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: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Automated Technology for Improving Ototoxicity Monitoring in VA Oncology Patients.
    Author: Konrad-Martin D, O'Connell Bennett K, Garinis A, McMillan GP.
    Journal: Am J Audiol; 2021 Oct 11; 30(3S):870-886. PubMed ID: 34582263.
    Abstract:
    Purpose Determine the efficacy of ototoxicity monitoring (OM) administered as automated protocols with the Oto-ID mobile audiometer (automated ototoxicity monitoring [A-OM]), compared with usual care (UC) OM in cancer patients receiving cisplatin. Method Participants were patients (n = 46, mean age 64.7 years; range: 30-78 years) receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy at the Department of Veterans Affairs Portland Health Care System. A randomized controlled trial contrasted A-OM and UC at up to three program evaluations (PEs) conducted by the study audiologist who was blinded to arm through PE1. PE1 occurred before randomization or oncology treatment; PE2 and PE3 occurred during and/or after treatment at 35 and 365 days postrandomization. The A-OM group (n = 24) used Oto-ID to screen their hearing before each cisplatin dose. Oto-ID results were sent to the study audiologist for interpretation, follow-up, and care coordination. The UC group (n = 22) received a consult for OM services through the audiology clinic. Outcomes included hearing shift near each patient's high-frequency hearing limit, revised hearing-handicap inventory score, and survival time from the start of treatment. Adherence to OM protocols, patients' use of aural rehabilitation services, and oncologists' treatment decisions were also examined. Results Ototoxicity was identified at a high overall rate (46% and 76% at 35 and 365 days, respectively, postrandomization). Adherence to monitoring prior to each cisplatin dose was 83.3% for those randomized to A-OM compared with 4.5% for UC. Randomization to A-OM was not associated with reduced ototoxic hearing shifts or self-reported hearing handicap relative to UC; neither did it compromise participants' survival. Half of participants in each arm accessed aural rehabilitation services. One in each arm had a documented ototoxicity-related cisplatin dose reduction. Conclusions Auditory impairment was an actionable concern for the participants and their oncology providers. A dedicated surveillance program using the Oto-ID's automated protocols improved adherence to OM recommendations over a traditional UC service delivery model. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16649602.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]