Abstract:

The aim of present study is comparing the quality of life of youth suffering from hearing impairment and hearing properly. The research was conducted in ten subscales: physical health, mental health, moods and emotions, self-perception, independence, family life and relations with parents, peers and social support, school environment, the level of social acceptance (bullying), financial resources. In the first subscale health self-assessment regarding physical activity, efficiency and energy was conducted. In the second and third subscales positive and negative emotions were studied. In the fourth subscale self-satisfaction was analyzed. The fifth subscale was about making decisions. The sixth subscale was designed to estimate relations with parents. The seventh subscale was aimed at looking into social support and making friends. In the eighth subscale school satisfaction was measured. In social acceptance the experience of bullying was investigated. The last subscale regarded estimation of family’s financial resources, possibility of having life similar to peer’s life and limitations caused by financial shortcomings.

The applied scientific method is diagnostic survey and technique – a questionnaire. The tool is Polish version of KIDSCREEN questionnaire – 52, which is used to estimate the quality of life of children and youth within the range of age 8 – 18. There are 52 questions in 10 subscales. 100 persons ranging from 16 – 18 years old were studied. 50 of the respondents were hearing properly and 50 had varied degrees of hearing impairments: mild, moderate, significant and very high. The proportion of sex was equal: 50 boys and 50 girls. Statistical analysis was conducted with use of Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient, with p≤ 0,050.

The results of study:
The highest life satisfaction of youth with hearing deficits was declared in subscales of physical health, mental health and social functioning though the differences in comparison with hearing well respondents appeared statistically insignificant. Only in subscale “financial resources” there was a statistically significant difference. In this area the youth with hearing deficits declared lower life satisfaction than their auditory healthy counterparts. Due to financial reasons they feel limitations in the access to assets and they perceive their lifestyle as less attractive than their healthy peers’. Although the differences in the three above mentioned subscales are not statistically significant, the study shows that the youth with hearing deficits estimates quality of their life worse than their hearing properly counterparts in every single aspect. Sex variable delivered information that boys estimated their quality of life higher than girls.

Conclusions:
Slight differences in declared quality of life can be associated with transitional stage of life. Process of becoming an adult affects similarly both well hearing and badly hearing youth. Since Newborn Hearing Screening Program was implemented the rehabilitation of hearing can be introduced as early as possible and hearing loss does not have to be the determinant of quality of life. The most important support for the youth with hearing deficits is financial support as well as peer support.

Keywords:

Quality of life, subjective quality of life, youth with hearing deficits.