 47.7% of the children were in the high-risk group, and statistically there were no significant differences between the at-risk and not-at-risk children in the studied ages. Of all the neonatal diseases investigated, hyperbilirubinemia was the most frequent (40.7%), and there were also four cases of meningitis and six cases of measles. In terms of consanguinity, mating of first cousins was 41.9% and mating of second cousins and farther familial relationships was 14%. After suspecting hearing loss in their children, the parents had visited physicians (57%), audiologists (37.2%), speech therapists (2.3%), or other specialists (3.5%) for the first time. The economic circumstances of the families had a significant bearing on the average ages of suspicion, diagnosis, amplification, and intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the remarkable improvement in the average ages of suspicion, diagnosis, amplification, and intervention in comparison with those reported in a previous study carried out in Iran (2002), there is still noticeable difference between these ages and those suggested by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]