Patterns of Hearing Aid Usage Predict Hearing Aid Use Amount (Data Logged and Self-Reported) and Overreport

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (02) ◽  
pp. 187-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ariane Laplante-Lévesque ◽  
Claus Nielsen ◽  
Lisbeth Dons Jensen ◽  
Graham Naylor
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Clinical Sample ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Available N ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Usage Patterns ◽  
Positive Rate ◽  
The Cost

Background: Previous studies found that, on average, users overreport their daily amount of hearing aid use compared to objective measures such as data logging. However, the reasons for this are unclear. Purpose: This study assessed data-logged and self-reported amount of hearing aid use in a clinical sample of hearing aid users. It identified predictors of data-logged hearing aid use, self-reported hearing aid use, and hearing aid use overreport. Research Design: This observational study recruited adult hearing aid users from 22 private dispensers in the Netherlands and in Denmark. Study Sample: The sample consisted of 228 hearing aid users. Typical participants were over the age of 65 and retired, were fitted binaurally, and had financially contributed to the cost of their hearing aids. Participants had on average a mild-to-severe sloping bilateral hearing impairment. Data Collection and Analysis: Participants completed a purposefully designed questionnaire regarding hearing aid usage and the International Outcome Inventory—Hearing Aids. Dispensers collected audiometric results and data logging. Multiple linear regression identified predictors of data-logged hearing aid use, self-reported hearing aid use, and hearing aid use overreport when controlling for covariates. Results: Data logging showed on average 10.5 hr of hearing aid use (n = 184), while participants reported on average 11.8 hr of daily hearing aid use (n = 206). In participants for which both data-logged and self-reported hearing aid use data were available (n = 166), the average absolute overreport of daily hearing aid use was 1.2 (1 hr and 11 min). Relative overreport was expressed as a rate of absolute overreport divided by data-logged hearing aid use. A positive rate denotes hearing aid use overreport: the average overreport rate was .38. Cluster analysis identified two data-logged patterns: “Regular,” where hearing aids are typically switched on for between 12 and 20 hr before their user powers them off (57% of the sample), and “On-off,” where hearing aids are typically switched on for shorter periods of time before being powered off (43% of the sample). In terms of self-report, 77% of the sample described their hearing aid use to be the same every day, while 23% of the sample described their hearing aid use to be different from day to day. Participants for whom data logging showed an On-off pattern or who reported their hearing aid use to be different from day to day had significantly fewer data-logged and self-reported hours of hearing aid use. Having an On-off data-logging pattern or describing hearing aid use as the same every day was associated with a significantly greater hearing aid use overreport. Conclusions: Data-logged and self-reported usage patterns significantly predicted data-logged hearing aid use, self-reported hearing aid use, and overreport when controlling for covariates. The results point to patterns of hearing aid usage as being at least as important a concept as amount of hearing aid use. Dispensers should discuss not only the “how much”, but also the “how” of hearing aid usage with their clients.

scholarly journals Real-World Hearing Aid Usage Patterns and Smartphone Connectivity

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeppe Høy Christensen ◽  
Gabrielle H. Saunders ◽  
Lena Havtorn ◽  
Niels H. Pontoppidan
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Intensity ◽  
Early Morning ◽  
Face Validity ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Acoustic Environment ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Usage Patterns ◽  
Late Evening

Data for monitoring individual hearing aid usage has historically been limited to retrospective questionnaires or data logged intrinsically in the hearing aid cumulatively over time (e. g., days or more). This limits the investigation of longitudinal interactions between hearing aid use and environmental or behavioral factors. Recently it has become possible to analyze remotely logged hearing aid data from in-market and smartphone compatible hearing aids. This can provide access to novel insights about individual hearing aid usage patterns and their association to environmental factors. Here, we use remotely logged longitudinal data from 64 hearing aid users to establish basic norms regarding smartphone connectivity (i.e., comparing remotely logged data with cumulative true hearing aid on-time) and to assess whether such data can provide representative information about ecological usage patterns. The remotely logged data consists of minute-by-minute timestamped logs of cumulative hearing aid on-time and characteristics of the momentary acoustic environment. Using K-means clustering, we demonstrate that hourly hearing aid usage patterns (i.e., usage as minutes/hour) across participants are separated by four clusters that account for almost 50% of the day-to-day variation. The clusters indicate that hearing aids are worn either sparsely throughout the day; early morning to afternoon; from noon to late evening; or across the day from morning to late evening. Using linear mixed-effects regression modeling, we document significant associations between daily signal-to-noise, sound intensity, and sound diversity with hearing aid usage. Participants encounter louder, noisier, and more diverse sound environments the longer the hearing aids are worn. Finally, we find that remote logging via smartphones underestimates the daily hearing aid usage with a pooled median of 1.25 h, suggesting an overall connectivity of 85%. The 1.25 h difference is constant across days varying in total hearing aid on-time, and across participants varying in average daily hearing aid-on-time, and it does not depend on the identified patterns of daily hearing aid usage. In sum, remote data logging with hearing aids has high representativeness and face-validity, and can offer ecologically true information about individual usage patterns and the interaction between usage and everyday contexts.

scholarly journals Clustering Users Based on Hearing Aid Use: An Exploratory Analysis of Real-World Data

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Pasta ◽  
Tiberiu-Ioan Szatmari ◽  
Jeppe Høy Christensen ◽  
Kasper Juul Jensen ◽  
Niels Henrik Pontoppidan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Real World ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Objective Data ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
User Clustering ◽  
Usage Patterns ◽  
Typical Day

While the assessment of hearing aid use has traditionally relied on subjective self-reported measures, smartphone-connected hearing aids enable objective data logging from a large number of users. Objective data logging allows to overcome the inaccuracy of self-reported measures. Moreover, data logging enables assessing hearing aid use with a greater temporal resolution and longitudinally, making it possible to investigate hourly patterns of use and to account for the day-to-day variability. This study aims to explore patterns of hearing aid use throughout the day and assess whether clusters of users with similar use patterns can be identified. We did so by analyzing objective hearing aid use data logged from 15,905 real-world users over a 4-month period. Firstly, we investigated the daily amount of hearing aid use and its within-user and between-user variability. We found that users, on average, used the hearing aids for 10.01 h/day, exhibiting a substantial between-user (SD = 2.76 h) and within-user (SD = 3.88 h) variability. Secondly, we examined hearing aid use hourly patterns by clustering 453,612 logged days into typical days of hearing aid use. We identified three typical days of hearing aid use: full day (44% of days), afternoon (27%), and sporadic evening (26%) day of hearing aid use. Thirdly, we explored the usage patterns of the hearing aid users by clustering the users based on the proportion of time spent in each of the typical days of hearing aid use. We found three distinct user groups, each characterized by a predominant (i.e., experienced ~60% of the time) typical day of hearing aid use. Notably, the largest user group (49%) of users predominantly had full days of hearing aid use. Finally, we validated the user clustering by training a supervised classification ensemble to predict the cluster to which each user belonged. The high accuracy achieved by the supervised classifier ensemble (~86%) indicated valid user clustering and showed that such a classifier can be successfully used to group new hearing aid users in the future. This study provides a deeper insight into the adoption of hearing care treatments and paves the way for more personalized solutions.

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.

Hearing Technology Use and Management in School-Age Children: Reports from Data Logs, Parents, and Teachers

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 883-892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha J. Gustafson ◽  
Todd A. Ricketts ◽  
Anne Marie Tharpe
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Parent Report ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
School Age ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
System Use ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss

Background: Consistency of hearing aid and remote microphone system use declines as school-age children with hearing loss age. One indicator of hearing aid use time is data logging, another is parent report. Recent data suggest that parents overestimate their children’s hearing aid use time relative to data logging. The potential reasons for this disparity remain unclear. Because school-age children spend the majority of their day away from their parents and with their teachers, reports from teachers might serve as a valuable and additional tool for estimating hearing aid use time and management. Purpose: This study expands previous research on factors influencing hearing aid use time in school-age children using data logging records. Discrepancies between data logging records and parent reports were explored using custom surveys designed for parents and teachers. Responses from parents and teachers were used to examine hearing aid use, remote microphone system use, and hearing aid management in school-age children. Study Sample: Thirteen children with mild-to-moderate hearing loss between the ages of 7 and 10 yr and their parents participated in this study. Teachers of ten of these children also participated. Data Collection and Analysis: Parents and teachers of children completed written surveys about each child’s hearing aid use, remote microphone system use, and hearing aid management skills. Data logs were read from hearing aids using manufacturer’s software. Multiple linear regression analysis and an intraclass correlation coefficient were used to examine factors influencing hearing aid use time and parent agreement with data logs. Parent report of hearing aid use time was compared across various activities and school and nonschool days. Survey responses from parents and teachers were compared to explore areas requiring potential improvement in audiological counseling. Results: Average daily hearing aid use time was ˜6 hr per day as recorded with data logging technology. Children exhibiting greater degrees of hearing loss and those with poorer vocabulary were more likely to use hearing aids consistently than children with less hearing loss and better vocabulary. Parents overestimated hearing aid use by ˜1 hr per day relative to data logging records. Parent-reported use of hearing aids varied across activities but not across school and nonschool days. Overall, parents and teachers showed excellent agreement on hearing aid and remote microphone system use during school instruction but poor agreement when asked about the child’s ability to manage their hearing devices independently. Conclusions: Parental reports of hearing aid use in young school-age children are largely consistent with data logging records and with teacher reports of hearing aid use in the classroom. Audiologists might find teacher reports helpful in learning more about children’s hearing aid management and remote microphone system use during their time at school. This supplementary information can serve as an additional counseling tool to facilitate discussion about remote microphone system use and hearing aid management in school-age children with hearing loss.

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.

Audiologist Practices: Parent Hearing Aid Education and Support

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (04) ◽  
pp. 324-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Meibos ◽  
Karen Muñoz ◽  
Karl White ◽  
Elizabeth Preston ◽  
Cache Pitt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
The United States ◽  
Counseling Skills ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Training Experience ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Hearing Aid Use

Background: Early identification of hearing loss has led to routine fitting of hearing aids in infants and young children. Amplification provides opportunities to optimize child development, although it also introduces challenges for parents to navigate. Audiologists have a central role in providing parents with support to achieve effective management strategies and habits. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore current practices of pediatric audiologists who work with children birth to 5 yr of age, regarding their support of parent learning in achieving effective hearing aid management, identify existing gaps in service delivery, and to determine if audiologists were receptive to receiving training related to effective approaches to provide counseling and support to parents. Research Design: A cross-sectional, population-based survey was used. Study Sample: Three hundred and forty-nine surveys were analyzed from pediatric audiologists who provided services to children birth to 5 yr of age. Responses were received from 22 states in the United States. Data Collection and Analysis: Responses were collected through the mail and online. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the information. Results: More than half (61%) of the audiologists in the study had been providing pediatric hearing aid services to children birth to 5 yr of age for >10 yr. Of the audiologists who reported monitoring hours of hearing aid use, the majority reported that they used data logging (90%). More than half of the audiologists (57%) who shared data logging with parents reported that they encountered defensiveness from parents when addressing hearing aid use. Information and skills that were not routinely provided by one-third to one-half of the audiologists included the following: how to get access to loaner hearing aids (30%), available hearing aid options/accessories (33%), available financial assistance (36%), how to teach hearing aid management to other caregivers (38%), how to do hearing aid maintenance (44%), and how to do a Ling 6 sound check (52%). Many audiologists reported they did not frequently collaborate with speech-language pathologists (48%), early interventionists (47%), or physicians (68%). More than half of the audiologists indicated a desire for more training in counseling skills, for all 14 items queried, to support parents with hearing aid management (53–79%), regardless of their previous training experience. Conclusions: For young children with hearing loss to achieve optimal benefit from auditory experiences for speech and language development, they need evidence-based, comprehensive, and coordinated hearing aid management. Audiologists have an important role for teaching information and skills related to hearing aids, supporting parent learning, and collaborating with other providers. Pediatric audiologists in this study recognized and desired the need for further training in counseling skills that can better prepare them to meet the emotional needs of parents in the hearing aid management process.

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.

scholarly journals Effects of an Intervention Designed to Increase Toddlers' Hearing Aid Use

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie E Ambrose ◽  
Margo Appenzeller ◽  
Sarah Al-Salim ◽  
Ann P Kaiser
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Single Case ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Baseline Design ◽  
Early Intervention Services ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Hearing Devices

Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of Ears On, an intervention designed to increase toddlers’ use of hearing devices. A single-case, multiple-baseline design across participants was used with three parent–child dyads who demonstrated low hearing aid use despite enrollment in traditional early intervention services. Data logging technology was used to objectively measure hearing aid use. A functional relationship was identified between participation in the intervention and the number of hours children utilized their hearing aids. Two dyads met the criterion set for completing the intervention: an average of 8 hr of daily hearing aid use. One dyad did not reach this criterion but did meet the parent’s goal of full-time use in the child’s educational setting. For all dyads, increases in use were maintained 1 month after completion of the intervention. Findings support use of this short-term, intensive, individualized intervention to improve hearing aid use for toddlers with hearing loss.

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.

Prediction of Deterioration in Hearing due to Hearing Aid Use

1991 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 661-670 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Macrae
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Noise Exposure ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Hearing Threshold ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Impairment ◽  
Hearing Damage ◽  
The Cost

There is a definite risk of overamplification by hearing aids. Guidelines should therefore be established that will minimize the risk of damage to hearing involved in hearing aid use. A mathematical model that can be used for this purpose is derived from equations for predicting noise-induced permanent threshold shift given in International Standard ISO 1999 combined with the Modified Power Law. The model implies that any noise exposure that would cause deterioration of the hearing threshold levels of a person with normal hearing would also be harmful to the hearing of a person with sensorineural hearing impairment. It follows that, in order to ensure that no deterioration occurs in the hearing of a hearing aid user, the output levels from the aid must be such that they would not cause any damage to a person with normal hearing. This constraint can be met for hearing aid users with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss but cannot be met for users with severe-to-profound loss because it would result in the provision of insufficient gain, particularly at the higher frequencies. If the model is valid, then for this group, some appropriately small amount of hearing damage must be accepted as the cost of the advantages gained from the use of a hearing aid. Verification of the model is essential before the model is used in clinical practice to determine the risk of deterioration in hearing due to hearing aid use.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document