使用助听器或人工耳蜗的学龄前儿童中父母焦虑、家庭康复参与和听觉-语言结果之间的关联。
Associations Among Parental Anxiety, Family Rehabilitation Participation, and Auditory-Language Outcomes in Preschool Children Using Hearing Aids or Cochlear Implants.
文献信息
| PMID | 42853251 |
|---|---|
| 原文 | 在 PubMed 查看原文 ↗ |
| 发表日期 | 2026 |
| 作者 | Yuşa Başoğlu |
| 作者单位 | Department of Audiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Türkiye. |
| 期刊 | American journal of audiology |
| SCI 分区 | Q2 |
| IF | 1.9 |
| 研究类型 | 临床研究 · 临床 |
| 所属专科 | 耳科 |
中文摘要
目的： 本研究考察了使用助听器或人工耳蜗的学龄前儿童中父母焦虑、家庭康复参与、设备数据记录变量和听觉-语言结果之间的关联。
方法： 五十对亲子对参与了这项横断面研究。父母完成了状态-特质焦虑量表、家庭康复参与表以及父母对儿童听觉/口语表现评估（PEACH）问卷。儿童使用土耳其早期语言发展测试进行评估。设备数据记录变量包括每日平均设备使用时间、使用天数、言语环境暴露和噪声环境暴露。
结果： 较高的父母焦虑与较低的家庭康复参与相关，其中特质焦虑的关联最强（r = -.520，95%置信区间[CI] [-.698, -.283]，p < .001）。家庭参与与父母报告的听觉表现呈正相关（r = .333，95% CI [.061, .560]，p = .018），但与年龄标准化的语言评分无关（r = .121，p = .401）。每日设备使用的均值±标准差为8.52 ± 1.57小时/天。在探索性回归模型中，特质焦虑和康复频率显著预测家庭参与，且家庭参与与PEACH总百分比得分呈正相关。设备数据记录变量不是显著的独立预测因子。
结论： 父母特质焦虑和家庭康复参与可能在儿科听力康复中具有临床相关性。家庭参与似乎与父母报告的日常听觉表现的关系比与标准化语言评分的关系更密切。设备数据记录提供了有用的临床背景，但在探索性模型中并未独立预测听觉表现。需要纵向研究来阐明这些关系。
补充材料： https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.34024143。
英文摘要
PURPOSE: This study examined associations among parental anxiety, family rehabilitation participation, device data logging variables, and auditory-language outcomes in preschool children using hearing aids or cochlear implants.
METHOD: Fifty parent-child dyads participated in this cross-sectional study. Parents completed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, the Family Rehabilitation Participation Form, and the Parents' Evaluation of Aural/Oral Performance of Children (PEACH) questionnaire. Children were assessed using the Turkish Early Language Development Test. Device data logging variables included daily average device use, number of days used, speech environment exposure, and noisy environment exposure.
RESULTS: Higher parental anxiety was associated with lower family rehabilitation participation, with the strongest association observed for trait anxiety (r = -.520, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-.698, -.283], p < .001). Family participation was positively associated with parent-reported auditory performance (r = .333, 95% CI [.061, .560], p = .018) but not with age-standardized language scores (r = .121, p = .401). The mean ± SD daily device use was 8.52 ± 1.57 hr/day. In exploratory regression models, trait anxiety and rehabilitation frequency significantly predicted family participation, and family participation was positively associated with PEACH total percentage score. Device data logging variables were not significant independent predictors.
CONCLUSIONS: Parental trait anxiety and family rehabilitation participation may be clinically relevant in pediatric hearing rehabilitation. Family participation appeared more closely related to parent-reported everyday auditory performance than to standardized language scores. Device data logging provided useful clinical context but did not independently predict auditory performance in the exploratory model. Longitudinal studies are needed to clarify these relationships.
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.34024143.