Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 29, 2026
Neuro-rehabilitation Approach for Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss
Published on: January 25, 2016
[Analysis of prognostic factors for sudden sensorineural hearing loss]
1Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, People's Hospital of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, 730000, China. ty_wei2003@yahoo.com.cn
Objective:
To analysis the prognostic factors of the sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SHL), to predict the prognosis of patient with SHL precisely.
Method:
Two hundred and fifty-six cases (280 ears) with SHL were reviewed retrospectively during January 2005 to Jun 2009. Possible influence factor was analysis with logistic stepwise regression to investigate the correlation with prognosis. All verified influence factors was analysis with single-factor analysis of variance.
Result:
The prognosis of SHL related to age, the trouble time before treatment, vertigo with(or) tinnitus, degree of hearing loss, the patterns of audiogram, but not to sex and trouble ear. With increasing of age, the prognosis of SHL becomes poor. Especially after 40 years old, the prognosis gets worse. Regarding to the relationship between the trouble time before treatment and the prognosis. The groups within 9 days have no significant difference (P > 0.05). There are significant difference between group of > 3-9 days and > 9-15 days (P < 0.05), > 9-15 days and > 15 days (P < 0.05). Compared with patients suffer from vertigo or (and) tinnitus, patients without vertigo or (and) tinnitus obtain a good result (P < 0.05). As for initial hearing threshold, flat (upgrade) subgroup, downgrade (upgrade) subgroup, upgrade subgroup and valley-mountain subgroup have no significant difference (P > 0.05). However, there are significant difference between upgrade subgroup and flat subgroup, upgrade subgroup and all the others. Furthermore, comparison with the low,midst, severe and profound hearing loss, the prognosis among them is no statistical different. But statistical different exists between media and profound subgroup.
Conclusion:
The factor of age, the trouble time before treatment, vertigo with (or) tinnitus, degree of hearing loss, the patterns of audiogram are correlated with prognosis of SHL. The prognosis has a poor tendency with age increasing, especially after 40 years old. Good result maybe achieved within 9 visiting days. After that, the recovery rates declined obviously. Patients have company complication, such as vertigo or (and) tinnitus have poor prognosis. The downgrade subgroup of audiogram has high incidence rate although upgrade subgroup has a good prognosis. The level of hearing loss before medication is not a simple linear correlation with prognosis. Media hearing loss demonstrate the best prognosis. On the contrary, profound hearing loss has the worst prognosis. With hearing threshold added, the total recovery rates goes down.
