A Large-Scale Examination of Veterans with Normal Pure-Tone Hearing Thresholds within the Department of Veterans Affairs

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background:

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) audiologists have anecdotally reported examining numerous Veterans with normal pure-tone thresholds; however, the prevalence of these patients within the VA is unknown. The VA audiological data repository provides an ideal dataset to examine this group of Veterans. Knowing the prevalence of normal-hearing Veterans within the VA system is the first step to understanding the underlying referral patterns and clinical complaints of Veterans. Data repositories which capture data from both normal and impaired populations provide an indispensable view into hearing health care which can help to improve diagnosis and treatment of Veterans’ hearing difficulties.

Purpose:

Using the VA audiological data repository, this study aimed to (1) determine the prevalence of normal hearing thresholds among Veterans seeking hearing health care within the VA health care system and (2) determine the prevalence of abnormal clinical audiology test results among Veterans with normal hearing thresholds.

Research Design:

This study was a large-scale retrospective, descriptive observational analysis of uploaded audiological records from the VA Denver Acquisition and Logistics Center audiological data repository encompassing visits that took place between April 1991 and June 2015.

Study Sample:

At the time of data extraction, there were 3,641,326 audiological records in the repository, with 2,322,771 unique individual records. The study sample was further restricted to include only individuals with normal hearing (n = 235,091), which was defined as pure-tone thresholds better than, or equal to, 25 dB HL at octave frequencies from 250 to 8000 Hz, bilaterally. Patients ranged from 19 to 90+ years of age.

Data Collection and Analysis:

We describe the data using frequencies and percentages for categorical variables and means and standard deviations for continuous variables. In addition to hearing thresholds, the occurrence of abnormal results on other tests in the audiological test battery is also reported. We estimate the prevalence of normal hearing among all Veterans with records in the VA audiological data repository.

Results:

Veterans with normal hearing were on average 37 yr old. The prevalence of Veterans with normal hearing thresholds visiting VA audiology clinics in the current hearing repository dataset was 10.12%. Overall, 41% of Veterans with normal pure-tone thresholds had other clinically abnormal audiological test results; for example, contralateral acoustic reflex thresholds (31.7%) and tympanometry (21.5%) had the highest rate of abnormal test results.

Conclusions:

Approximately one in ten Veterans seeking care within the VA healthcare system, and reported to the VA audiological data repository, has normal pure-tone hearing thresholds. This may be an underestimate of the true underlying prevalence of normal-hearing Veterans seeking audiology services at the VA because records with normal results were not consistently submitted to the repository. In addition, 41% of Veterans with normal pure-tone thresholds nonetheless presented with other audiological abnormalities. This study suggests that future work directed toward understanding referral patterns and clinical complaints of individuals who present to VA audiology clinics with normal hearing thresholds may be fruitful in the cause of improving diagnosis and treatment of Veterans’ hearing difficulties.

This study was supported by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (RR&D-C8006W) and a U.S. National Institutes of Health T-35 grant (DC008764). The contents do not represent the views of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs or the U.S. government.

This work was presented, in part, at the 2017 American Auditory Society Annual Scientific and Technology Conference.

• REFERENCES

• American Academy of Audiology (AAA) 2010 Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment, and management of children and adults with central auditory processing disorder. https://audiology.org/publications-resources/document-library/central-auditory-processing-disorder
  Google Scholar
• American National Standards Institute (ANSI) 2010. American National Standard Specification for Audiometers. Acoustical Society of America (ANSI S3.6-2010) . New York, NY: ANSI;
  Google Scholar
• Byrne JET, Kerr AG. 1987. Deafness with normal pure tone audiometry. In: Kerr AG, Groves J, Booth JB. Scott Brown’s Otolaryngology. Great Britain, UK: Butterworth and Co; 383-384
  Google Scholar
• Cooper Jr JC, Gates GA. 1991; Hearing in the elderly—the Framingham cohort, 1983–1985: part II. Prevalence of central auditory processing disorders. Ear Hear 12 (05) 304-311
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gallun FJ, Lewis MS, Folmer RL, Diedesch AC, Kubli LR, McDermott DJ, Walden TC, Fausti SA, Lew HL, Leek MR. 2012; Implications of blast exposure for central auditory function: a review. J Rehabil Res Dev 49 (07) 1059-1074
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gates GA, Cooper Jr JC, Kannel WB, Miller NJ. 1990; Hearing in the elderly: the Framingham cohort, 1983–1985. Part I. Basic audiometric test results. Ear Hear 11 (04) 247-256
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gelfand SA, Schwander T, Silman S. 1990; Acoustic reflex thresholds in normal and cochlear-impaired ears: effects of no-response rates on 90th percentiles in a large sample. J Speech Hear Disord 55 (02) 198-205
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glorig A. 1966; Audiometric references levels. Laryngoscope 76 (05) 842-849
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glorig A, Quiggle R, Wheeler DE, Grings W. 1956; Determination of the normal hearing reference zero. J Acoust Soc Am 28: 1110-1113
  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
• Goodman A.. 1965; Reference zero levels for pure-tone audiometer. ASHA 7 (Suppl) 262-263
  Google Scholar
• Gordon JS, Griest SE, Thielman EJ, Carlson KF, Helt WJ, Lewis MS, Blankenship C, Austin D, Theodoroff SM, Henry JA. 2017; Audiologic characteristics in a sample of recently-separated military veterans: the Noise Outcomes in Servicemembers Epidemiology Study (NOISE Study). Hear Res 349: 21-30
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Helfer TM, Jordan NN, Lee RB. 2005; Postdeployment hearing loss in U.S. army soldiers seen at audiology clinics from April 1, 2003, through March 31, 2004. Am J Audiol 14 (02) 161-168
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Higson JM, Haggard MP, Field DL. 1994; Validation of parameters for assessing obscure auditory dysfunction—robustness of determinants of OAD status across samples and test methods. Br J Audiol 28 (01) 27-39
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hinchcliffe R. 1992; King-Kopetzky syndrome: an auditory stress disorder. J Audiol Med 1: 89-98
  Google Scholar
• Jayaram M, Baguley DM, Moffat DA. 1992; Speech in noise: a practical test procedure. J Laryngol Otol 106 (02) 105-110
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jerger J, Oliver TA, Pirozzolo F. 1990; Impact of central auditory processing disorder and cognitive deficit on the self-assessment of hearing handicap in the elderly. J Am Acad Audiol 1 (02) 75-80
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• King PF. 1954; Psychogenic deafness. J Laryngol Otol 68 (09) 623-635
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kopetzky SJ. 1948. Deafness, Tinnitus, and Vertigo. New York, NY: Thomas Nelson & Sons;
  Google Scholar
• Margolis RH, Heller JW. 1987; Screening tympanometry: criteria for medical referral. Audiology 26 (04) 197-208
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Martin FN, Champlin CA, Chambers JA. 1998; Seventh survey of audiometric practices in the United States. J Am Acad Audiol 9 (02) 95-104
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Middelweerd MJ, Festen JM, Plomp R. 1990; Difficulties with speech intelligibility in noise in spite of a normal pure-tone audiogram. Audiology 29 (01) 1-7
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Narula AA, Mason SM. 1988; Selective dysacusis—a preliminary report. J R Soc Med 81 (06) 338-340
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Plomp R. 1978; Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 63 (02) 533-549
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pryce H, Wainwright D. 2008; Help-seeking for medically unexplained hearing difficulties: a qualitative study. Int J Ther Rehabil 15: 343-349
  Google Scholar
• Rappaport JM, Phillips DP, Gulliver JM. 1993; Disturbed speech intelligibility in noise despite a normal audiogram: a defect in temporal resolution?. J Otolaryngol 22 (06) 447-453
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rendell RJ, Stephens SDG. 1988; Auditory disability with normal hearing. Br J Audiol 22: 233-234
  Google Scholar
• Saunders G, Abrams H. 2009. Evaluation of Approaches to Auditory Rehabilitation of mTBI. NCRAR Pre-conference Workshop: Current Directions and Interdisciplinary Approaches to mTBI, October 7, Portland, OR
  Google Scholar
• Saunders GH, Frederick MT, Arnold M, Silverman S, Chisolm TH, Myers P. 2015; Auditory difficulties in blast-exposed eterans with clinically normal hearing. J Rehabil Res Dev 52 (03) 343-360
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saunders GH, Haggard MP. 1989; The clinical assessment of obscure auditory dysfunction—1. Auditory and psychological factors. Ear Hear 10 (03) 200-208
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stach BA, Spretnjak ML, Jerger J. 1990; The prevalence of central presbyacusis in a clinical population. J Am Acad Audiol 1 (02) 109-115
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thornton AR, Raffin MJ. 1978; Speech-discrimination scores modeled as a binomial variable. J Speech Hear Res 21 (03) 507-518
  Google Scholar
• Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense (VA/DoD) 2010 VA/DoD clinical practice guidelines for management of post-traumatic stress. https://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/ptsd/cpgPTSDFULL201011612c.pdf
• Wilber LA, Kruger B, Killion MC. 1988; Reference thresholds for the ER-3A insert earphone. J Acoust Soc Am 83 (02) 669-676
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wiley TL, Cruickshanks KJ, Nondahl DM, Tweed TS, Klein R, Klein BEK. 1996; Tympanometric measures in older adults. J Am Acad Audiol 7 (04) 260-268
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson RH. 2011; Some observations on the nature of the audiometric 4000 Hz notch: data from 3430 veterans. J Am Acad Audiol 22 (01) 23-33
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson RH, McArdle R. 2013; Characteristics of the audiometric 4,000 Hz notch (744,553 veterans) and the 3,000, 4,000, and 6,000 Hz notches (539,932 veterans). J Rehabil Res Dev 50 (01) 111-132
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson RH, McArdle R. 2014; A treatise on the thresholds of interoctave frequencies: 1500, 3000, and 6000 Hz. J Am Acad Audiol 25 (02) 171-186
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar