Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2020 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Gudmon, Monica de Castro
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Mendes, Beatriz de Castro Andrade |
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Fonoaudiologia
|
| Departamento: |
Faculdade de Ciências Humanas e da Saúde
|
| País: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/23380
|
Resumo: |
Audiological follow-up is characterized as a periodic procedure that consists of otorhinolaryngological, audiological and other assessments, with the objective of verifying possible changes in the patient's audiological characteristics, as well as the need for adjustments in the ear molds, checking the proper functioning and eventual adjustments in the characteristics of the patient hearing aids. Protocols for assessing auditory function and language development for children must be included in this process and they must be attended to by a multidisciplinary team. Objective: Based on the analysis of the flow of care provided by the audiological monitoring hearing health service, to propose different processes for the user, aiming at greater effectiveness and agility in meeting the demands brought by children with hearing loss and their families. Method: The subjects were selected by convenience sample. All children with hearing loss who attended the children's hearing aid clinic in 2018 were included. Results: From the 271 subjects, the average age of the children was ten years, 56% study in regular schools and 41% undergo speech therapy; most have moderate to profound sensorineural hearing loss, with 36% using electronic devices more than ten hours a day. Regarding the reason for scheduling, 37% return for annual follow-up, 23% return due to problems with the devices, another 23% return due to the need for documentation, 16% return to make earmolds and only 1% with a specific complaint from a doctor. Of the total, 24% presented the device as a reason for scheduling, and of these, 55% required maintenance or replacement. Conclusion: There was no trend in demographic and audiological characteristics in the population that returned spontaneously. The reasons for scheduling a return are mostly for audiological follow-up, followed by complaints related to hearing aids and the need for documents for benefits. There was great variability among patients, with very different demands, according to the needs of each age group and families. This heterogeneity hindered a previous organization in the return |
