耳聋或听力困难儿童及其家庭的生活质量——一项范围综述
Quality of Life in Children Who Are Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing and Their Families-A Scoping Review.
文献信息
| PMID | 42855432 |
|---|---|
| 原文 | 在 PubMed 查看原文 ↗ |
| 发表日期 | 2026 |
| 作者 | Nina Jakhelln Laugen |
| 作者单位 | Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. |
| 期刊 | The Laryngoscope |
| SCI 分区 | Q2 |
| IF | 2.3 |
| 研究类型 | 综述 Meta · 临床 |
| 所属专科 | 耳科 |
中文摘要
目的： 生活质量（QoL）已成为耳聋或听力困难（DHH）儿童日益重要的结局指标。然而，尚不清楚该人群中QoL是如何被研究的，尤其是在生命最初几年。我们回顾了针对0-7岁DHH儿童及其家庭QoL的研究，以描述当前研究状况。
数据来源： 在PubMed、Web of Science、CINAHL、PsychArticles、ProQuest和Scopus中检索了过去10年发表的关于幼儿及其家庭QoL的文章。
综述方法： 本综述按照PRISMA-ScR指南进行。三名独立评审员在标题、摘要和全文文章筛选过程中应用了预先设定的纳入和排除标准。
结果： 共纳入47项研究。它们测量了QoL的各个方面，许多研究缺乏对该术语本身的定义。使用听力特异性和一般性QoL问卷收集数据，但心理测量学特性往往未记录。接受人工耳蜗植入的儿童是研究最频繁的人群，而轻度、中度和单侧听力损失则代表性不足。关于以家庭为中心的早期干预对儿童和家庭QoL影响的研究几乎缺失。
结论： QoL包含多个方面，需要在每项研究中加以明确，以便进行跨研究比较。未来研究应纳入研究不足的群体，例如轻度听力损失儿童和患有共病的儿童。此外，需要开展研究以探讨人工耳蜗植入以外干预措施的益处。
证据等级： 不适用。
英文摘要
OBJECTIVE: Quality of life (QoL) has become an increasingly relevant outcome for children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH). However, it is not clear how QoL has been investigated in this population, especially during the first years of life. We reviewed research on QoL of children who are DHH aged 0-7 years and their families to describe the state of current research.
DATA SOURCES: Articles published during the last 10 years were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsychArticles, ProQuest, and Scopus on QoL of young children and their families.
REVIEW METHODS: The review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Three independent reviewers applied predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria during the screening of titles, abstracts, and full-text articles.
RESULTS: A total of 47 studies were included. They measured various aspects of QoL, and many lacked a definition of the term itself. Hearing-specific and general QoL questionnaires were used to collect data, but psychometric properties were often not documented. Children with cochlear implants were the most frequently studied population, whereas mild, moderate, and unilateral hearing losses were underrepresented. Research on the effects of family-centered early intervention on child and family QoL was practically absent.
CONCLUSIONS: QoL includes multiple aspects, and they need to be specified in each study to facilitate cross-study comparison. Future research should include understudied groups, such as children with mild hearing loss and children with comorbid conditions. Furthermore, studies that investigate the benefits of interventions beyond cochlear implantation are needed.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.