基于程度和功能描述的小儿听力损失：一项回顾性病历审查

文献信息

中文摘要

目的： 儿科听力学评估报告是临床事件的持久记录，也是分享听力损失信息的渠道，但我们缺乏关于该领域当前实践的信息。
设计： 我们完成了一项针对先天性听力损失婴儿的回顾性病历审查。
研究样本： 我们分析了374份报告，以调查听力学家如何根据所提供的描述性信息水平，使用封闭类别集来描述听力损失。我们还分析了哪些儿童层面和诊所层面的因素可以预测报告类别。
结果： 大多数报告仅使用基于程度的描述来描述听力损失（n = 238，63.6%）。描述听力损失影响的报告（n = 99，26.5%）来自儿科机构的可能性是来自全生命周期机构的2.34倍（95% CI = 1.9-6.4）。总体而言，报告中的文字超出了低识字水平者的阅读水平建议（平均阅读年级水平为11.56 [SD = 1.39]，表明难度为困难至非常困难）。
结论： 本研究揭示了听力学家在诊断后描述婴儿听力损失方面的差异。儿科机构的听力学家在其临床报告中比全生命周期实践中的听力学家更常包含功能性描述。总体而言，这些报告可能对家庭来说难以阅读并用于制定护理计划。

英文摘要

OBJECTIVE: The report from a paediatric audiology assessment is a lasting record of clinical events and a channel for sharing information about hearing loss, but we lack information about current practices in this area.
DESIGN: We completed a retrospective chart review from infants with congenital hearing loss.
STUDY SAMPLE: We analysed 374 reports to investigate how audiologists described hearing loss using a closed category set based on the level of descriptive information provided. We also analysed which child-level and clinic-level factors predict a report category.
RESULTS: Most reports described hearing loss using degree-based descriptions only (n = 238, 63.6%). Reports describing implications of hearing loss (n = 99, 26.5%) were 2.34 times more likely to have come from a paediatric facility compared to a lifespan facility (95% CI = 1.9-6.4). Overall, the writing in reports exceeded reading level recommendations for those with low literacy (average reading grade level 11.56 [SD = 1.39] indicating difficult-very difficult).
CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals variability in how audiologists describe infant hearing loss after diagnosis. Audiologists in paediatric facilities include functional descriptions more often in their clinical reports than audiologists in lifespan practices. Overall, reports may be challenging for families to read and use to develop a care plan.