Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0277787 (stigma)
 13,352 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

We report on the development of a Genetic Attitude Assessment Tool (GAAT) to measure parental attitudes in contemplating genetic testing for childhood hearing loss, and to examine the differences in assessments made before and after genetic counseling. The GAAT tool was administered to a convenient sample of 119 parents of children with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. The respondents completed the survey either before (n = 77) or after (n = 42) genetic counseling. Exploratory Factor Analysis was applied to identify and quantify the underlying psychosocial structure. Our results showed the validated 54-item GAAT instrument contains six subscales: (1) "test intention," (2) "beliefs in non-genetic causes of hearing loss," (3) "deferral of decision to undergo genetic testing," (4) "appropriate use of genetic testing results," (5) "beliefs in the benefits," and (6) "concerns about stigma." The respondents who answered the survey after genetic counseling had higher "test intention" (P = 0.017) and endorsed to a greater extent "beliefs in the benefits" (P < 0.001). They believed to a lesser extent that childhood hearing loss was due to "non-genetic causes" (P < 0.001) and were less inclined to prefer "decision deferral" (P = 0.031). Respondents who themselves had a hearing loss expressed a significantly weaker belief in "non-genetic causes" of hearing loss (P < 0.0001). In conclusion the validated GAAT instrument is responsive to changes in parental attitudes after genetic counseling. The GAAT may be used to monitor parental attitudes serially, to further understand how parental attitudes change from pre genetic counseling, post genetic counseling, to post test result disclosure.
 ...
PMID:Assessing parental attitudes toward genetic testing for childhood hearing loss: before and after genetic consultation. 1754 6

The Esteem totally implantable active middle ear implant is a new technology to augment hearing in patients suffering from moderate-to-severe and severe sensorineural hearing loss. In contrast to conventional (acoustic) hearing aids, the system uses two piezoelectric transducers (PZTs). PZTs are used as the sensor and driver to replace the function of the middle ear. Sound is received via a PZT sensor that picks up eardrum vibrations, following the piezoelectric principle, and transforms them into an electric signal. This signal is filtered, modified, amplified and transferred to a PZT driver, which mechanically drives the stapes and thereby the inner ear. The sound processor also contains a power source, which is an implantable lithium iodide battery. All components of the hearing restoration system are totally implantable to offer good sound fidelity and reduce hearing aid stigma caused by the visibility of conventional and semi-implantable hearing systems. Our experience shows that this system can provide considerable benefit to patients with sensorineural hearing loss.
 ...
PMID:The Esteem System: a totally implantable hearing device. 2061 Sep 15

Hearing loss affects approximately one-third of adults 61 to 70 years of age and more than 80 percent of those older than 85 years. Men usually experience greater hearing loss and have earlier onset compared with women. The most common type is age-related hearing loss; however, many conditions can interfere with the conduction of sound vibrations to the inner ear and their conversion to electrical impulses for conduction to the brain. Screening for hearing loss is recommended in adults older than 50 to 60 years. Office screening tests include the whispered voice test and audioscopy. Older patients who admit to having difficulty hearing may be referred directly for audiometry. The history can identify risk factors for hearing loss, especially noise exposure and use of ototoxic medications. Examination of the auditory canal and tympanic membrane can identify causes of conductive hearing loss. Audiometric testing is required to confirm hearing loss. Adults presenting with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss should be referred for urgent assessment. Management of hearing loss is based on addressing underlying causes, especially obstructions (including cerumen) and ototoxic medications. Residual hearing should be optimized by use of hearing aids, assistive listening devices, and rehabilitation programs. Surgical implants are indicated for selected patients. Major barriers to improved hearing in older adults include lack of recognition of hearing loss; perception that hearing loss is a normal part of aging or is not amenable to treatment; and patient nonadherence with hearing aids because of stigma, cost, inconvenience, disappointing initial results, or other factors.
 ...
PMID:Hearing loss in older adults. 2296 95

We examined the prevalence, severity, etiology, and treatment of audiology problems among Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom (OIF/OEF) Veterans with mild traumatic brain injury (TBI). A retrospective chart review was performed of 250 Veterans with mild TBI. Results of a comprehensive second-level mild TBI evaluation and subsequent visits to audiology were evaluated. We found the vast majority (87%) of Veterans reported some level of hearing disturbance and those involved in blast injuries reported a higher incidence of hearing disturbance than those with other injury etiologies. Audiology referrals were given to 75 Veterans and 37 attended. At this visit, Veterans reported tinnitus (75.7%) and hearing loss (59.8%). Nearly half (48.6%) of Veterans were diagnosed with conductive hearing loss, sensorineural hearing loss, or central auditory dysfunction. An additional 24.3% of Veterans had subclinical levels of auditory dysfunction. Our study has highlighted the increased prevalence of hearing loss among OIF/OEF Veterans and, thus, the need for appropriate referrals and treatment. Strategies to address perceived stigma associated with hearing loss may increase attendance at follow-up visits. Additionally, while only a third of audiograms were found to be abnormal, advanced testing resulted in a significant percentage of our population being diagnosed with auditory dysfunction.
 ...
PMID:Audiological issues and hearing loss among Veterans with mild traumatic brain injury. 2334 Dec 75

A recent project entitled CATALISE used the Delphi method to reach a consensus on terminology for unexplained language problems in children. 'Developmental language disorder' (DLD) was the term agreed by a panel of 57 experts. Here I reflect on points of difficulty that arose when attempting to reach a consensus, using qualitative information from comments made by panel members to illustrate the kinds of argument used. One issue of debate was the use of labels, in particular the term 'disorder', which was seen as having both pros and cons. The potential for labels to stigmatize or create low expectations was a particular concern. However, labels could also ensure language problems were not trivialized and could help avoid stigma by providing an explanation for behaviours that might otherwise meet with disapproval. Further debate surrounded issues of how best to identify cases of disorder. Although it was agreed there should be a focus on cases with a poor prognosis, it was recognized that our knowledge of factors related to prognosis was still incomplete. Furthermore, there was a tension between use of standardized tests, which allow for a relatively objective and reliable assessment of language, and more qualitative observations, which can capture functional aspects of communication that are not always picked up on formal assessment. Debate also surrounded the issue of the relationship between DLD and other conditions. Some favoured drawing a distinction between DLD and language disorders associated with other conditions, and others regarded such distinctions as unnecessary. We concluded that it was misleading to assume co-occurring conditions were causes of language disorder, but it was helpful to distinguish DLD from cases of language disorder associated with 'differentiating conditions' that had a known or likely biomedical origin, including brain injury, sensorineural hearing loss, genetic syndromes, intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder. Furthermore, DLD could co-occur with milder neurodevelopmental disorders that did not have a clear biomedical aetiology. Normal-range non-verbal IQ has traditionally been incorporated in the diagnosis of DLD, but this was rejected as unsupported by evidence. DLD is a category that has utility in identifying children who would benefit from speech-language therapy services, but it should not be thought of as a well-defined condition. DLD has a multifactorial aetiology, is heterogeneous in terms of language features and overlaps with other neurodevelopmental disorders. Our notions of DLD are likely to be refined by further research into aetiology, associated characteristics and intervention effectiveness.
 ...
PMID:Why is it so hard to reach agreement on terminology? The case of developmental language disorder (DLD). 2871