A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-ASSESSMENT AND CLINICAL EVALUATION OF HEARING STATUS

The relationship was explored between a subjective measure of hearing status, derived from a functional self-assessment expressed in terms of ability to hear and understand spoken words, and a comparable objective measure of hearing status, obtained from a speech reception test. The Augmentation Survey of the Health and Nutrition Examination Survey of the National Center for Health Statistics provided the necessary data for a sample of 3059 adults. Using chi-square tests for the subsample with the highest level of objectively assessed hearing status, favorable subjective assessments were found to be significantly associated with higher income, lower age group, higher level of educational attainment, greater psychological adjustment, fewer symptoms of depression, and higher self-ratings of overall health. In a linear regression with self-assessment of hearing status as the dependent variable, less than one-quarter of the variation could be explained by objective status and the six explanatory variables.^

Hearing aid use and adherence: A systematic review of the literature concerning the socioeconomic and psychological influences on hearing aid use and barriers to use

The current hearing health situation in the United States does not provide adequate support to individuals with hearing loss. More research is needed to give more support to these individuals. By conducting a systematic review of relevant literature from 1990 to present, I identified many factors that influence an individual's use of hearing aids. There are two research questions in this study: 1. Does the provision of screening and access to hearing aids decrease the negative effects of hearing loss? 2. Why is it difficult for people with hearing loss to adapt to and use hearing aids? The population of interest was adults (>18 years old) with hearing loss. Factors that influenced use of hearing aids for this population included age, gender, socioeconomic status, education, perceived severity of hearing loss, cost of hearing aids, screening, perceived benefit, stigmatization, perceived control, cognitive capability, personality, and social support. Research suggests that more efficient screening of at-risk individuals and the provision of better access to these individuals would prevent many of the negative effects of hearing loss.^

Mismatch Repair Deficient Tumors Lacking Known Sporadic Causes: Are They All Due to Lynch Syndrome?

BACKGROUND: Mismatch repair deficient (MMRD) colorectal (CRC) or endometrial (EC) cancers in the absence of MLH1 promoter hypermethylation and BRAF mutations are suggestive of Lynch syndrome (LS). Positive germline genetic test results confirm LS. It is unclear if individuals with MMRD tumors but no identified germline mutation or sporadic cause (MMRD+/germline-) have LS. HYPOTHESIS: Since LS is hereditary, individuals with LS should have a stronger family history of LS-related cancers than individuals with sporadic tumors. We hypothesized that MMRD+/germline- CRC and/or EC patients would have less suggestive family histories than LS CRC and/or EC patients. METHODS: 253 individuals with an MMRD CRC or EC who underwent genetic counseling at one institution were included in analysis in 1 of 4 groups: LS, MMRD+/germline-, MMRD+/VUS, sporadic MSI-H (MMRD tumor with MLH1 promoter hypermethylation or BRAF mutation). Family histories were analyzed utilizing MMRpro and PREMM1,2,6. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare family history scores. Logistic regression was used to determine what factors were predictive of LS. RESULTS: MMRD+/germline- individuals had significantly lower median family history scores (PREMM1,2,6=7.3, MMRpro=8.1) than LS individuals (PREMM1,2,6=26.1, MMRpro=89.8, p CONCLUSION: MMRD+/germline- individuals have less suggestive family histories of LS than individuals with LS, but more suggestive family histories than sporadic MSI-H individuals. CRC and/or EC patients with abnormal tumor studies are more likely to have a germline LS mutation if they have a family history suggestive of hereditary cancer. These results imply that the MMRD+/germline- group may not all have LS. This finding highlights the need to determine other somatic, epigenetic or germline causes of MMRD tumors so that these patients and their families can be accurately counseled regarding screening and management.