We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Differences in clinical characteristics and prognosis of sudden low- and high-frequency hearing loss.
Laryngoscope 2017 August
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: We compared the clinical characteristics between acute low- and high-frequency hearing loss (LF and HF, respectively) patients, and the efficacy of three different treatment protocols (systemic steroids, intratympanic steroid injection, and combination therapy).
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled study.
METHODS: A total of 111 patients diagnosed with LF or HF were treated on an outpatient basis. Each group was randomly divided into three equal subgroups based on therapy: oral steroid, intratympanic dexamethasone injection (IT), and combination therapy. Hearing gain was estimated by comparing pre- and post-treatment pure-tone averages. Recovery rate was assessed by Clinical Practice Guideline: Sudden Hearing Loss from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.
RESULTS: In comparison of chief complaints, ear fullness and hearing loss were more common in the LF and HF group, respectively (P = .033 and P = .001, respectively). Hearing recovery rates were significantly different between the two groups (i.e., 74.1% [40/54] in the LF group and 45.6% [26/57] in the HF group; P < .001). Oral steroid therapy was most effective in the LF group (P = .017). In the HF group, all three modalities showed similar results, although IT tended to be the most effective (P = .390).
CONCLUSIONS: There were differences in chief complaints and treatment responses between LF and HF patients. Although they showed similar partial damage in the cochlea, the pathophysiology of LF and HF may be quite different.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1b. Laryngoscope, 127:1878-1884, 2017.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled study.
METHODS: A total of 111 patients diagnosed with LF or HF were treated on an outpatient basis. Each group was randomly divided into three equal subgroups based on therapy: oral steroid, intratympanic dexamethasone injection (IT), and combination therapy. Hearing gain was estimated by comparing pre- and post-treatment pure-tone averages. Recovery rate was assessed by Clinical Practice Guideline: Sudden Hearing Loss from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.
RESULTS: In comparison of chief complaints, ear fullness and hearing loss were more common in the LF and HF group, respectively (P = .033 and P = .001, respectively). Hearing recovery rates were significantly different between the two groups (i.e., 74.1% [40/54] in the LF group and 45.6% [26/57] in the HF group; P < .001). Oral steroid therapy was most effective in the LF group (P = .017). In the HF group, all three modalities showed similar results, although IT tended to be the most effective (P = .390).
CONCLUSIONS: There were differences in chief complaints and treatment responses between LF and HF patients. Although they showed similar partial damage in the cochlea, the pathophysiology of LF and HF may be quite different.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1b. Laryngoscope, 127:1878-1884, 2017.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app