Premium
Hearing Status and Aural Rehabilitative Profile of 878 Patients With Sporadic Vestibular Schwannoma
Author(s) -
Macielak Robert J.,
Marinelli John P.,
Spear Samuel A.,
HahsVaughn Debbie L.,
Link Michael J.,
Nye Chad,
Carlson Matthew L.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
the laryngoscope
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.181
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1531-4995
pISSN - 0023-852X
DOI - 10.1002/lary.29315
Subject(s) - medicine , schwannoma , audiology , bone conduction , hearing aid , vestibular system , absolute threshold of hearing , neuroma , rehabilitation , acoustic neuroma , cross sectional study , hearing loss , physical therapy , surgery , pathology
Objectives/Hypothesis To examine the hearing status and aural rehabilitative profile in a national cohort of patients with sporadic vestibular schwannoma (VS). Study Design Cross‐sectional survey Methods A cross‐sectional survey of Acoustic Neuroma Association members diagnosed with sporadic VS was performed from February 2017 through January 2019. Self‐reported results were used to determine the aural rehabilitative profile of respondents. Results Among survey respondents, 62.2% (546/878) were not using any hearing‐assistive device at time of survey. For the 37.8% (332/878) that were utilizing hearing‐assistive devices, 32.8% (109/332) reported using a behind‐the‐ear hearing aid, 23.8% (79/332) used a contralateral routing of signal (CROS) hearing aid, and 21.7% (72/332) used a bone conduction device. Notably, 41.9% (278/663) of patients who previously underwent tumor treatment reported utilizing a hearing rehabilitation device at some point during VS management compared to 27.0% (58/215) of those undergoing observation with serial imaging ( P < .001). Of 275 patients with functional hearing in the ipsilateral ear, 26.5% (73/275) reported having used at least one type of hearing device; 24.0% (66/275) reported use of a conventional hearing aid, 0.7% (2/275) a CROS aid, and 0.4% (1/275) a bone conduction device. Among respondents reporting ipsilateral nonfunctional hearing, 44.9% (258/575) reported having used at least one type of hearing device; 13.0% (75/575) a CROS aid, and 12.3% (71/575) a bone conduction device. Conclusions Even among a cohort with presumably elevated literacy surrounding hearing rehabilitation options, few patients with a history of unilateral vestibular schwannoma ultimately use hearing assistive devices long‐term, suggesting that most patients sufficiently adjust to unilateral hearing loss or are unsatisfied with the benefits achieved with current device options. Level of Evidence 4 Laryngoscope , 131:1378–1381, 2021