Impact of Hearing Loss and Universal Face Masking in the COVID-19 Era.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ten Hulzen RD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7396946 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Impact of Hearing Loss and Universal Face Masking in the COVID-19 Era.
Ten Hulzen Richard D RD Fabry David A DA
Mayo Clinic proceedings 20200803 10
Similar Datasets
Project description:Objectives/hypothesisTo determine the prevalence and associated risk factors of voice disorders in healthcare workers of high-risk hospital care units during the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.Study designCross-sectional study.MethodsQuestionnaire survey to healthcare personnel of COVID-19 high-risk hospital units was conducted, regarding demographic data, clinical activity, the pattern of usage of personal protective equipment, medical and vocal history, vocal symptoms, and Spanish validated Voice Handicap Index (VHI)-10 questionnaire.ResultsA total of 221 healthcare workers answered the survey. Nearly 33% of them reported having trouble with their voice during the last month, and 26.24% had an abnormal score in the Spanish validated VHI-10 questionnaire. The mean VHI-10 score was 7.92 (95% confidence interval 6.98-8.85). The number of working hours, the number of hours of mask daily use, simultaneous surgical and self-filtering mask use, and working in intermediate or intensive care units were independent variables significantly associated with a higher VHI-10 score.ConclusionsHealthcare workers of high-risk hospital care units during the universal masking COVID-19 pandemic are at risk of voice disorders.Level of evidence3 Laryngoscope, 131:E1227-E1233, 2021.
| S-EPMC7675517 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo conduct a scoping review on etiologic investigation of prelingual hearing loss among children <2 years of age in the era of universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS).Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases.Review methodsWe searched for articles published from January 1, 1998, to February 19, 2020. We reviewed studies that (1) included children identified with either congenital or delayed-onset hearing loss before 2 years of age among cohorts who had undergone UNHS and (2) investigated ≥1 etiologies of hearing loss. We defined hearing loss as congenital when confirmed after UNHS failure and as delayed onset when diagnosed after ≥1 assessments with normal hearing.ResultsAmong 2069 unique citations, 115 studies met criteria for full-text assessment, and 20 met our inclusion criteria. Six studies tested children diagnosed with hearing loss for genetic etiology, 9 for congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, and 5 for both. Among 1787 children with congenital hearing loss and etiologic investigation, 933 (52.2%) were tested for genetic mutations and 1021 (57.1%) for congenital CMV infection. The proportion of congenital hearing loss cases attributable to genetic etiology ranged between 7.7% and 83.3% and to congenital CMV infection between 0.0% and 32.0%.ConclusionData are lacking on the identification and etiology of delayed-onset hearing loss in children <2 years of age in the UNHS era. The proportion of congenital hearing loss cases attributable to genetic etiologies and congenital CMV infection appears to vary widely.
| S-EPMC7541667 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn February 2022, Massachusetts rescinded a statewide universal masking policy in public schools, and many Massachusetts school districts lifted masking requirements during the subsequent weeks. In the greater Boston area, only two school districts - the Boston and neighboring Chelsea districts - sustained masking requirements through June 2022. The staggered lifting of masking requirements provided an opportunity to examine the effect of universal masking policies on the incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) in schools.MethodsWe used a difference-in-differences analysis for staggered policy implementation to compare the incidence of Covid-19 among students and staff in school districts in the greater Boston area that lifted masking requirements with the incidence in districts that sustained masking requirements during the 2021-2022 school year. Characteristics of the school districts were also compared.ResultsBefore the statewide masking policy was rescinded, trends in the incidence of Covid-19 were similar across school districts. During the 15 weeks after the statewide masking policy was rescinded, the lifting of masking requirements was associated with an additional 44.9 cases per 1000 students and staff (95% confidence interval, 32.6 to 57.1), which corresponded to an estimated 11,901 cases and to 29.4% of the cases in all districts during that time. Districts that chose to sustain masking requirements longer tended to have school buildings that were older and in worse condition and to have more students per classroom than districts that chose to lift masking requirements earlier. In addition, these districts had higher percentages of low-income students, students with disabilities, and students who were English-language learners, as well as higher percentages of Black and Latinx students and staff. Our results support universal masking as an important strategy for reducing Covid-19 incidence in schools and loss of in-person school days. As such, we believe that universal masking may be especially useful for mitigating effects of structural racism in schools, including potential deepening of educational inequities.ConclusionsAmong school districts in the greater Boston area, the lifting of masking requirements was associated with an additional 44.9 Covid-19 cases per 1000 students and staff during the 15 weeks after the statewide masking policy was rescinded.
| S-EPMC9743802 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has caused unexpected disruptions in patient care, including adherence to the Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) 1-3-6 guidelines. These guidelines mandate newborn hearing screening (NHS) by 1 month of age, diagnosis of hearing loss (HL) by 3 months, and referral to Early Intervention by 6 months. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on EHDI benchmarks in a major US city to help clinicians address current needs and prepare for future disruptive events.MethodsRetrospective review was performed for all patients who did not pass NHS at two tertiary care centers between March 2018 and March 2022. Patients were divided into three cohorts based on the periods of time before, during, and after the COVID-19 Massachusetts State of Emergency (SOE). Demographics, medical history, NHS results, Auditory Brainstem Response results, and hearing aid (HA) intervention data were collected. Two-sampled independent t-tests and analysis of variance were used to compute rate and time outcomes.Results30,773 newborns underwent NHS and 678 failed NHS. There was no difference in 1-month benchmark NHS rates, increased 3-month benchmark HL diagnosis rate post-SOE COVID (91.7%; p = 0.002), and increased 6-month benchmark HA intervention rate post-SOE COVID compared to pre-COVID (88.9% vs. 44.4%; p = 0.027). Mean time to NHS was lower during SOE COVID compared to pre-COVID (1.9 days vs. 2.0 days; p = 0.038) and mean time to HL diagnosis was higher during SOE COVID (47.5 days; p < 0.001). Lost to follow-up (LTF) rate at HL diagnosis decreased post-SOE (4.8%; p = 0.008).ConclusionNo differences in EHDI 1-3-6 benchmark rates between pre-COVID and SOE COVID patients were observed. However, increased 3-month benchmark HL diagnosis and 6-month benchmark HA intervention rates and a decreased LTF rate at 3-month benchmark HL diagnosis were observed post-SOE COVID.
| S-EPMC10181868 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Universal masking for healthcare workers and patients in hospitals was adopted to combat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with compliance rates of 100% and 75.9%, respectively. Zero rates of nosocomial influenza A, influenza B, and respiratory syncytial virus infection were achieved from February to April 2020, which was significantly lower than the corresponding months in 2017-2019.
| S-EPMC7468684 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9730911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveHearing loss is an important public health problem. Its causes vary, including infections, noise, and aging. The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic occurred in April 2020 in Japan. During the pandemic, people were urged to stay at home and drastically changed their lifestyles. This study aimed to examine hearing loss before and during the pandemic. The prevalence during the pandemic after April 2020 was compared for the period in 2019. Study subjects were those who received health checkups in both periods. Hearing loss was defined as a hearing threshold of > 30 dB at 1 kHz and > 40 dB at 4 kHz in either ear using pure-tone audiometry.ResultsA total of 2367 persons presented in both 2019 and 2020. The overall rates of hearing loss were 9.5% and 13.2% before and after the pandemic, respectively. After controlling for age, sex, current smoking, regular exercise and alcohol consumption, the rate of hearing loss showed a significant increase in 2020 (p = < 0.0001). With age stratification, an increase was observed in the participants aged < 40 years (1.3% vs. 3.1%, p < 0.001) and 40-59 years (7.2% vs. 12.6%, p < 0.001). Further studies are needed to confirm the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hearing loss.
| S-EPMC9235250 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceSpontaneous adverse reaction reports of sudden hearing loss have been observed, and a population-based cohort study conducted in Israel showed an increase in the incidence of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) following vaccination with messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech). However, in this setting, the possibility of confounding remained.ObjectiveTo assess a potential association between COVID-19 vaccinations and SSNHL.Design, setting, and participantsThis register-based country-wide retrospective cohort study of 5.5 million Finnish residents was conducted from January 1, 2019, to April 20, 2022, and included all individuals who were identified from the population information system who were alive or born during the study period except individuals who had SSNHL during 2015 to 2018 according to specialized care derived diagnosis codes for SSNHL (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision [ICD-10] code H91.2) as a primary or secondary diagnosis.ExposuresThe a priori primary risk period was 0 to 54 days following each COVID-19 vaccination. The risk periods for different vaccine doses did not overlap so that a later vaccine exposure ended the previous risk period. The secondary risk period was from 55 days following each COVID-19 vaccination until a subsequent COVID-19 vaccination. A secondary analysis included a risk time from 0 to 54 days following a positive polymerase chain reaction test result for SARS-CoV-2.Main outcomes and measuresThe incidences of SSNHL following COVID-19 vaccination were compared with the incidences before the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland. The Poisson regression model included calendar time, age, sex, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, other chronic diseases, and the number of visits in primary health care.ResultsFor the 5.5 million Finnish residents included in the study, the comparison time comprised 6.5 million person-years, the primary risk time of 1.7 million person-years, and the secondary risk time of 2.1 million person-years. Before the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland, 18.7/100 000 people received a diagnosis of SSNHL annually. The study data suggested no increased risk for SSNHL following any COVID-19 vaccination. In particular, adjusted incidence rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals for the BNT162b2 vaccine's 3 doses were 0.8 (95% CI, 0.6-1.0), 0.9 (95% CI, 0.6-1.2), and 1.0 (95% CI, 0.7-1.4), respectively. There was no association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and an increased incidence of SSNHL.Conclusions and relevanceThe results of this cohort study show no evidence of an increased risk of SSNHL following COVID-19 vaccination. The study accounted for previous disease and other potential confounding factors. These results are based on diagnosis codes in specialized care but still need to be verified in settings that are capable of evaluating the degree of hearing loss.
| S-EPMC9857204 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact and exposure of COVID-19 on parent mental health (e.g., depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), for parents of children with hearing loss. The survey was distributed via an electronic survey to families subscribed to a pediatric program listserv as part of a university medical center. Fifty-five percent of parents reported elevated symptoms of anxiety, while 16% scored in the clinically significant range for depression. In addition, 20% of parents reported elevated symptoms of PTSD. Liner regressions found that impact of COVID-19 predicted anxiety symptoms, while both impact and exposure predicted depression and PTSD symptoms. In addition, both impact and exposure predicted COVID related parental distress. Exposure and impact of COVID-19 has had negative consequences on parents of children with hearing loss. Although exposure influenced parental mental health, impact uniquely affected depression and PTSD. Results highlight the need for mental health screening, as well implementation of psychological interventions using telehealth or in-person consultations. Future work should focus on post-pandemic challenges, including long-term psychological functioning due to the established relationship between parental mental health and pediatric outcomes.
| S-EPMC10153707 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveIntroduce novel methods and materials to limit microdroplet spread when performing transnasal aerosol generating procedures in the COVID-19 era.MethodsPrototypes of a negative pressure face shield (NPFS) were tested then used clinically to create a suction-clearing negative pressure microenvironment with controlled access to the nose and mouth. Air pressure measurements within prototypes were followed by prospective evaluation of 30 consecutive patients treated with the device assessed through questionnaires and monitoring oximetry.ResultsThe NPFS is a transparent acrylic barrier with two anterior instrumentation ports and a side port to which continuous suction is applied. It is positioned on a stand and employs a disposable antimicrobial wrap to secure an enclosure around the head. This assembly was successfully used to complete transnasal laryngoscopy in all 30 patients studied. Tolerance of the design was excellent, with postprocedure questionnaire identifying no shortness of breath (27/30), no claustrophobia (27/30), no pain (29/30), and no significant changes in pulse oximetry.ConclusionDiagnostic laryngoscopy was successfully performed in a negative pressure microenvironment created to limit dispersion of aerosols. Further application of the NPFS device is targeted for use with transnasal laryngeal laser and biopsy procedures to be followed by additional modification to enable intranasal and intraoral procedures in a similar protected environment.Level of evidenceLevel 2b (Cohort Study).
| S-EPMC7444791 | biostudies-literature