Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T03:24:56.414Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Validation of self-reported hearing loss using television volume

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 September 2010

B Ranganathan*
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Sunderland Royal Hospital, UK
P Counter
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Cumberland Infirmary, Carlisle, UK
I Johnson
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
*
Address for correspondence: Mr B Ranganathan, ENT Registrar, William Harvey Hospital, Ashford TN24 0LZ, UK E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Objective:

To assess the diagnostic utility of using television volume as a marker for hearing loss.

Study design:

Prospective study using a self-administered questionnaire.

Setting:

ENT and audiology out-patient departments in the north of England.

Participants:

One hundred and seventeen patients with a history of hearing loss, undergoing pure tone audiometry for the first time.

Main outcome measures:

sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy, and positive and negative predictive value of television volume as a marker of hearing loss.

Results:

The data indicated that if the patient (or their partner or parent) reported viewing television with an increased volume, then there was a 68 per cent chance of the patient having a hearing loss of 25 dB or more. Patients reporting increased television volume had a mean hearing loss of 35 dB. Increased television volume had a sensitivity of 81 per cent and a specificity of 52 per cent as a predictor of hearing loss. Patients who increased their television volume to watch news programmes had an average hearing loss of 41 dB; increased television volume for news programmes had a sensitivity of 75 per cent and a specificity of 71 per cent as a predictor of hearing loss.

Conclusions:

Television volume is a useful marker of hearing loss in situations where audiometry is unavailable, for instance in a primary care setting. However, it is not a very specific test.

Type
Main Articles
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Presented as a poster at the North of England Otolaryngology Society Meeting, 12 September 2008, Sunderland, UK, and orally at the Otolaryngological Research Society Meeting, 2 April 2009, Nottingham, UK.

References

1 Facts and Figures on Deafness and Tinnitus. The Royal National Institute for Deaf People. In: http://www.rnid.org.uk/VirtualContent/101697/Facts_and_figures_on_deafness_and_tinnitus_March_2006.pdf [20 May 2008]Google Scholar
2 Hearing loss increases but UK patients stay silent (cited 2003 March 18) http://www.santecommunications.net/pdf_files/results180303.pdf [20 May 2008]Google Scholar
3 British Society of Audiology. Acoustic, Audiometric test methods. Basic pure tone and air conduction threshold audiometry. BS EN ISO 8253-1. March 2004. (ref-www.thebsa.org.uk)Google Scholar
4 Catlin, FI. Guide for the evaluation of hearing handicap. American Academy of Otolaryngology Committee on Hearing and Equilibrium. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1979;12:655–63CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5 Ventry, IM, Weinstein, BE. The hearing handicap inventory for the elderly: a new tool. Ear Hear 1982;3:128–34CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6 Nondahl, DM, Cruickshanks, KJ, Wiley, TL, Tweed, TS, Klein, R, Klein, BE. Accuracy of self-reported hearing loss. Audiology 1998;37:295301CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7 Clark, K, Sowers, M, Wallace, RB, Anderson, C. The accuracy of self-reported hearing loss in women aged 60-85 years. Am J Epidemiol 1991;134:704–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed