An Examination of Changes in Hearing-Aid Performance and Benefit in the Elderly Over a 3-Year Period of Hearing-Aid Use

2003 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry E. Humes ◽  
Dana L. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Systematic Improvement ◽  
Measurement Protocol ◽  
Hearing Handicap ◽  
Standardized Measurement ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

This brief report describes the changes in hearing-aid performance and benefit in 9 elderly hearing-aid wearers over a 3-year period following the hearing-aid fitting. Objective measures of hearing-aid performance included three measures of speech recognition: (a) the Nonsense Syllable Test (NST) presented at 65 dB SPL and a +8 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), (b) the Connected Speech Test (CST) presented at 50 dB SPL in quiet, and (c) the CST presented at 65 dB SPL and a +8 dB SNR. Subjective, self-report measures of hearing-aid benefit included the Hearing Aid Performance Inventory (HAPI; B. E. Walden, M. E. Demorest, & E. L. Helper, 1984) and the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE; I. Ventry & B. Weinstein, 1982). Performance and benefit measures were obtained at postfit intervals of 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years using a standardized measurement protocol. Individual data were evaluated using 95% critical differences established previously for each benefit measure and applied around the scores observed at the 1-month postfit interval. Little evidence was seen for systematic improvement in aided performance or benefit, consistent with that expected from acclimatization, in any participant or for any measure of benefit.

Changes in Hearing-Aid Benefit Following 1 or 2 Years of Hearing-Aid Use by Older Adults

2002 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 772-782 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry E. Humes ◽  
Dana L. Wilson ◽  
Nancy N. Barlow ◽  
Carolyn Garner
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Individual Data ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

This study reports the results of a large number of hearing-aid benefit measures obtained from 134 elderly hearing-aid wearers during the first year of hearing-aid usage. Benefit measures were obtained after 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year of hearing-aid use by all participants. In addition, follow-up measurements of hearing-aid benefit were performed on 49 of these same hearing-aid wearers following 2 years of hearing-aid use. All participants in this study were fit binaurally with identical full-concha in-the-ear (ITE) hearing aids that used linear Class-D amplifiers with output-limiting compression. Benefit measures included several objective tests of speech recognition, as well as the subjective self-report scales of the Hearing Aid Performance Inventory (HAPI; B. E. Walden, M. E. Demorest, & E. L. Hepler) and the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE; I. Ventry & B. Weinstein, 1982). Although group means changed only slightly over time for all of the benefit measures, significant differences were observed for some of the benefit measures, especially among the subjective, self-report measures of benefit. In almost all of the cases exhibiting significant changes, performance was significantly worse (less benefit) at both the 6-month and 1-year post-fit interval compared to the measurements at 1 month post-fit. In general, the individual data from the 134 participants who were represented in the 1-year data set were consistent with the trends in the group data described above. Regarding longer term changes in benefit following 2 years of hearing-aid use, minimal changes were again observed. In all, there was little evidence for acclimatization of hearing-aid benefit in this study in either the group or the individual data.

Use of a Mild-Gain Hearing Aid by Middle-Age Normal-Hearing Adults Who Do and Do Not Self-Report Trouble Hearing in Background Noise

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 419-428
Author(s):  
Jasleen Singh ◽  
Karen A. Doherty
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Middle Age ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Hearing Handicap ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Hearing Problems

Purpose The aim of the study was to assess how the use of a mild-gain hearing aid can affect hearing handicap, motivation, and attitudes toward hearing aids for middle-age, normal-hearing adults who do and do not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. Method A total of 20 participants (45–60 years of age) with clinically normal-hearing thresholds (< 25 dB HL) were enrolled in this study. Ten self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise, and 10 did not self-report difficulty hearing in background noise. All participants were fit with mild-gain hearing aids, bilaterally, and were asked to wear them for 2 weeks. Hearing handicap, attitudes toward hearing aids and hearing loss, and motivation to address hearing problems were evaluated before and after participants wore the hearing aids. Participants were also asked if they would consider purchasing a hearing aid before and after 2 weeks of hearing aid use. Results After wearing the hearing aids for 2 weeks, hearing handicap scores decreased for the participants who self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise. No changes in hearing handicap scores were observed for the participants who did not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. The participants who self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise also reported greater personal distress from their hearing problems, were more motivated to address their hearing problems, and had higher levels of hearing handicap compared to the participants who did not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. Only 20% (2/10) of the participants who self-reported trouble hearing in background noise reported that they would consider purchasing a hearing aid after 2 weeks of hearing aid use. Conclusions The use of mild-gain hearing aids has the potential to reduce hearing handicap for normal-hearing, middle-age adults who self-report difficulty hearing in background noise. However, this may not be the most appropriate treatment option for their current hearing problems given that only 20% of these participants would consider purchasing a hearing aid after wearing hearing aids for 2 weeks.

Reliability and Stability of Various Hearing-Aid Outcome Measures in a Group of Elderly Hearing-Aid Wearers

1996 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 923-935 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry E. Humes ◽  
Dan Halling ◽  
Maureen Coughlin
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Nonsense Syllable ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Elderly Persons ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Hearing Handicap

Twenty elderly persons with hearing impairment were fit with binaural in-the-ear hearing aids and followed for a 6-month period post-fit. Several hearing-aid outcome measures were obtained at 0, 7, 15, 30, 60, 90, and 180 days post-fit. Outcome measures included (a) objective measures of benefit obtained with nonsense-syllable materials in quiet (CUNY Nonsense Syllable Test, NST) and sentences in multitalker babble (Hearing in Noise Test, HINT); (b) two subjective measures of benefit, one derived from pre-fit/post-fit comparisons on a general scale of hearing handicap (Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly, HHIE) and the other based on a subjective scale of post-fit hearing-aid benefit (Hearing Aid Performance Inventory, HAPI); (c) a questionnaire on hearing-aid satisfaction; (d) an objective measure of hearing-aid use; and (e) a subjective measure of hearing-aid use. Reliability and stability of each measure were examined through repeated-measures analyses of variance, a series of test-retest correlations, and, where possible, scatterplots of the scores against their corresponding 95% critical differences. Many of the measures were found to be both reliable and stable indicators of hearing-aid outcome.

scholarly journals Audiological Rehabilitation for Facilitating Hearing Aid Use: A Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (03) ◽  
pp. 248-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hashir Aazh ◽  
Brian C. J. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Educational Interventions ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Hearing Handicap

AbstractThis article reviews and critically analyzes the design of studies on the effect of audiological rehabilitation (AR) programs on hearing aid (HA) outcomes, in order to guide future research.The design of this study was a narrative review. Studies were included in the review if they were randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of AR on HA use and outcome between 2000 and 2016.Seven articles that met the inclusion criteria were included in the review. Most used educational rather than counseling approaches. Although educational AR programs seem to be useful in enhancing the use of communication strategies, there is limited evidence for their effect on HA use and self-perceived hearing handicap.More research is needed in this field. Future studies should (1) investigate the efficacy of AR interventions based on counseling and empathetic listening as opposed to or in addition to educational interventions, (2) use stricter criteria to include only a subpopulation of patients who do not get on well with their HAs, (3) measure the amount of HA use via data-logging and self-report questionnaires, and (4) use a matching comparison intervention for patients in the control group.

scholarly journals Processo de adaptação de próteses auditivas em usuários atendidos em uma instituição pública federal: parte II: resultados dos questionários de auto-avaliação

2007 ◽  
Vol 73 (5) ◽  
pp. 660-670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carine Dias de Freitas ◽  
Maristela Julio Costa
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aid ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Hearing Handicap ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Uma reabilitação eficiente deve reduzir os efeitos da deficiência sobre as habilidades auditivas e comunicativas do indivíduo e aumentar o bem-estar psicossocial. OBJETIVOS:Verificar a viabilidade do uso de questionários de auto-avaliação e comparar os resultados da protetização em usuários de uma instituição pública federal, com e sem queixas relacionadas às características da amplificação. MATERIAL E MÉTODOS:25 indivíduos, de 13 a 77 anos de idade, usuários de próteses auditivas. Foram aplicados os questionários de auto-avaliação HHIE-S/HHIA (Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly Screening Version ou for Adult) e APHAB (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit), nos indivíduos sem (Grupo 1) e com queixas relacionados às características da amplificação (Grupo 2). RESULTADOS: Diferenças significantes não foram encontradas entre os grupos nos protocolos HHIE-S/HHIA e APHAB, exceto na subescala facilidade de comunicação do APHAB, onde o Grupo 1 obteve melhor benefício. Também evidenciou-se redução significativa da incapacidade auditiva com o uso das próteses em situações favoráveis de comunicação, ambientes reverberantes e na presença de ruído ambiental para ambos os grupos. CONCLUSÃO: Os questionários revelaram ser excelentes preditores das dificuldades enfrentadas pelos usuários, e diferenças significantes foram encontradas em situações favoráveis de comunicação, onde o grupo sem queixas obteve melhor benefício.

Hearing-Aid Outcome Measures Following One Month of Hearing Aid Use by the Elderly

2001 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 469-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry E. Humes ◽  
Carolyn B. Garner ◽  
Dana L. Wilson ◽  
Nancy N. Barlow
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Elderly Persons ◽  
Impaired Hearing ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Class D

This study reports the results of a large number of hearing-aid outcome measures obtained from 173 elderly hearing-aid wearers following one month of hearing-aid use. All participants in this study were fit binaurally with identical full-concha in-the-ear (ITE) hearing aids having linear Class-D amplifiers with output-limiting compression. Outcome measures included several measures of speech recognition, as well as several self-report measures of hearing-aid performance, benefit, satisfaction, and use. Comparison of mean data from this sample of hearing-aid wearers to other larger sets of data, obtained previously for several of these measures of hearing-aid outcome evaluated in isolation, indicated that the participants in this study were representative of the participants in other largerscale studies. Subsequent principal-components factor analysis of the data from this study indicated that there were seven distinct dimensions of hearing-aid outcome. Attempts to document the effectiveness and efficacy of hearing aids for elderly persons with impaired hearing will be most complete when assessing performance along all seven dimensions of hearing-aid outcome. Clinically efficient procedures for doing so are discussed.

The Hearing Handicap Scale as a Measure of Hearing Aid Benefit

1979 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Curtis Tannahill
Keyword(s):  
Word Identification ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Speech Reception ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Hearing Handicap ◽  
Scale Scores ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Use of the Hearing Handicap Scale as a measure of hearing aid benefit was investigated. New hearing aid users with bilateral, sensorineural hearing losses ranging from 5 dB HL to 55 dB HL served as subjects. Changes in speech reception threshold, word identification, and Hearing Handicap Scale were derived by comparing data obtained prior to hearing aid use with that obtained following four weeks of hearing aid use. Results showed a significant improvement for all three measurements and indicated that improvement in word identification presented at conversational level was more related to self-reported hearing aid benefit than was improvement in speech reception threshold. Also, word identification ratings obtained with the stimuli presented at conversation speech level produced a significant correlation with Hearing Handicap Scale scores.

Benefit From, Satisfaction With, and Cost-Effectiveness of Three Different Hearing Aid Technologies

1998 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig W. Newman ◽  
Sharon A. Sandridge
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Present Report ◽  
Digital Signal ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Effectiveness Model ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Clinical decision-making has become more complex as newer, more costly, hearing aid (HA) technologies become available. The expanding array of more expensive HAs demands that clinical researchers continue to justify the value of these instruments relative to the substantial increase in cost to both the provider and consumer. In the present report, 25 current conventional HA users with adult onset of sensorineural hearing loss were fitted with: (a) a one-channel linear HA; (b) a two-channel, nonlinear HA; and (c) a seven-band, two-channel digital signal processing (DSP) HA. All instruments were mini behind-the-ear units with identifying information removed from the cases. Subjects wore each HA for at least a 1-month period. A set of laboratory (Speech Perception in Noise [SPIN] test; audibility index calculated from real-ear measurements) and self-report (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit; Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly/Adults; Knowles Hearing Aid Satisfaction Survey; preference ratings) outcome measures were used to evaluate the benefit from, satisfaction with, and cost-effectiveness of each test HA. As expected, there were statistically significant differences between unaided and aided conditions across HAs. Although the DSP instrument yielded significantly higher word recognition scores on the SPIN test, no differences were observed among the test HAs for the standardized self-report measures. In contrast, however, more than 75% of the subjects preferred the “higher end” instruments. Yet, 33% of the subjects changed their preference for the “higher end” instruments after being informed of costs. A cost-effectiveness model for evaluating the relationship between HA retail purchase price and improvements in performance/benefit is presented.

scholarly journals Is the Device-Oriented Subjective Outcome (DOSO) Independent of Personality?

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 932-940 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Hsiang Wu ◽  
Kelsey Dumanch ◽  
Elizabeth Stangl ◽  
Christi Miller ◽  
Kelly Tremblay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Elderly Adult ◽  
Subjective Outcome ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit ◽  
The Relationship

Background: Self-report questionnaires are a frequently used method of evaluating hearing aid outcomes. Studies have shown that personality can account for 5–20% of the variance in response to self-report measures. As a result, these influences can impact results and limit their generalizability when the purpose of the study is to examine the technological merit of hearing aids. To reduce personality influences on self-report outcome data, the Device-Oriented Subjective Outcome (DOSO) was developed. The DOSO is meant to demonstrate outcomes of the amplification device relatively independent of the individual’s personality. Still, it is unknown if the DOSO achieves its original goal. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between personality and the DOSO. The relationship between personality and several widely used hearing-related questionnaires was also examined. Research Design: This is a nonexperimental study using a correlational design. Study Sample: A total of 119 adult hearing aid wearers participated in the study. Data Collection and Analysis: The NEO Five-Factor Inventory was used to measure five personality traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness). The initial (unaided) hearing disablement, residual (aided) hearing disablement, and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction was measured using the DOSO, Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly/Adult, Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, and Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life. The relationship between personality and each questionnaire was examined using a correlation analysis. Results: All of the DOSO subscales were found to be significantly correlated to personality, regardless of whether age and better-ear hearing thresholds were controlled. Individuals who reported poorer hearing aid outcomes tended to have higher Neuroticism scores, while those who scored higher in Extraversion, Openness, and Agreeableness were more likely to report better outcomes. Across DOSO subscales, the maximum variance explained by personality traits ranged from 6% to 11%. Consistent with the literature, ˜3–18% of the variance of other hearing-related questionnaires was attributable to personality. Conclusions: The degree to which personality affects the DOSO is similar to other hearing-related questionnaires. Although the variance accounted for by personality is not large, researchers and clinicians should not assume that the results of the DOSO are independent of personality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document