Search

Purpose: This report focuses on audiology productivity measures and targets, impacting variables, and implementation of productivity in pediatric settings and "life span facilities" with a significant population of pediatric patients. Research Design: A questionnaire was sent to 116 facilities in geographically diverse locations. Results: Of the 116 surveys sent, 25 surveys were returned (response rate of 21.5%) and 22 had sufficient data to be included for analyses. The majority of the sites measure productivity at the individual and/or department level. No predominant productivity measurement method was reported. Measurement methods included the following: appointment length (n = 6), weighting Current Procedural Terminology codes (n = 6), relative value units (n = 5), a combination of methods (n = 1), and other specific parameters (n = 1). Thirteen sites measured productivity as a percentage of scheduled worked time with a target of 69% (ranged from 40% to 85%). Many variables thought to impact productivity were evaluated: age of the patient, scheduling, use of a 2nd tester, no-show rate, hearing aid status, components of auditory brainstem response evaluation, documentation time, and monaural or binaural services. Schedule review and adjustment, efficiency, and communication with staff were methods reported to increase productivity. Conclusion: Most surveyed facilities measure productivity at the individual and/or department levels. However, there is no standard method. Current productivity measures include time-based measures based on appointment length, time-based measures assigned to Current Procedural Terminology codes, relative value units, combined approaches, and individual site developed programs. Many variables impact productivity measurements. Further study and discussion are needed to develop an optimal method for productivity measurement in audiology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) is guided by the 1-3-6 approach: screening by one month, diagnosis by 3 mo, and early intervention (EI) enrollment by 6 mo. Although screening rates remain high, successful diagnosis and EI-enrollment lag in comparison. The aim of this systematic review is to critically examine and synthesize the barriers to and facilitators of EHDI that exist for families, as they navigate the journey of congenital hearing loss diagnosis and management in the United States. Understanding barriers across each and all stages is necessary for EHDI stakeholders to develop and test novel approaches which will effectively reduce barriers to early hearing healthcare., Design: A systematic literature search was completed in May and August 2021 for empirical articles focusing on screening, diagnosis, and EI of children with hearing loss. Two independent reviewers completed title and abstract screening, full-text review, data extraction, and quality assessments with a third independent reviewer establishing consensus at each stage. Data synthesis was completed using the Framework Analysis approach to categorize articles into EHDI journey timepoints and individual/family-level factors versus system-level factors., Results: Sixty-two studies were included in the narrative synthesis. Results revealed that both individual/family-level (e.g., economic stability, medical status of the infant including middle ear involvement) and system-level barriers (e.g., system-service capacity, provider knowledge, and program quality) hinder timely diagnosis and EI for congenital hearing loss. Specific social determinants of health were noted as barriers to effective EHDI; however, system-level facilitators such as care coordination, colocation of services, and family support programs have been shown to mitigate the negative impact of those sociodemographic factors., Conclusions: Many barriers exist for families to obtain appropriate and timely EHDI for their children, but system-level changes could facilitate the process and contribute to long-term outcomes improvement. Limitations of this study include limited generalizability due to the heterogeneity of EHDI programs and an inability to ascertain factor interactions., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This executive summary of the guideline update provides evidence-based recommendations for patient selection and surgical indications for managing tympanostomy tubes in children. The summary and guideline are intended for any clinician involved in managing children aged 6 months to 12 years with tympanostomy tubes or children being considered for tympanostomy tubes in any care setting as an intervention for otitis media of any type. The target audience includes specialists, primary care clinicians, and allied health professionals., Purpose: The purpose of this executive summary is to provide a succinct overview for clinicians of the key action statements (recommendations), summary tables, and patient decision aids from the update of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's "Clinical Practice Guideline: Tympanostomy Tubes in Children (Update)." The new guideline updates recommendations in the prior guideline from 2013 and provides clinicians with trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations on patient selection and surgical indications for managing tympanostomy tubes in children. This summary is not intended to substitute for the full guideline, and clinicians are encouraged to read the full guideline before implementing the recommended actions., Methods: The guideline on which this summary is based was developed using methods outlined in the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation's "Clinical Practice Guideline Development Manual, Third Edition: A Quality-Driven Approach for Translating Evidence Into Action," which were followed explicitly. The guideline update group represented the disciplines of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, otology, pediatrics, audiology, anesthesiology, family medicine, advanced practice nursing, speech-language pathology, and consumer advocacy., Action Statements: Strong recommendations were made for the following key action statements: (14) Clinicians should prescribe topical antibiotic ear drops only, without oral antibiotics, for children with uncomplicated acute tympanostomy tube otorrhea. (16) The surgeon or designee should examine the ears of a child within 3 months of tympanostomy tube insertion AND should educate families regarding the need for routine, periodic follow-up to examine the ears until the tubes extrude. Recommendations were made for the following key action statements: (1) Clinicians should not perform tympanostomy tube insertion in children with a single episode of otitis media with effusion (OME) of less than 3 months' duration, from the date of onset (if known) or from the date of diagnosis (if onset is unknown). (2) Clinicians should obtain a hearing evaluation if OME persists for 3 months or longer OR prior to surgery when a child becomes a candidate for tympanostomy tube insertion. (3) Clinicians should offer bilateral tympanostomy tube insertion to children with bilateral OME for 3 months or longer AND documented hearing difficulties. (5) Clinicians should reevaluate, at 3- to 6-month intervals, children with chronic OME who do not receive tympanostomy tubes, until the effusion is no longer present, significant hearing loss is detected, or structural abnormalities of the tympanic membrane or middle ear are suspected. (6) Clinicians should not perform tympanostomy tube insertion in children with recurrent acute otitis media (AOM) who do not have middle ear effusion (MEE) in either ear at the time of assessment for tube candidacy. (7) Clinicians should offer bilateral tympanostomy tube insertion in children with recurrent AOM who have unilateral or bilateral MEE at the time of assessment for tube candidacy. (8) Clinicians should determine if a child with recurrent AOM or with OME of any duration is at increased risk for speech, language, or learning problems from otitis media because of baseline sensory, physical, cognitive, or behavioral factors. (10) The clinician should not place long-term tubes as initial surgery for children who meet criteria for tube insertion unless there is a specific reason based on an anticipated need for prolonged middle ear ventilation beyond that of a short-term tube. (12) In the perioperative period, clinicians should educate caregivers of children with tympanostomy tubes regarding the expected duration of tube function, recommended follow-up schedule, and detection of complications. (13) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe postoperative antibiotic ear drops after tympanostomy tube placement. (15) Clinicians should not encourage routine, prophylactic water precautions (use of earplugs or headbands, avoidance of swimming or water sports) for children with tympanostomy tubes. Options were offered from the following key action statements: (4) Clinicians may perform tympanostomy tube insertion in children with unilateral or bilateral OME for 3 months or longer (chronic OME) AND symptoms that are likely attributable, all or in part, to OME that include, but are not limited to, balance (vestibular) problems, poor school performance, behavioral problems, ear discomfort, or reduced quality of life. (9) Clinicians may perform tympanostomy tube insertion in at-risk children with unilateral or bilateral OME that is likely to persist as reflected by a type B (flat) tympanogram or a documented effusion for 3 months or longer. (11) Clinicians may perform adenoidectomy as an adjunct to tympanostomy tube insertion for children with symptoms directly related to the adenoids (adenoid infection or nasal obstruction) OR in children aged 4 years or older to potentially reduce future incidence of recurrent otitis media or the need for repeat tube insertion.

Background: Children referred to audiology services with otherwise unexplained academic, listening, attention, language, or other difficulties are often found to be audiometrically normal. Some of these children receive further evaluation for auditory processing disorder (APD), a controversial construct that assumes neural processing problems within the central auditory nervous system. This study focuses on the evaluation of APD and how it relates to diagnosis in one large pediatric audiology facility., Purpose: To analyze electronic records of children receiving a central auditory processing evaluation (CAPE) at Cincinnati Children's Hospital, with a broad goal of understanding current practice in APD diagnosis and the test information which impacts that practice., Research Design: A descriptive, cross-sectional analysis of APD test outcomes in relation to final audiologist diagnosis for 1,113 children aged 5-19 yr receiving a CAPE between 2009 and 2014., Results: Children had a generally high level of performance on the tests used, resulting in marked ceiling effects on about half the tests. Audiologists developed the diagnostic category "Weakness" because of the large number of referred children who clearly had problems, but who did not fulfill the AAA/ASHA criteria for diagnosis of a "Disorder." A "right-ear advantage" was found in all tests for which each ear was tested, irrespective of whether the tests were delivered monaurally or dichotically. However, neither the side nor size of the ear advantage predicted the ultimate diagnosis well. Cooccurrence of CAPE with other learning problems was nearly universal, but neither the number nor the pattern of cooccurring problems was a predictor of APD diagnosis. The diagnostic patterns of individual audiologists were quite consistent. The number of annual assessments decreased dramatically during the study period., Conclusions: A simple diagnosis of APD based on current guidelines is neither realistic, given the current tests used, nor appropriate, as judged by the audiologists providing the service. Methods used to test for APD must recognize that any form of hearing assessment probes both sensory and cognitive processing. Testing must embrace modern methods, including digital test delivery, adaptive testing, referral to normative data, appropriate testing for young children, validated screening questionnaires, and relevant objective (physiological) methods, as appropriate. Audiologists need to collaborate with other specialists to understand more fully the behaviors displayed by children presenting with listening difficulties. To achieve progress, it is essential for clinicians and researchers to work together. As new understanding and methods become available, it will be necessary to sort out together what works and what doesn't work in the clinic, both from a theoretical and a practical perspective., (American Academy of Audiology.)

The American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation has published a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery featuring the updated "Clinical Practice Guideline: Otitis Media with Effusion." To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 18 recommendations developed emphasize diagnostic accuracy, identification of children who are most susceptible to developmental sequelae from otitis media with effusion, and education of clinicians and patients regarding the favorable natural history of most otitis media with effusion and the lack of efficacy for medical therapy (eg, steroids, antihistamines, decongestants). An updated guideline is needed due to new clinical trials, new systematic reviews, and the lack of consumer participation in the initial guideline development group., (© American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation 2015.)