Questionable Use of "Nonorganic" in Norrix et al. (2017), "Estimating Nonorganic Hearing Thresholds"

Area of Science:

• Audiology
• Medical Terminology
• Psychosocial Health

Background:

• The term "nonorganic" hearing loss is frequently used in audiology, but it presents significant terminological confusion.
• This term is problematic as it can imply the absence of hearing loss or a functional disorder without organ damage, leading to misinterpretation.
• The article "Estimating Nonorganic Hearing Thresholds Using Binaural Auditory Stimuli" (Norrix et al., 2017) highlights the need for clearer terminology.

Discussion:

• "Nonorganic" hearing loss can be misinterpreted as a lack of genuine hearing impairment, which is illogical when a hearing loss is suspected.
• A more accurate term, "false" hearing loss, is proposed to describe functional hearing disorders where the underlying cause is not immediately apparent or organ-related.
• The term "false" may also carry less negative connotation compared to "nonorganic."

Key Insights:

• "False" hearing loss is a more precise and less ambiguous term than "nonorganic" hearing loss.
• Instances of false hearing loss can be linked to underlying physical-mental health disturbances.
• Audiologists should remain vigilant for signs of psychosocial difficulties in patients presenting with false hearing loss and facilitate appropriate referrals.

Outlook:

• Adoption of the term "false" hearing loss can improve patient communication and reduce stigma.
• Further research into the psychosocial factors contributing to false hearing loss is warranted.
• Standardizing terminology in audiology is crucial for accurate diagnosis and effective patient care.