Predictive factors for vestibular loss in children with hearing loss

Kristen L Janky, Megan L.A. Thomas, Robin R. High, Kendra K Schmid, Oluwaseye Ayoola Ogun

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine if there are factors that can predict whether a child with hearing loss will also have vestibular loss. Method: A retrospective chart review was completed on 186 children with hearing loss seen at Boys Town National Research Hospital for vestibular testing from 1999 to 2015 through neurosensory genetics clinic or cochlear implant candidacy. Each child’s medical chart was reviewed to obtain the following data: vestibular loss severity (classified as normal, bilateral, or mild to moderate), degree of hearing loss (bilateral pure-tone average [PTA]), imaging abnormalities (classified as “normal” or “abnormal”), parental concerns for gross motor delay (classified as “yes, there is concern” or “no, there is not a concern”), parent report of age when their child sat (months) and walked independently (months), comorbidities (classified as “yes” if there were 1 or more comorbidities or “no” if there were no comorbidities), and score on the Developmental Profile-3. Results: Children were grouped according to vestibular loss severity; 115 children had normal vestibular function, 31 had bilateral vestibular loss, and 40 had mild-to-moderate vestibular loss. As severity of vestibular loss increased, children (a) sat and walked later, (b) scored more poorly on the Developmental Profile-3 physical subscale, (c) had more severe hearing loss, (d) had parents who more frequently reported concern for gross motor delay, and (e) were more likely to have other comorbidities. Of these factors, age-to-sit, age-to-walk, PTA, and parental concerns for gross motor developmental delay had the greatest ability to differentiate children with vestibular loss from children with normal vestibular function. For age-to-sit, using a cutoff value of 7.25 months yielded a sensitivity of 62% and a specificity of 81%. For age-to-walk, a cutoff value of 14.5 months yielded a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 77%. For PTA for the neurosensory genetics group, a cutoff value of 40 dB yielded a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 55%; however, a cutoff value of 66 dB yielded a sensitivity of 33% and an improved specificity of 91%. Conclusions: A referral for vestibular evaluation should be considered for children whose hearing loss is greater than 66 dB and particularly those who sit later than 7.25 months or walk later than 14.5 months or whose parents report concerns for gross motor development. Collectively, these factors appear to be more sensitive for identifying children with bilateral vestibular loss compared with children with mild-to-moderate vestibular loss. Because of the benefit of physical therapy, children identified with vestibular loss should then be referred to physical therapy for further evaluation and treatment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)137-146
Number of pages10
JournalAmerican journal of audiology
Volume27
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2018

Fingerprint

Hearing Loss
Comorbidity
Parents
Bilateral Hearing Loss
Aptitude
Cochlear Implants
Age Factors
Therapeutics
Referral and Consultation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Speech and Hearing

Cite this

Predictive factors for vestibular loss in children with hearing loss. / Janky, Kristen L; Thomas, Megan L.A.; High, Robin R.; Schmid, Kendra K; Ogun, Oluwaseye Ayoola.

In: American journal of audiology, Vol. 27, No. 1, 01.03.2018, p. 137-146.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Janky, Kristen L ; Thomas, Megan L.A. ; High, Robin R. ; Schmid, Kendra K ; Ogun, Oluwaseye Ayoola. / Predictive factors for vestibular loss in children with hearing loss. In: American journal of audiology. 2018 ; Vol. 27, No. 1. pp. 137-146.
@article{99f0f54c3689413d9f80f2d911506b35,
title = "Predictive factors for vestibular loss in children with hearing loss",
abstract = "Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine if there are factors that can predict whether a child with hearing loss will also have vestibular loss. Method: A retrospective chart review was completed on 186 children with hearing loss seen at Boys Town National Research Hospital for vestibular testing from 1999 to 2015 through neurosensory genetics clinic or cochlear implant candidacy. Each child’s medical chart was reviewed to obtain the following data: vestibular loss severity (classified as normal, bilateral, or mild to moderate), degree of hearing loss (bilateral pure-tone average [PTA]), imaging abnormalities (classified as “normal” or “abnormal”), parental concerns for gross motor delay (classified as “yes, there is concern” or “no, there is not a concern”), parent report of age when their child sat (months) and walked independently (months), comorbidities (classified as “yes” if there were 1 or more comorbidities or “no” if there were no comorbidities), and score on the Developmental Profile-3. Results: Children were grouped according to vestibular loss severity; 115 children had normal vestibular function, 31 had bilateral vestibular loss, and 40 had mild-to-moderate vestibular loss. As severity of vestibular loss increased, children (a) sat and walked later, (b) scored more poorly on the Developmental Profile-3 physical subscale, (c) had more severe hearing loss, (d) had parents who more frequently reported concern for gross motor delay, and (e) were more likely to have other comorbidities. Of these factors, age-to-sit, age-to-walk, PTA, and parental concerns for gross motor developmental delay had the greatest ability to differentiate children with vestibular loss from children with normal vestibular function. For age-to-sit, using a cutoff value of 7.25 months yielded a sensitivity of 62{\%} and a specificity of 81{\%}. For age-to-walk, a cutoff value of 14.5 months yielded a sensitivity of 78{\%} and a specificity of 77{\%}. For PTA for the neurosensory genetics group, a cutoff value of 40 dB yielded a sensitivity of 80{\%} and a specificity of 55{\%}; however, a cutoff value of 66 dB yielded a sensitivity of 33{\%} and an improved specificity of 91{\%}. Conclusions: A referral for vestibular evaluation should be considered for children whose hearing loss is greater than 66 dB and particularly those who sit later than 7.25 months or walk later than 14.5 months or whose parents report concerns for gross motor development. Collectively, these factors appear to be more sensitive for identifying children with bilateral vestibular loss compared with children with mild-to-moderate vestibular loss. Because of the benefit of physical therapy, children identified with vestibular loss should then be referred to physical therapy for further evaluation and treatment.",
author = "Janky, {Kristen L} and Thomas, {Megan L.A.} and High, {Robin R.} and Schmid, {Kendra K} and Ogun, {Oluwaseye Ayoola}",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1044/2017_AJA-17-0058",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "137--146",
journal = "American Journal of Audiology",
issn = "1059-0889",
publisher = "American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Predictive factors for vestibular loss in children with hearing loss

AU - Janky, Kristen L

AU - Thomas, Megan L.A.

AU - High, Robin R.

AU - Schmid, Kendra K

AU - Ogun, Oluwaseye Ayoola

PY - 2018/3/1

Y1 - 2018/3/1

N2 - Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine if there are factors that can predict whether a child with hearing loss will also have vestibular loss. Method: A retrospective chart review was completed on 186 children with hearing loss seen at Boys Town National Research Hospital for vestibular testing from 1999 to 2015 through neurosensory genetics clinic or cochlear implant candidacy. Each child’s medical chart was reviewed to obtain the following data: vestibular loss severity (classified as normal, bilateral, or mild to moderate), degree of hearing loss (bilateral pure-tone average [PTA]), imaging abnormalities (classified as “normal” or “abnormal”), parental concerns for gross motor delay (classified as “yes, there is concern” or “no, there is not a concern”), parent report of age when their child sat (months) and walked independently (months), comorbidities (classified as “yes” if there were 1 or more comorbidities or “no” if there were no comorbidities), and score on the Developmental Profile-3. Results: Children were grouped according to vestibular loss severity; 115 children had normal vestibular function, 31 had bilateral vestibular loss, and 40 had mild-to-moderate vestibular loss. As severity of vestibular loss increased, children (a) sat and walked later, (b) scored more poorly on the Developmental Profile-3 physical subscale, (c) had more severe hearing loss, (d) had parents who more frequently reported concern for gross motor delay, and (e) were more likely to have other comorbidities. Of these factors, age-to-sit, age-to-walk, PTA, and parental concerns for gross motor developmental delay had the greatest ability to differentiate children with vestibular loss from children with normal vestibular function. For age-to-sit, using a cutoff value of 7.25 months yielded a sensitivity of 62% and a specificity of 81%. For age-to-walk, a cutoff value of 14.5 months yielded a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 77%. For PTA for the neurosensory genetics group, a cutoff value of 40 dB yielded a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 55%; however, a cutoff value of 66 dB yielded a sensitivity of 33% and an improved specificity of 91%. Conclusions: A referral for vestibular evaluation should be considered for children whose hearing loss is greater than 66 dB and particularly those who sit later than 7.25 months or walk later than 14.5 months or whose parents report concerns for gross motor development. Collectively, these factors appear to be more sensitive for identifying children with bilateral vestibular loss compared with children with mild-to-moderate vestibular loss. Because of the benefit of physical therapy, children identified with vestibular loss should then be referred to physical therapy for further evaluation and treatment.

AB - Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine if there are factors that can predict whether a child with hearing loss will also have vestibular loss. Method: A retrospective chart review was completed on 186 children with hearing loss seen at Boys Town National Research Hospital for vestibular testing from 1999 to 2015 through neurosensory genetics clinic or cochlear implant candidacy. Each child’s medical chart was reviewed to obtain the following data: vestibular loss severity (classified as normal, bilateral, or mild to moderate), degree of hearing loss (bilateral pure-tone average [PTA]), imaging abnormalities (classified as “normal” or “abnormal”), parental concerns for gross motor delay (classified as “yes, there is concern” or “no, there is not a concern”), parent report of age when their child sat (months) and walked independently (months), comorbidities (classified as “yes” if there were 1 or more comorbidities or “no” if there were no comorbidities), and score on the Developmental Profile-3. Results: Children were grouped according to vestibular loss severity; 115 children had normal vestibular function, 31 had bilateral vestibular loss, and 40 had mild-to-moderate vestibular loss. As severity of vestibular loss increased, children (a) sat and walked later, (b) scored more poorly on the Developmental Profile-3 physical subscale, (c) had more severe hearing loss, (d) had parents who more frequently reported concern for gross motor delay, and (e) were more likely to have other comorbidities. Of these factors, age-to-sit, age-to-walk, PTA, and parental concerns for gross motor developmental delay had the greatest ability to differentiate children with vestibular loss from children with normal vestibular function. For age-to-sit, using a cutoff value of 7.25 months yielded a sensitivity of 62% and a specificity of 81%. For age-to-walk, a cutoff value of 14.5 months yielded a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 77%. For PTA for the neurosensory genetics group, a cutoff value of 40 dB yielded a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 55%; however, a cutoff value of 66 dB yielded a sensitivity of 33% and an improved specificity of 91%. Conclusions: A referral for vestibular evaluation should be considered for children whose hearing loss is greater than 66 dB and particularly those who sit later than 7.25 months or walk later than 14.5 months or whose parents report concerns for gross motor development. Collectively, these factors appear to be more sensitive for identifying children with bilateral vestibular loss compared with children with mild-to-moderate vestibular loss. Because of the benefit of physical therapy, children identified with vestibular loss should then be referred to physical therapy for further evaluation and treatment.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85043579161&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85043579161&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1044/2017_AJA-17-0058

DO - 10.1044/2017_AJA-17-0058

M3 - Article

VL - 27

SP - 137

EP - 146

JO - American Journal of Audiology

JF - American Journal of Audiology

SN - 1059-0889

IS - 1

ER -