The nurse is planning to instruct a group of adolescents on ways to prevent traumatic brain injuries. What should be included in these instructions?

Choice A reason:
A formal hearing test, or audiometry, is the most comprehensive method for assessing hearing loss, which can be a side effect of ototoxic medications. These tests can detect both conductive and sensorineural hearing loss, providing a detailed profile of hearing function across different frequencies. For clients receiving ototoxic antibiotics, regular monitoring through formal hearing tests is recommended to detect any early signs of hearing impairment and to implement timely interventions.
Choice B reason:
The rubbing fingers test is a rudimentary hearing screening method where the examiner rubs their fingers together near the patient's ear, asking them to indicate when they hear the sound. While this test can be used as a quick check for hearing loss, it is not as sensitive or specific as formal audiometry and may not detect early or mild hearing loss caused by ototoxic drugs.
Choice C reason:
Tuning fork tests, such as the Weber and Rinne tests, are used to differentiate between conductive and sensorineural hearing loss. These tests can be useful in a clinical setting to provide immediate information about the type of hearing loss; however, they are not as comprehensive as formal hearing tests and may not be sufficient for monitoring ototoxicity.
Choice D reason:
The whisper hearing test involves the examiner whispering words or numbers and asking the patient to repeat them. This test can be useful for detecting significant hearing loss but may not be sensitive enough to detect the early stages of ototoxicity. Moreover, the test's accuracy can be affected by the examiner's voice level and the testing environment.

Choice A Reason:
This approach is recommended as it allows for a systematic comparison between the two sides of the chest. Percussion should start at the apices of the lungs, which are located just above the clavicles, and proceed downwards. This method ensures that any differences in percussion note, which could indicate underlying pathology, are identified by direct comparison.

Choice B Reason:
While this approach also involves a systematic assessment, it does not allow for immediate comparison between the two sides of the chest. It is important to compare corresponding areas on each side as you go to detect any asymmetry or changes in resonance.

Choice C Reason:
This method, similar to choice B, does not facilitate immediate side-to-side comparison during the assessment. Immediate comparison is crucial for identifying subtle differences that may indicate conditions such as pleural effusion or pneumothorax.

Choice D Reason:
Starting the percussion above the left clavicle and moving to the right chest after completing the left side does not allow for direct comparison of symmetrical chest areas. Additionally, assessing the right chest moving upward from the liver is not a standard practice, as the liver dullness can interfere with the percussion of the lower right lung fields.