Method: Fifteen hearing mothers of children with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss were interviewed. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and a grounded theory approach was used to inductively analyze parental stress in mothers of D/HH children. Theory generation was achieved through triangulation of data sources and systematic organization of data into codes. The coding process identified salient themes that were constantly cross-checked and compared across data to further develop categories, properties, and tentative hypotheses.
Results: In general, two main themes emerged from the interviews: the contextual stressors and stress-reducing resources. The contextual stressors were labeled as distress over audiology-related needs, pressure to acquire new knowledge and skills, apprehension about the child's future, and demoralizing negative social attitudes. The stress-reducing resources that moderated parenting stress were identified to be the child's progress, mother's characteristics, professional support, and social support. The interaction between the identified stressors and adjustment process uncovered a central theme termed maternal coherence.
Conclusion: The substantive theory suggests that mothers of D/HH children can effectively manage parenting stress and increase well-being by capitalizing on relevant stress-reducing resources to achieve maternal coherence.
STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross sectional observational study.
METHODS: Two sets of questionnaires were given to 126 parents or primary caregivers of the implantees. The first set of questionnaire contained questions to assess the children's usage of CI, their types of education placement, and their modes of communication. The second set of questionnaire was the Parent's Evaluation Of Aural/Oral Performance of Children (PEACH) to evaluate the children's auditory functionality.
RESULTS: Our study showed that among the implantees, 97.6% are still using their CI, 69.8% communicating orally, and 58.5% attending mainstream education. For implantees that use oral communication and attend mainstream education, their mean age of implantation is 38 months. This is significantly lower compared to the mean age of implantation of implantees that use non-oral communication and attend non-mainstream education. Simple logistic regression analysis shows age of implantation reliably predicts implantees (N = 126) would communicate using oral communication with odds ratio of 0.974, and also predict mainstream education (N = 118) with odds ratio of 0.967. The median score of PEACH rating scale is 87.5% in quiet, and this significantly correlates with an earlier age of implantation (r = -0.235 p = 0.048).
CONCLUSIONS: UKM Cochlear Implant Program has achieved reasonable success among the pediatric implantees, with better outcomes seen in those implanted at the age of less than 4 years old.
Methods: This cohort study was designed to screen the hearing of newborns using transiently evoked otoacoustic emission and auditory brain stem response, and to determine the risk factors associated with hearing loss of newborns in 3 tertiary hospitals in Northern Thailand. Data were prospectively collected from November 1, 2010 to May 31, 2012. To develop the risk score, clinical-risk indicators were measured by Poisson risk regression. The regression coefficients were transformed into item scores dividing each regression-coefficient with the smallest coefficient in the model, rounding the number to its nearest integer, and adding up to a total score.
Results: Five clinical risk factors (Craniofacial anomaly, Ototoxicity, Birth weight, family history [Relative] of congenital sensorineural hearing loss, and Apgar score) were included in our COBRA score. The screening tool detected, by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, more than 80% of existing hearing loss. The positive-likelihood ratio of hearing loss in patients with scores of 4, 6, and 8 were 25.21 (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.69-43.26), 58.52 (95% CI, 36.26-94.44), and 51.56 (95% CI, 33.74-78.82), respectively. This result was similar to the standard tool (The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing) of 26.72 (95% CI, 20.59-34.66).
Conclusion: A simple screening tool of five predictors provides good prediction indices for newborn hearing loss, which may motivate parents to bring children for further appropriate testing and investigations.