Tools for evaluation of restriction on auditory participation: systematic review of the literature

Souza, Valquíria Conceição; Lemos, Stela Maris Aguiar

doi:10.1590/2317-1782/20152015008

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Systematic Review • CoDAS 27 (4) • Jul-Aug 2015 • https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20152015008 copy

Tools for evaluation of restriction on auditory participation: systematic review of the literature

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

PURPOSE:

To systematically review studies that used questionnaires for the evaluation of restriction on auditory participation in adults and the elderly.

RESEARCH STRATEGY:

Studies from the last five years were selected through a bibliographic collection of data in national and international journals in the following electronic databases: ISI Web of Science and Virtual Health Library - BIREME, which includes the LILACS and MEDLINE databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA:

Studies available fully; published in Portuguese, English, or Spanish; whose participants were adults and/or the elderly and that used questionnaires for the evaluation of restriction on auditory participation.

DATA ANALYSIS:

Initially, the studies were selected based on the reading of titles and abstracts. Then, the articles were fully and the information was included in the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist.

RESULTS:

Three-hundred seventy studies were found in the researched databases; 14 of these studies were excluded because they were found in more than one database. The titles and abstracts of 356 articles were analyzed; 40 of them were selected for full reading, of which 26 articles were finally selected. In the present review, nine instruments were found for the evaluation of restriction on auditory participation.

CONCLUSION:

The most used questionnaires for the assessment of the restriction on auditory participation were the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE), Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults (HHIA), and Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly - Screening (HHIE-S). The use of restriction on auditory participation questionnaires can assist in validating decisions in audiology practices and be useful in the fitting of hearing aids and results of aural rehabilitation.

Questionnaires; Hearing Loss; Hearing; Review; Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences

Author (year)	Country	Study design	Sample	Instrument	Main findings from the study
Campos et al. (2014)³	Brazil	Cross-cut	Experienced hearing aid users: 37 New hearing aid users: 37	HHIA and HHIE	There was no difference in the ability to handle the hearing aid between the new and experienced users of hearing aids. The handling abilities are related to the overall benefit obtained with the use of the device.
Chiossi et al. (2014)⁶	Brazil	Cross-cut	72	HHIE-S	The self-awareness of the hearing impact in daily life became interconnected with the rate of vocal handicap. The quality of life was negatively influenced by the increase in self-awareness regarding the hearing and vocal difficulties in daily life.
Silva et al. (2013)⁷	Brazil	Cross-cut	34	HHIA and HHIE	A reduction of statistical significance was verified in the difficulties caused by the auditory deprivation after the adaptation of the hearing aid.
Guarinello et al. (2013)⁸	Brazil	Longitudinal	29	HHIA	A significant difference was verified among the average score of the evaluation of handicap before and after the adaptation to the hearing aid. There was a decrease in the awareness of the hearing handicap after the use of the hearing prosthetic in the study group.
Fuente et al. (2013)⁹	Chile	Longitudinal	Study group: 48; control group: 48	AIADH	Exposure to solvents is associated to the difficulties in daily life related to the functions of the peripheral and central auditory system.
Tomioka et al. (2013)¹⁰	Japan	Longitudinal	Homens: 781 Women: 950	HHIE-S	The HHIE-S had a high reliability and was specific in the detection of hearing handicaps. The instrument was sensitive for evaluating the impact of hearing handicaps on the quality of life.
Håkan et al. (2013)¹¹	Sweden	Cross-cut	Normal hearing: 20 Hearing loss: 20	HHIA	The employees with hearing handicaps reported good quality of life in relation to the population with normal hearing; however, with less physical performance and higher effort noticed in noise than their peers with normal hearing.
Yamamoto and Ferrari (2012)¹²	Brazil	Retrospective	200	HHIA and HHIE	The time between the start of hearing complaints and the moment when treatment was sought was, on average, 7.6 years. There were weak or inexistent connections between the audiometric data, demographic data, awareness of handicap, and the time to seek treatment.
Magalhães and Iório (2012)¹³	Brazil	Cohort	50	HHIE	The analysis of the HHIE revealed that there was a reduction in the participation restriction in the emotional and social scales in the period post intervention.
Fuente et al. (2012)¹⁴	Chile	Cross-cut	Normal hearing: 20 Hearing loss: 20	AIADH	The version in Spanish of the AIADH presented good criteria reliability. Significant statistical differences for all the answers to the items in the questionnaire were observed between individuals with normal hearing and with hearing deficiency.
Deepthi and Kasthuri (2012)¹⁵	India	Cross-cut	175	HHIE-S	The sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values of the screening tools were compared with the tona averages over 25, 40, and 55 dB of hearing level. The HHIE-S produced a sensitivity of 26.2% and a specificity of 95.9%.
Holanda et al. (2011)¹⁶	Brazil	Cross-cut	43	HDHS	The instrument was considered of easy comprehension and applicability and obtained acceptable reliability and validity. The HDHS needs to be tested in samples that are representative of the working Brazilian population with noise-induced hearing loss.
Magalhães and Iório (2011)¹⁷	Brazil	Retrospective	50	HHIE	The HHIE revealed that the emotional and social scales in the period post-adaptation to the hearing aid were significant, in gender and age group.
Aiello et al. (2011)¹⁸	Brazil	Prospective	Normal hearing: 30 Hearing loss: 113	HHIA	The questions from the questionnaire were considered easy to read. High internal consistency overall and of items. No difference was observed between the points of the testing and retesting.
Menegotto et al. (2011)¹⁹	Brazil	Retrospective	51	HHIA-S and HHIE-S	The instruments revealed low sensitivity and high specificity. There was no statistical significance between the degree of hearing loss and the degree of handicap.
Luz et al. (2011)²⁰	Brazil	Longitudinal	Adult Groups: 27 Elderly Groups: 17	HHIA and HHIE	There was a reduction in the limitation of activities and the handicap in daily life activities in adults and the elderly with the use of hearing aids.
Silverman et al. (2011)²¹	USA	Longitudinal	Elderlies	HHIA and HHIE	There was no statistical significance in the blind monitoring of the implementation of the protocols.
Solheim et al. (2011)²²	Norway	Cross-cut	84	HDHS	There was statistical significance in the association between the limitations of activities and the increase in the degree of hearing loss and handicap related to lower satisfaction with the overall conditions of life.
Araújo et al. (2010)²³	Brazil	Cross-cut	52	HHIA	The subscales of the emotional and social/situational aspects were scored, with 73.1% of handicap presence. The application of the questionnaires revealed itself to be an efficient procedure.
Preminger and Meeks (2010)²⁴	USA	Randomized clinical trial	Hearing loss: 36 Cônjuge: 36	HHIA, HHIE, HHIE-SP	The individual with hearing loss who participated in the program for aural rehabilitation presented an improvement in quality of life, which also happened to their spouse. The main impact of the program was a better understanding of the spouse in the experiences lived by their partner.
Noble et al. (2009)²⁵	Australia	Randomized clinical trial	68	HHIE and HHQ	The groups showed a benefit after the implantation. No difference was observed between patients with unilateral and bilateral implants. The younger cohort presented increases in performance and self-evaluation and abilities.
Calviti and Pereira (2009)²⁶	Brazil	Prospective clinical study	71	HHIE and HHIE-S	The HHIE-S as well as the HHIE score presented a correlation to the auditory threshold. Both instruments presented good sensitivity and average specificity.
Rosis et al. (2009)²⁷	Brazil	Cross-cut	Audiology: 55 Geriatrics/ Gerontology: 23		HHIE-S
Collins et al. (2009)²⁸	USA	Randomized clinical trial	Individual: 329 Group: 330		HHIE
Metselaar et al. (2009)²⁹	The Netherlands	Exploratory	247		HHDI

Instrument	Area	Main thematic lines of the study	Number of inclusive studies
HHIE	Emotional and social	Handicap in the elderly population^{(3,10,12,17-20,24,27,28)}	10
HHIE-S	Emotional and social	Handicap in the elderly population^{(8,13,15,24,25)}	5
HHIE-SP	Emotional and social	Evaluates how the spouse believes the partner reacts to the hearing loss⁽²⁸⁾	1
HHIA	Emotional and social	Handicap in the adult population^{(6,7,9,10,17,18,20,21,23,28)}	10
HHIA-S	Emotional and social	Handicap in the adult population⁽¹⁹⁾	1
HDHS	Perception of speech and non-verbal sounds, interpersonal relationships, angst, and threat to self-image	Handicap in individuals with NIHL⁽¹⁶⁾and evaluation of hearing handicap in the elderly⁽²²⁾	2
AIADH	Intelligibility in noise, intelligibility in silence, sound distinction, sound detection, and sound localization	Handicap^(6,11)	2
HHDI	Emotional, social, and awareness of others	Handicap in users of hearing aids⁽²⁹⁾	1
HHQ	Emotional, social, and handicap	Handicap⁽²⁵⁾	1

Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia Al. Jaú, 684, 7º andar, 01420-002 São Paulo - SP Brasil, Tel./Fax 55 11 - 3873-4211 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revista@codas.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Correspondence address: Valquíria Conceição Souza Rua Johnson, 177, União, Belo Horizonte (MG), Brazil, CEP: 31170-650. E-mail: valcsouza@hotmail.com