Hyperacusis and Associated Factors in Schoolchildren: An Internet Survey Based on Reports From Both Parents and Children

Introduction The aim was to investigate sound tolerance in schoolchildren aged 9–14 years, examine differences across age groups, and identify possible associated factors. Material and methods This was a cross-sectional exploratory study. An internet-based survey was conducted with children aged 9 to 14 years and their parents/guardians, recruited via social media. Parents/guardians and children completed separate questionnaires; the one developed for children has not been formally validated although it has been applied in prior pediatric studies. Hyperacusis was classified as present when both parent and child report were positive. Associated factors were analyzed using Fisher’s exact test to compare individuals with auditory hypersensitivity in terms of whether they were also sensitive to lights, odors, or motion sickness. Inter-rater agreement between parents and children was evaluated with the kappa coefficient (κ). Results From the 75 parents recruited, there were just 60 questionnaires that had been completed by their children (age range 9–14 years; mean 12 years; 61.7% male). Listening difficulties were more frequently reported in children aged 9–10 years (p = 0.010), while earphone use was significantly higher among adolescents aged 13–14 years (p = 0.010). Motion sickness was more prevalent in children aged 11–12 years (p = 0.033). Tinnitus was reported by 20% of children, and hyperacusis by 10.3%, with no significant differences across age groups. Sensitivity to light and odors was significantly associated with hyperacusis according to parents’ reports (p = 0.007) and to children’s reports (p = 0.020). No association was observed between motion sickness and hyperacusis. Conclusions Although the prevalence of hyperacusis among schoolchildren was relatively low, the occurrence of sound-related discomfort was notable. Sound tolerance should be considered in clinical evaluations. The findings should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size and the use of non-validated questionnaires.