Michael R. Tuley

Quality-of-Life Changes and Hearing Impairment: A Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE To assess whether hearing aids improve the quality of life of elderly persons with hearing loss. SETTING Primary care clinics at a Bureau of Veterans Affairs hospital. PATIENTS One hundred and ninety-four elderly veterans who were identified as being hearing impaired from a screening survey involving 771 consecutive clinic patients. Of the original 194, 188 (97%) completed the trial. INTERVENTION Subjects were randomly assigned to either receive a hearing aid (n = 95) or join a waiting list (n = 99). MAIN ENDPOINTS: A comprehensive battery of disease-specific and generic quality-of-life measures were administered at baseline, 6 weeks, and 4 months. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Persons assigned to the two groups were similar in age, ethnicity, education, marital status, occupation, and comorbid diseases. At baseline, 82% of subjects reported adverse effects on quality of life due to hearing impairment, and 24% were depressed. At follow-up, a significant change in score improvements for social and emotional function (34.0; 95% CI, 27.3 to 40.8; P less than 0.0001), communication function (24.2; CI, 17.2 to 31.2; P less than 0.0001), cognitive function (0.28; CI, 0.08 to 0.48; P = 0.008), and depression (0.80; CI, 0.09 to 1.51; P = 0.03) was seen in subjects who received hearing aids compared with those assigned to the waiting list. Six drop-outs (three per group), no crossovers, and no significant changes in cointerventions were seen. Average, self-reported, daily aid use in the hearing aid group was 8 hours. CONCLUSION Hearing loss is associated with important adverse effects on the quality of life of elderly persons, effects which are reversible with hearing aids.

Association Between Hearing Impairment and the Quality of Life of Elderly Individuals

Hearing impairment is one of the most common chronic health problems of elderly Americans. Although adverse effects on quality of life are thought to be considerable, they have not been rigorously evaluated. This study was designed to identify the types and extent of dysfunction experienced by elderly individuals with hearing loss, and to define the most appropriate measures for assessing this dysfunction. Elderly male veterans attending a primary care clinic were screened for hearing loss and had their quality of life assessed with a comprehensive battery of disease‐specific and generic measures. Of 472 people who had their hearing tested, 106 had hearing loss. Hearing loss was associated with significant emotional (P = .0001), social (P = .0001), and communication (P = .02) dysfunction. Most individuals (66%) perceived these dysfunctions as severe handicaps even though audiologic loss revealed only mild to moderate impairment (pure tone average loss, 27–55 dB). Adverse effects were best detected with disease‐specific rather than generic functional status measures. We conclude that hearing impairment is associated with important adverse effects on the quality of life of elderly individuals, and that these effects are perceived as severe handicaps even by individuals with only mild to moderate degrees of hearing loss.

Medical Treatment Preferences of Nursing Home Residents: Relationship to Function and Concordance with Surrogate Decision-Makers

Objective: To describe treatment preferences of nursing home residents, concordance with decisions by self‐selected proxies and to establish the relationship of sociodemographic and functional measures to decisions.

Correlates of successful hearing aid use in older adults

Objective To evaluate whether age, education, functional handicap, degree of hearing loss, amount of hearing and speech recognition gain achieved with hearing aid, locus of control, visual acuity, manual dexterity, number of co-morbid diseases, and number of medications predict which elderly individuals with hearing loss are likely to benefit from hearing aids. Design A logistic regression prediction model for hearing aid benefit was developed on a training set of 89 individuals and verified in a test set of 87 individuals. Hearing aid success was assessed 4 mo after hearing aid administration. It was defined by assessing hearing aid satisfaction, functional handicap change post-hearing aid, and number of hours of weekly hearing aid use. Setting All patients were elderly male veterans from the Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital. There were no differences in demographic or clinical characteristics in training versus test set individuals. Results Several variables, including baseline perceived functional handicap, education, number of medications, and age correlated with individual success measures. However, no variables consistently correlated with all success measures. The accuracy of prediction rules for success utilizing the variables ranged from 75 to 88% in the training set, and 54 to 84% in the test set. Conclusion Although certain baseline factors were statistically significantly related to individual measures of successful hearing aid use, no factors were good enough to consistently differentiate successful from unsuccessful hearing aid candidates. (Ear Hear 13 2:108-113)

Survival among Mexican-Americans, non-Hispanic whites, and African-Americans with end-stage renal disease: the emergence of a minority pattern of increased incidence and prolonged survival.

We undertook this study to determine whether there is a significant difference in survival on treatment for end-stage renal disease between Mexican-Americans, non-Hispanic whites, and African-Americans. A database covering the years 1975 to 1986 was obtained from the Texas Kidney Health Program. Eight-eight percent to 90% of patients starting renal replacement therapy in Texas were included in this database. The patients were followed until death, for 3 years after successful transplantation, or until they were lost to follow-up. Life table analysis as well as age-adjusted analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model were performed comparing ethnic/racial groups, disease etiology, and treatment type. In life-table analyses, African-Americans and Mexican-Americans had a survival advantage in most age, disease, and treatment groups. With age adjustment, this survival advantage remained for all etiologies combined, for diabetes and hypertension cases, and for patients receiving hemodialysis in a center. Multivariate analysis revealed a persistent survival advantage for Mexican-Americans independent of traditional predictor variables, such as age, disease etiology, treatment type, or size of the center in which they received treatment. In this same analysis, African-Americans showed an advantage in the older age groups. Both African-Americans and Mexican-Americans on renal replacement therapy have an increased survival advantage compared with non-Hispanic whites. Given the additional burden of increased incidence of end-stage renal disease in these groups, the cost of renal replacement therapy for these minorities is disproportionately high. Further study should be aimed at elucidation of the mechanisms by which minorities achieve their survival advantage.

Methods for screening for hearing loss in older adults.

Two common screening tools for detecting hearing loss, the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly-Screening Version (HHIE-S) and Audioscope, are compared. One hundred eighty-five consecutive patients over age 60 at a primary care clinic received both screening tests followed by pure tone audiometry. Three criteria for hearing loss were considered: Speech Frequency Pure Tone Average ≥ 25 dB; High Frequency Pure Tone Average ≥: 25 dB; and Ventry and Weinsteins criteria of a 40 dB loss at 1.0 or 2.0 kHz. Ranges of respective operating characteristics for the Audioscope versus the HHIE-S were: sensitivities 0.64 to 0.96 versus 0.29 to 0.63; specificities 0.80 to 0.91 versus 0.75 to 0.93; and positive likelihood ratios 4.86 to 7.52 versus 2.42 to 4.27. Most patients preferred screening with the Audioscope (60%) over the HHIE-S (13%). The Audioscope is preferred by patients, and outperforms the HHIE-S using a variety of reference standard definitions.

Anterior ischemic optic neuropathy is not associated with carotid artery atherosclerosis.

Background and Purpose: The relation between anterior ischemic optic neuropathy and carotid artery atherosclerotic disease is unclear. We studied patients with anterior ischemic optic neuropathy to determine if they had an increased occurrence of carotid artery stenosis. Methods: Fifteen consecutive patients with anterior ischemic optic neuropathy were evaluated prospectively for cervical carotid artery stenosis and compared with 30 age‐ and sex‐matched asymptomatic patients and also with 11 age‐ and sex‐matched patients experiencing transient monocular blindness. Results: There was no difference in the mean stenosis of the internal carotid artery between patients with anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (mean carotid stenosis, 19%) and asymptomatic patients (mean carotid stenosis, 9%; p >0.05), whereas patients with transient monocular blindness had significantly more stenosis (mean, 77%) in the cervical carotid arteries than both control subjects (p < 0.0001) and patients with anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (p < 0.0001). There was also no difference in the percentage of patients with stenosis ≥30% in anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (two of 15) and asymptomatic patients (five of 30), whereas 10 of 11 patients with transient monocular blindness had stenoses ≥30%, significantly more than patients with anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (p < 0.0001) and asymptomatic patients (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Anterior ischemic optic neuropathy is not a marker for atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis. The pathogenesis of nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy does not involve carotid artery stenosis in most patients. (Stroke 1993;24:539‐542)

Discriminating and responsiveness abilities of two hearing handicap scales.

Several scales exist for screening handicap and assessing rehabilitation in elderly individuals with hearing loss. There are few comparative studies, however, to suggest which scales perform best. Using receiver-operating curves and responsiveness indices, we examined the relative discriminating ability and sensitivity to detect change of four scales: a long and short version of the Hearing Handicap Inventory in the Elderly (HHIE-L, HHIE-S), and a long and short version of the Revised Quantified Denver Scale of Communication Function (RQDS-L, RQDS-S). All scales were administered to 137 elderly veterans with hearing loss and 101 elderly veterans without hearing loss. Follow-up testing to determine relative ability to detect change was assessed in hearing impaired individuals only after they had used a hearing aid for 4 months. Discriminative accuracy for correctly identifying individuals with hearing loss were: HHIE-L 78%, HHIE-S 79%, RQDS-L 73%, and RQDS-S 74%. Overall differences between the HHIE-S and the RQDS-S were not statistically significant (p = 0.06). True positive results were greater with the HHIE-S compared to the RQDS-S (p = 0.03). Responsiveness indices were: HHIE-L 1.78, HHIE-S 1.86, RQDS-L 1.04, and RQDS-S 1.07. Differences between the HHIE-S and the RQDS-S were statistically significant (p less than 0.05). We conclude short versions of the HHIE and RQDS are as accurate and sensitive for detecting change as long versions, and the HHIE-S is a superior versatile instrument for screening and assessing rehabilitation in elderly individuals with hearing impairment.

A critical reevaluation of the Quantified Denver Scale of Communication Function

The Quantified Denver Scale of Communication Function (QDS) is a 25 item questionnaire developed to measure communication difficulties in adults with hearing impairment. This study reassessed the constructs, reliability, and validity of the scale, and developed a 5 item short version. The QDS was administered to 238 elderly individuals (137 with and 101 without hearing loss). Factor analysis using this sample identified only two subscale constructs as opposed to four originally proposed constructs. The validity of the new revised two-construct model was verified by four independent investigators who labeled the two constructs as measuring self isolation and communication function. The internal reliability of the revised scale was 0.97 and of both construct subscales was 0.95. Overall test-retest reliability was 0.73. Validity examined by comparing the revised scale with another well-known handicap measure, the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly, was adequate: overall scale correlations were 0.73 and subscale correlations ranged from 0.64 to 0.72. The accuracy of the revised QDS for discriminating between individuals with and without hearing loss was 73%. Stepwise discriminant analysis generated a 5 item short version scale which contained two questions from the long communication subscale and three from the long self-isolation subscale. The accuracy of the short QDS was 74%. We conclude that the revised QDS is a reliable and valid scale that can be used to assess self isolation and communication function in elderly individuals with hearing loss, and that a new 5 item short version performs as well as the original 25 item scale.

Appendicitis: Higher risk in Mexican Americans?

OBJECTIVES Mexican Americans (MAs), compared to white non-Hispanics (WNHs), have higher rates of biliary disease, noninsulin dependent diabetes, and endstage renal disease but lower rates of lung cancer, hip fractures, and mortality from coronary heart disease. Relatively little research has been done to identify other ethnic differences in disease incidence. We used surgical procedure rates to confirm known ethnic differences and to explore our clinical suspicion that MAs have higher rates of appendectomy than WNHs. METHODS We used a registry of surgical procedures at two teaching hospitals in South Texas to calculate proportional operation ratios (PORs) for MAs versus WNHs. These two hospitals are the primary source of acute hospital care for the indigent in the area. The POR is arithmetically identical to proportional incidence and mortality ratios. RESULTS MAs underwent appendectomy proportionally more often than WNHs at both hospitals (POR = 1.41 and 1.75, p < 0.0001). Other significant PORs were consistent with known ethnic disease differences in biliary tract operations, vascular access for chronic hemodialysis, lung cancer, and coronary artery bypass. CONCLUSIONS These findings support the hypothesis that MAs may undergo appendectomy more often than WNHs and so may be at higher risk of appendicitis.