J Am Acad Audiol 25:1034-1035 (2014)
Letter to the Editor DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.25.10.11
Time for a Change: A N ote on H earing Loss T erm inology Before the term sensorineural came into popular use in the 1960s, losses that resulted from lesions of the cochlea or auditory nerve were commonly referred to as nerve-type hearing loss or perceptive hearing loss. The former is unfortunately still common today, although the majority of hearing losses do not involve the audi tory nerve at all. The latter is completely inaccurate, as these lesions are not expected to involve perception, and is fortunately rarely seen in audiological parlance today. The emergence of the term sensorineural was greatly welcomed, as it was designed to imply that a hearing loss was caused by a sensory (inner ear) lesion, a neural (auditory nerve) lesion, or both. The clear shortcoming of this one-word term is that it does not separate the two possible sites of lesion. This term tit well in a profes sional era in which the site-of-lesion tests of the day often could not give a clear differentiation between cochlear and retrocochlear lesions. Today’s diagnostic capabilities, of course, have greatly increased the audiologist’s ability to accurately separate sensory from neural lesions. We believe th a t the time for a more accurate term is long overdue. Although there has been some use of the term sensory-neural in an attem pt to separate the possible etiological sites, we note th at according to the dictionary the dash (-) is used "... in writing or printing to mark a pause or break in sense, or to represent omitted letters or words.” In contrast,
1 034
the slash (/) is used "... between alternatives (e.g., and/or).” As such, the use of a slash, as in sensory / neural hearing loss, meets the criteria for accurate terminology in audiology. It is our hope that the profession of audiology will rally around the use of a spelling that better reflects an “and/or” situation when a clear differentiation be tween sensory and neural cannot be made. Audiologists can facilitate patient management by reporting that the loss is cochlear (sensory) or neural in nature when test results clearly differentiate between these two lesion sites. Through this letter, we hope th a t we have put forth a clear argum ent for adoption of the spelling sensory / neural as a replacement for previous spell ings. We believe th a t this spelling clearly states that a hearing loss-producing lesion may be found in the cochlea, the auditory nerve, or both and that, as a profession, we are strengthened through a common ality of accurate term s and spellings in audiological communication. Listed below are audiologists who support this change and join us in urging its adoption. John Greer Clark Associate Professor, Communication Sciences and Disorders University of Cincinnati Cincinnati, OH Frederick N. Martin Lillie Hage Jamail Centennial Professor Emeritus, Communication Sciences and Disorders University of Texas at Austin
Copyright of Journal of the American Academy of Audiology is the property of American Academy of Audiology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Letter to the Editor DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.25.10.11
Time for a Change: A N ote on H earing Loss T erm inology Before the term sensorineural came into popular use in the 1960s, losses that resulted from lesions of the cochlea or auditory nerve were commonly referred to as nerve-type hearing loss or perceptive hearing loss. The former is unfortunately still common today, although the majority of hearing losses do not involve the audi tory nerve at all. The latter is completely inaccurate, as these lesions are not expected to involve perception, and is fortunately rarely seen in audiological parlance today. The emergence of the term sensorineural was greatly welcomed, as it was designed to imply that a hearing loss was caused by a sensory (inner ear) lesion, a neural (auditory nerve) lesion, or both. The clear shortcoming of this one-word term is that it does not separate the two possible sites of lesion. This term tit well in a profes sional era in which the site-of-lesion tests of the day often could not give a clear differentiation between cochlear and retrocochlear lesions. Today’s diagnostic capabilities, of course, have greatly increased the audiologist’s ability to accurately separate sensory from neural lesions. We believe th a t the time for a more accurate term is long overdue. Although there has been some use of the term sensory-neural in an attem pt to separate the possible etiological sites, we note th at according to the dictionary the dash (-) is used "... in writing or printing to mark a pause or break in sense, or to represent omitted letters or words.” In contrast,
1 034
the slash (/) is used "... between alternatives (e.g., and/or).” As such, the use of a slash, as in sensory / neural hearing loss, meets the criteria for accurate terminology in audiology. It is our hope that the profession of audiology will rally around the use of a spelling that better reflects an “and/or” situation when a clear differentiation be tween sensory and neural cannot be made. Audiologists can facilitate patient management by reporting that the loss is cochlear (sensory) or neural in nature when test results clearly differentiate between these two lesion sites. Through this letter, we hope th a t we have put forth a clear argum ent for adoption of the spelling sensory / neural as a replacement for previous spell ings. We believe th a t this spelling clearly states that a hearing loss-producing lesion may be found in the cochlea, the auditory nerve, or both and that, as a profession, we are strengthened through a common ality of accurate term s and spellings in audiological communication. Listed below are audiologists who support this change and join us in urging its adoption. John Greer Clark Associate Professor, Communication Sciences and Disorders University of Cincinnati Cincinnati, OH Frederick N. Martin Lillie Hage Jamail Centennial Professor Emeritus, Communication Sciences and Disorders University of Texas at Austin
Copyright of Journal of the American Academy of Audiology is the property of American Academy of Audiology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
