Sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols in the school setting

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Nunes,Aryelly Dayane da Silva
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: Pereira,Rhadimylla Nágila, Pereira Junior,Antonio, Barbosa,Isabelle Ribeiro, Balen,Sheila Andreoli
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista CEFAC (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-18462020000600502
Resumo: ABSTRACT Objective: to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols: audiometry, tympanometry, and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE). Methods: a cross-sectional study comprising 70 schoolchildren aged 6-14 years old (9.9 ± 2). All participants underwent a complete audiological evaluation and screening procedures. Procedures were compared regarding sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Results: sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 64.71% and 66.04% for audiometry, 64.71% and 73.58% for tympanometry, and 66.67% and 78.85% for TEOAE. The positive and negative predictive values were 37.93% and 14.63% for audiometry, 44% and 13.33% for tympanometry, and 52.17% and 12.77% for TEOAE. Conclusions: in the school setting, TEOAE stands out from the two other screening protocols, in all measures regarding sensitivity, accuracy, and predictive values.
id CEFAC-1_a744bba7691ef03701b7e7ac362e46a1
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1516-18462020000600502
network_acronym_str CEFAC-1
network_name_str Revista CEFAC (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols in the school settingHearingMass ScreeningChildSchoolHearing LossABSTRACT Objective: to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols: audiometry, tympanometry, and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE). Methods: a cross-sectional study comprising 70 schoolchildren aged 6-14 years old (9.9 ± 2). All participants underwent a complete audiological evaluation and screening procedures. Procedures were compared regarding sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Results: sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 64.71% and 66.04% for audiometry, 64.71% and 73.58% for tympanometry, and 66.67% and 78.85% for TEOAE. The positive and negative predictive values were 37.93% and 14.63% for audiometry, 44% and 13.33% for tympanometry, and 52.17% and 12.77% for TEOAE. Conclusions: in the school setting, TEOAE stands out from the two other screening protocols, in all measures regarding sensitivity, accuracy, and predictive values.ABRAMO Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial2020-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-18462020000600502Revista CEFAC v.22 n.6 2020reponame:Revista CEFAC (Online)instname:Centro de Especialização em Fonoaudiologia Clínica (CEFAC)instacron:CEFAC10.1590/1982-0216/20202266519info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessNunes,Aryelly Dayane da SilvaPereira,Rhadimylla NágilaPereira Junior,AntonioBarbosa,Isabelle RibeiroBalen,Sheila Andreolieng2020-09-24T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1516-18462020000600502Revistahttp://www.revistacefac.com.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||revistacefac@cefac.br1982-02161516-1846opendoar:2020-09-24T00:00Revista CEFAC (Online) - Centro de Especialização em Fonoaudiologia Clínica (CEFAC)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols in the school setting
title Sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols in the school setting
spellingShingle Sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols in the school setting
Nunes,Aryelly Dayane da Silva
Hearing
Mass Screening
Child
School
Hearing Loss
title_short Sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols in the school setting
title_full Sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols in the school setting
title_fullStr Sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols in the school setting
title_full_unstemmed Sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols in the school setting
title_sort Sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols in the school setting
author Nunes,Aryelly Dayane da Silva
author_facet Nunes,Aryelly Dayane da Silva
Pereira,Rhadimylla Nágila
Pereira Junior,Antonio
Barbosa,Isabelle Ribeiro
Balen,Sheila Andreoli
author_role author
author2 Pereira,Rhadimylla Nágila
Pereira Junior,Antonio
Barbosa,Isabelle Ribeiro
Balen,Sheila Andreoli
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Nunes,Aryelly Dayane da Silva
Pereira,Rhadimylla Nágila
Pereira Junior,Antonio
Barbosa,Isabelle Ribeiro
Balen,Sheila Andreoli
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Hearing
Mass Screening
Child
School
Hearing Loss
topic Hearing
Mass Screening
Child
School
Hearing Loss
description ABSTRACT Objective: to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of three hearing screening protocols: audiometry, tympanometry, and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE). Methods: a cross-sectional study comprising 70 schoolchildren aged 6-14 years old (9.9 ± 2). All participants underwent a complete audiological evaluation and screening procedures. Procedures were compared regarding sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. Results: sensitivity and specificity were, respectively, 64.71% and 66.04% for audiometry, 64.71% and 73.58% for tympanometry, and 66.67% and 78.85% for TEOAE. The positive and negative predictive values were 37.93% and 14.63% for audiometry, 44% and 13.33% for tympanometry, and 52.17% and 12.77% for TEOAE. Conclusions: in the school setting, TEOAE stands out from the two other screening protocols, in all measures regarding sensitivity, accuracy, and predictive values.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-18462020000600502
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-18462020000600502
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1982-0216/20202266519
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv ABRAMO Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial
publisher.none.fl_str_mv ABRAMO Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista CEFAC v.22 n.6 2020
reponame:Revista CEFAC (Online)
instname:Centro de Especialização em Fonoaudiologia Clínica (CEFAC)
instacron:CEFAC
instname_str Centro de Especialização em Fonoaudiologia Clínica (CEFAC)
instacron_str CEFAC
institution CEFAC
reponame_str Revista CEFAC (Online)
collection Revista CEFAC (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista CEFAC (Online) - Centro de Especialização em Fonoaudiologia Clínica (CEFAC)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||revistacefac@cefac.br
_version_ 1754122582598090752

Registros relacionados