4.5 Review

Personally Modifiable Risk Factors Associated with Pediatric Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review

期刊

OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY
卷 151, 期 1, 页码 14-28

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0194599814526560

关键词

hearing loss; child; infant; adolescent; tobacco; noise; risk factor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundPediatric hearing loss is an increasingly recognized problem with significant implications. Increasing our quantitative understanding of potentially modifiable environmental risk factors for hearing loss may form the foundation for prevention and screening programs. ObjectiveTo determine whether specific threshold exposure levels of personally modifiable risk factors for hearing loss have been defined, with the overarching goal of providing actionable guidance for the prevention of pediatric hearing loss. Data SourcesA systematic review was performed. Computerized searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were completed and supplemented with manual searches. Review MethodsInclusion/exclusion criteria were designed to determine specific threshold values of personally modifiable risk factors on hearing loss in the pediatric population. Searches and data extraction were performed by independent reviewers. ResultsThere were 38 criterion-meeting studies, including a total of 50,651 subjects. Threshold noise exposures significantly associated with hearing loss in youth included: (1) more than 4 hours per week or more than 5 years of personal headphone usage, (2) more than 4 visits per month to a discotheque, and (3) working on a mechanized farm. Quantified tobacco levels of concern included any level of in utero smoke exposure as well as secondhand exposure sufficient to elevate serum cotinine. ConclusionsSpecific thresholds analyses are limited. Future studies would ideally focus on stratifying risk according to clearly defined levels of exposure, in order to provide actionable guidance for children and families.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据