One in four American adults has a disability. Individuals with disabilities are more likely to have mental health issues and use substances and are less likely to attend substance use rehabilitation compared to individuals without disabilities. However, most research about substance use and substance use rehabilitation does not focus specifically on sensory disabilities. The purpose was to test the association between vision and/or hearing loss, lifetime drug use, and lifetime drug rehabilitation. Data files from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cycles (2013-2014, 2015-2016, 2017-2018) were combined. Ordinal logistic regression was used to test the association between vision and hearing loss and lifetime drug use and binary logistic regression to test the association with lifetime rehabilitation among those who had used drugs, adjusting for multiple testing and the complex survey design. There was a significant association between vision and hearing loss status and lifetime drug use (p = .018), but not with lifetime rehabilitation (p = .972). Post-hoc comparisons were not statistically significant. However, individuals with vision loss only and hearing loss only had 36% and 37% greater odds, respectively, of drug use than those without a disability, and those with both vision and hearing loss had 18% greater odds of drug use than those with either alone. Persons with disability were more likely to have used drugs but were not more likely to have gone to drug rehabilitation.

Background: The number of people in the U.S. affected by sensory disabilities and/or substance use has continued to increase, but the relationship between them has yet to be fully understood. The purpose of this review is to assess the relationship between substance use and vision loss in the U.S. as described by current literature. Methods: A search of published literature was conducted across MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science, and EBSCO: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and CINAHL following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analysis (PRISMA) protocol. Risk of bias was assessed by the authors based on study design. U.S. based studies written in English between 2010 and 2022 that reported on vision loss and substance use were included. Results: In all, 21 articles were included (case reports 11, case series 1, cross-sectional 4, retrospective cohort 3, review 2) representing 89,132 patients. Nineteen studies found a positive association between vision loss and substance use, with 15 studies suggesting substance use was a risk factor for vision loss. One study reported on vision loss preceding substance use but was inconclusive. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that substance use may be a risk factor for vision loss, and we recommend that providers screen for vision loss in at risk patients to mitigate further disability. Further research is needed to assess the impact visual disabilities may have on substance use, and stronger evidence is needed to verify if substance use is truly a risk factor for vision loss.

This study examined the association between formal sex education (FSE), sensory disability status, and contraceptive use among U.S. women. Women with disabilities face barriers to contraceptive decision-making, such as limited accessible FSE content and topics. Data were weighted and analyzed from the 2011–2019 National Survey of Family Growth among women 15–25 years of age. Multivariable logistic regression and moderation analysis examined the association between sensory disability status, contraceptive use during last sexual encounter, and FSE topics. Women with hearing loss or both hearing loss and vision loss were less likely to use contraceptives during last sexual encounter than women without sensory disability (hearing loss: adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.36; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.14, 0.96; both: aOR: 0.28; CI: 0.08, 0.91). Exploratory moderation analysis showed women with vision loss who received FSE on birth control methods (aOR: 6.14; 95% CI: 1.70, 22.23) and on sexually transmitted infections (aOR: 28.24; 95% CI: 1.71, 46.63). The estimates were based on small numbers of individuals within each subgroup and wide confidence intervals, and thus should be interpreted with caution. The findings point to differences in contraceptive use according to sensory disability status, indicating future studies need larger sample sizes to better understand the role of FSE for women with sensory disability.

Introduction: Few studies identify which health information (HI) people trust and use, and some studies have focused on health information-seeking behaviors (HISB) of individuals with varying perceived cancer risk (PCR). However, most HISB and PCR studies focus on mainstream populations with typical hearing ability. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between HISB and high PCR (HPCR) among English speakers who experienced hearing loss. Methods: Data from the English version of the 2013 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 4 Cycle 3 were analyzed. Frequencies were calculated from HINTS 4 Cycle 3 survey questions. Correlation analysis was used to examine relationships between HPCR status and the various trusted HI sources. A significant correlation coefficient (Pearson’s r) was p set at .05. Results: Of the 229 participants self-identifying as experiencing hearing loss, 46 identified as having HPCR. Moreover, over 95% of HCPR participants endorsed speaking English well. In their latest HI search, participants reported they first accessed HI from the internet (28.3%) yet also indicated their most trusted HI source were doctors (97.8%). Pearson’s r indicated no significant relationship between PCR status of participants and degree of trust in HI sources (p < .05). Conclusions: Health professionals should deliver clear and relevant health messages and materials that are understood by individuals who experience hearing loss, including those with HPCR. For individuals who experience hearing loss, health education and communication specialists need to consider alternate communication methods such as writing, speech recognition apps, or captions to support health communication. Keywords: health information seeking-behaviors, hearing loss, perceived cancer risk

Adolescents with sensory disabilities are disproportionately affected by nonlethal violent victimization (NVV) more than adolescents without sensory disabilities, but little is known about NVV in the United States. The purpose of the current study is to determine whether adolescents' sensory disability (SD) status (no disability, vision disability, hearing disability, both disabilities) are associated with NVV, the number of crime episodes reported, and police reporting of crime. Data were analyzed from the 2016-2021 National Crime Victimization Survey. Logistic and linear regression was used to examine the association between SD status type of NVV, police reporting of the crime, and number of NVV episodes. A sample of 1,953 adolescents were in the analysis. Of the sample, 43.4% of adolescents with no disability experienced NVV, 24.7% of adolescents with vision disability experienced NVV, and 44.4% of adolescents with hearing disability experienced NVV. Adolescents with vision disability had fewer episodic NVV than those without SDs, unlike those with hearing disability (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41, 0.42; aOR: 1.09; 95%CI: 1.08, 1.11 respectively). Adolescents with vision disability are more likely to report their crime to police than adolescents without SD and similarly found among adolescents with hearing disability (aOR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.33, 1.37; aOR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.15, 1.19, respectively). These findings can be used to enhance initiatives in reducing incidence of NVV among adolescents with hearing disability, vision disability, and both disabilities. To confirm results, agencies can collaborate and develop uniform terminology for data collection.