Haggard R S, Primus M A
University of Wyoming, Laramie, USA.
Am J Audiol. 1999 Dec;8(2):83-92. doi: 10.1044/1059-0889(1999/014).
Hearing loss classification scales are commonly used to explain audiometric findings to the parents of children with hearing loss. These scales, however, have little or no scientific basis. In this study, filtered auditory recordings were used to simulate three levels of childhood hearing loss, as defined by the commonly used terms--slight, mild, and moderate. Parents, after listening to each simulation, were asked to provide their impressions. Results demonstrated that: parents defined each simulated loss with terminology representing substantially greater magnitude than the commonly used terms; parents anticipated significantly greater difficulty (p < .05) for each of nine hearing-related tasks when hearing loss was defined by the simulations rather than the classification terms; and parents selected more aggressive management procedures in response to the simulations than to the classification terms. In an additional task, parents estimated degree of simulated hearing loss with percentage values, indicating about 40% greater hearing loss for the three levels of loss compared to values produced by the conventional American Academy of Otolaryngology-American Council of Otolaryngology (1979) percentage formula. The findings indicate that standard methods of classifying hearing loss in audiologic and medical clinics may undermine parents' understanding of their child's hearing loss, causing them to underestimate substantially the magnitude of the loss.
听力损失分类量表通常用于向听力损失儿童的家长解释听力测定结果。然而,这些量表几乎没有科学依据。在本研究中,使用经过滤波的听觉录音来模拟常用术语所定义的三个儿童听力损失水平,即轻度、中度和重度。家长在听完每次模拟后,被要求给出他们的印象。结果表明:家长用比常用术语所代表的程度大得多的术语来定义每次模拟的听力损失;当听力损失由模拟定义而非分类术语定义时,家长预计九项听力相关任务中的每一项都会有显著更大的困难(p < 0.05);并且家长针对模拟情况选择的管理程序比针对分类术语时更积极。在另一项任务中,家长用百分比值估计模拟听力损失的程度,表明与美国耳鼻咽喉头颈外科学会 - 美国耳鼻咽喉头颈外科学会(1979)传统百分比公式得出的值相比,这三个损失水平的听力损失大约高40%。研究结果表明,听力和医学诊所中听力损失分类的标准方法可能会削弱家长对其孩子听力损失的理解,导致他们大幅低估损失的程度。