Anglia Ruskin University
Schofield_2017_2.docx (333.66 kB)
Download file

The use of uHear™ to screen for hearing loss in older patients with cancer as part of a comprehensive geriatric assessment

Download (333.66 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2023-08-30, 14:57 authored by Michelle Lycke, Philip R. Debruyne, Tessa Lefebvre, Evi Martens, Lore Ketelaars, Hans Pottel, Koen van Eygen, Sofie Derijcke, Patrick Werbrouck, Philippe Vergauwe, Karin Stellamans, Philippe Clarysse, Ingeborg Dhooge, Patricia Schofield, Tom Boterberg
Objective: We previously validated uHear™ to screen for hearing loss in older patients with cancer without a known hearing loss, as part of a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA). In view of low specificity, we tested a new modified uHear™ scoring system as described by Handzel. Methods: Patients, aged ≥70 years, were evaluated by uHear™ and conventional audiometry, which is considered the gold standard, as part of a CGA. The pass or fail screening cut-off for uHear™ was defined as having ≥2 consecutive hearing grades starting from the moderate– severe threshold zone ranging from 0.5 to 2.0 kHz (modified Handzel-uHear™ scoring system). To accept the modified Handzel-uHear™ as screening tool, it was predefined that the combined sensitivity (S) and specificity (Sp) of the test (S + Sp/2) was at least 80% and that an actual combined (S + Sp)/2 of 90% would be found. Results: Ninety ears (45 subjects) were tested. Of those ears, 24.4% were identified as impaired by conventional audiometry. Modified Handzel-uHear™ identified 26.7% of tested ears as impaired. The combined (S + Sp)/2 of the modified Handzel-uHear™ was calculated as 77.5%, while in previous cohort, this was retrospectively calculated as 94.6%. A new uHear™ scoring system was proposed and tested in current and previous cohort. A (S + Sp)/2 of 80.2 and 78.8%, respectively, were obtained. Conclusion: uHear™ is a feasible tool for use within the CGA and shows promising results. However, further research is warranted to optimize the cut-off method before it could be routinely implemented within geriatric oncology.



  • Yes



Issue number


Page range


Publication title

Acta Clinica Belgica




Taylor & Francis

File version

  • Accepted version


  • eng

Legacy posted date


Legacy creation date


Legacy Faculty/School/Department

ARCHIVED Faculty of Health, Social Care & Education (until September 2018)

Usage metrics

    ARU Outputs


    No categories selected