Reliability and validity of the (modified) Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap: Confiabilidad y validez del Inventario (modificado) de Amsterdam para Discapacidad y Desventaja Auditiva

Meijer, Astrid G.W.; Wit, H. P.; TenVergert, Elisabeth M.; Albers, F. W. J.; Kobold, Jeroen E P Muller

doi:10.3109/14992020309101317

Cited by 55 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Measures of hearing loss, however, are poor predictors of hearing disability (i.e. the impact of hearing difficulties in daily life), with correlations between measures of disability and loss ranging between 0.3 and 0.6 depending on the type of disability measure and range of hearing loss (Anderson et al 1995; Koike et al 1994; Lutman et al 1987; Meijer et al 2003; Newman et al 1990). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hearing in Middle Age

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To report population-based prevalence of hearing impairment based on speech recognition in noise testing in a large and inclusive sample of UK adults aged 40 to 69 years. The present study is the first to report such data. Prevalence of tinnitus and use of hearing aids is also reported. Design The research was conducted using the UK Biobank resource. The better-ear unaided speech reception threshold was measured adaptively using the Digit Triplet Test (n = 164,770). Self-report data on tinnitus, hearing aid use, noise exposure as well as demographic variables were collected. Results Overall, 10.7% of adults (95%CI 10.5–10.9%) had significant hearing impairment. Prevalence of tinnitus was 16.9% (95%CI 16.6–17.1%) and hearing aid use was 2.0% (95%CI 1.9–2.1%). Odds of hearing impairment increased with age, with a history of work- and music-related noise exposure, for lower socioeconomic background and for ethnic minority backgrounds. Males were at no higher risk of hearing impairment than females. Conclusion Around 1 in 10 adults aged 40 to 69 years have substantial hearing impairment. The reasons for excess risk of hearing impairment particularly for those from low socioeconomic and ethnic minority backgrounds require identification, as this represents a serious health inequality. The underutilization of hearing aids has altered little since the 1980s, and is a major cause for concern.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hearing in Middle Age

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and instruments in use, time of weekly practice and additional risk factors for noise-induced hearing loss were identified by means of a questionnaire survey. In addition, their hearing ability was assessed using the (modified) Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap ((m)AIADH) [24]. Audiometric hearing threshold levels (HTLs) were compared with the theoretical predictions calculated according to ISO 1999:2013 [22].…”

Section: Hearing Examinationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Maximum total score for the questionnaire was 84. Additionally, the answers for each subscale were summed up (maximum score for subscale I was 24, while for other subscales the total was 15) [24].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exposure to excessive sounds and hearing status in academic classical music students

Pawlaczyk-Łuszczyńska¹,

Zamojska-Daniszewska²,

Dudarewicz³

et al. 2017

Int J Occup Med Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess hearing of music students in relation to their exposure to excessive sounds. Material and Methods: Standard pure-tone audiometry (PTA) was performed in 168 music students, aged 22.5±2.5 years. The control group included 67 subjects, non-music students and non-musicians, aged 22.8±3.3 years. Data on the study subjects' musical experience, instruments in use, time of weekly practice and additional risk factors for noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) were identified by means of a questionnaire survey. Sound pressure levels produced by various groups of instruments during solo and group playing were also measured and analyzed. The music students' audiometric hearing threshold levels (HTLs) were compared with the theoretical predictions calculated according to the International Organization for Standardization standard ISO 1999:2013. Results: It was estimated that the music students were exposed for 27.1±14.3 h/week to sounds at the A-weighted equivalent-continuous sound pressure level of 89.9±6.0 dB. There were no significant differences in HTLs between the music students and the control group in the frequency range of 4000-8000 Hz. Furthermore, in each group HTLs in the frequency range 1000-8000 Hz did not exceed 20 dB HL in 83% of the examined ears. Nevertheless, high frequency notched audiograms typical of the noise-induced hearing loss were found in 13.4% and 9% of the musicians and non-musicians, respectively. The odds ratio (OR) of notching in the music students increased significantly along with higher sound pressure levels (OR = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.014-1.13, p < 0.05). The students' HTLs were worse (higher) than those of a highly screened non-noise-exposed population. Moreover, their hearing loss was less severe than that expected from sound exposure for frequencies of 3000 Hz and 4000 Hz, and it was more severe in the case of frequency of 6000 Hz. Conclusions: The results confirm the need for further studies and development of a hearing conservation program for music students. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2017;30(1):55-75

show abstract

“…Wszystkie osoby badane wypełniały kwestionariusz samooceny jakości słyszenia, który służył do określenia subiektywnych problemów percepcji słuchowej występujących w życiu codziennym. Wykorzystano zaadaptowany kwestionariusz amsterdamski (Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap − AIADH) [8,9]. Składa się on z 30 pytań (w tym 2 pytań kontrolnych, nieuwzględnianych w ocenie punktowej wyników kwestionariusza).…”

Section: Samoocena Jakości Słyszeniaunclassified

“…Za pomocą modelu regresji liniowej stwierdzono zależność pomiędzy poziomem narażenia a wielkością Tabela 1. Samoocena jakości słyszenia barmanów z zastosowaniem kwestionariusza amsterdamskiego AIADH (Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap ) przeprowadzona w Łodzi w 2017 r. [8,9] Table 1. Self-assessment of the quality of hearing in bartenders using the AIADH (Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap) questionnaire in Łódź, 2017 [8,9] L Aeq − równoważny poziom dźwięku skorygowany charakterystyką częstotliwościową A / the equivalent A-weighted sound pressure level, L Amax − maksymalny poziom dźwięku skorygowany charakterystyką częstotliwościową A / maximum A-weighted sound pressure level, L Cpeak − szczytowy poziom dźwięku skorygowany charakterystyką częstotliwościową C / the peak C-weighted sound pressure level.…”

Section: Ocena Czasowych Zmian Słuchuunclassified

Assessment of temporary hearing changes related to work as a bartender

Wolniakowska

Zaborowski

Dudarewicz

et al. 2019

Med Pr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

StreszczenieWstęp: W przemyśle rozrywkowym hałas często osiąga wysokie poziomy ciśnienia akustycznego, jednak ryzyko uszkodzenia słuchu w tym sektorze nie zostało jeszcze dokładnie ocenione. Celem pracy była ocena związku między ekspozycją na wysoki poziom dźwięku a czasowym przesunięciem progu słuchu u osób pracujących na stanowisku barmana w lokalach rozrywkowych. Materiał i metody: Badaniem objęto 18 barmanów (średni wiek: 25±7 lat) zatrudnionych w klubie muzycznym (N = 8), pubie (N = 5) i dyskotece (N = 5). Poziomy dźwięków oraz charakterystyka częstotliwościowa hałasu były określane za pomocą dozymetrii indywidualnej. Progi słuchu oceniano za pomocą audiometrii tonalnej przeprowadzanej przed rozpoczęciem dnia pracy oraz bezpośrednio (do 15 min) po jego zakończeniu. Badania słuchu przeprowadzono u barmanów w czasie 2 lub 3 sesji badawczych podczas pracy w weekendy. Uzyskano 92 audiogramy przed-i poekspozycyjne. Wyniki: Uśrednione równoważne poziomy dźwięku odniesione do 8-godzinnego dnia pracy w ocenianych 3 lokalach muzycznych wynosiły 95 dBA, przekraczając ponad czterokrotnie dopuszczalne prawnie normy. U 77% badanych osób wykazano przynajmniej w 1 sesji pomiarowej czasowe przesunięcia progów słuchu ≥ 10 dB HL dla częstotliwości 4 kHz. Wnioski: Osoby pracujące na stanowisku barmana stanowią grupę zawodową o podwyższonym ryzyku utraty słuchu. Niezbędne jest zwiększanie świadomości tego faktu oraz wdrażanie u tych pracowników programów ochrony słuchu, zgodnie z dyrektywą Komisji Europejskiej (EU 2003/10/WE). Med. Pr. 2019;70(1):17-25 Słowa kluczowe: ekspozycja zawodowa, uszkodzenie słuchu spowodowane hałasem, hałas, czynniki ryzyka uszkodzenia słuchu spowodowanego hałasem, czasowe zmiany słyszenia, audiometria tonalna Abstract Background: Noise in entertainment industry often reaches high sound pressure levels. Nevertheless, the risk of hearing loss in this sector is insufficiently recognized. The aim of this study was the assessment of the relationship between noise exposure and temporary threshold shifts (TTS) for people working as bartenders at a variety of entertainment venues. Material and Methods: The study comprised a total of 18 bartenders (mean age was 25±7 years old) employed at a music club (N = 8), pub (N = 5) and discotheque (N = 5). Personal dosimeters were used for determining noise levels and frequency characteristics. Hearing was evaluated by pre-(before work) and post-exposure (up to 15 min after the end of work) pure tone audiometry. Hearing tests were carried out for bartenders during 2 or 3 sessions while working on weekends. Results: The mean personal noise exposure level normalized to a nominal 8-hour working day was 95 dBA, above 4 times higher than the accepted legal limit. The TTS values (10 dB HL or more) were significant at 4 kHz for both ears for 77% of bartenders. Conclusions: People working as bartenders represent a professional group with an increased risk of hearing loss. Raising awareness of this fact and implementing hearing protection programs in this group of workers is ur...

show abstract

Reliability and validity of the (modified) Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap: Confiabilidad y validez del Inventario (modificado) de Amsterdam para Discapacidad y Desventaja Auditiva

Cited by 55 publications

References 14 publications

Hearing in Middle Age

Hearing in Middle Age

Exposure to excessive sounds and hearing status in academic classical music students

Assessment of temporary hearing changes related to work as a bartender

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About