Subjective Measures of Hearing Aid Benefit and Satisfaction in the NIDCD/VA Follow-Up Study

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (04) ◽  
pp. 323-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gail Takahashi ◽  
Charles D. Martinez ◽  
Sharon Beamer ◽  
Julie Bridges ◽  
Douglas Noffsinger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Use Patterns ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Follow Up Study ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Perceived benefit, satisfaction, and hearing aid use patterns were measured in a follow-up study to a large-scale multi-site clinical trial conducted in 1996–97. Measures included the Hearing Aid Status Questionnaire, the Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, the Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile, the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life, and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids. On the Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, hearing aid users indicated more unaided difficulty in easy listening situations and less aided benefit in more difficult listening situations compared to the original study. Subjects who no longer used hearing aids indicated less difficulty in unaided situations. All measures indicated significant long-term subjective benefit and satisfaction with hearing aids. Although understanding speech in noise or in group situations continues to be problematic, subjects reported wearing their hearing aids almost all of the time in both easy and difficult listening situations. Se midió el beneficio y la satisfacción del paciente y los patrones de uso del auxiliar auditivo (AA) en un estudio de seguimiento de un estudio clínico, multicéntrico, a larga escala, conducido en 1996–97. Las mediciones incluyeron el Cuestionario del Estado de Uso del Auxiliar Auditivo, el Perfil de Beneficio del Auxiliar Auditivo, El Perfil de Glasgow de Beneficio del Auxiliar Auditivo, la Prueba de Satisfacción con la Amplificación en la Vida Diaria, y el Inventario Internacional de Resultados de Auxiliares Auditivos. En el Perfil de Beneficio de Auxiliares Auditivos, los usuarios de AA indicaron más dificultad sin amplificación en situaciones fáciles de escucha y menor beneficio con amplificación en situaciones difíciles de escucha, comparado con el estudio original. Los sujetos que no volvieron a usar sus AA indicaron menos dificultad en situaciones no amplificadas. Todas las medidas indicaron una satisfacción y un beneficio subjetivo y significativo a largo plazo, con los AA. Aunque entender el lenguaje en ruido o en situaciones grupales continúa siendo problemático, los sujetos reportaron la utilización de sus AA casi todo el tiempo, tanto en situaciones fáciles como difíciles de escucha.

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.

A Follow-Up Study of the CROS Hearing Aid

1972 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hedda Aufricht
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Conversational Speech ◽  
Noisy Environment ◽  
Follow Up Study ◽  
Speech Distortion ◽  
Male Veterans ◽  
The Mean

A recent development in hearing aids, the contralateral routing of signals (CROS), makes it possible to provide amplification for persons with unilateral hearing loss. In 1967, a CROS eyeglass hearing aid was placed on government contract and made available to veterans. To study the efficiency of the CROS, a follow-up questionnaire was sent to 60 male veterans who had been fitted with this aid. All had demonstrated unilateral hearing losses, and the mean threshold for the speech frequencies (500–2000 Hz) in the good ear was 24 dB. The 54 replies (90%) indicated that 85% wore the aid, liked it, and derived benefit from it; 15% neither liked nor wore the aid. The CROS appeared to be most helpful in listening to conversational speech and at work, and most disturbing in a noisy environment. The complaints about the aid fell into major categories: 33% objected to its poor fit and construction and 11% were disturbed by speech distortion. The CROS aid has been a useful addition to the hearing-aid stock at the clinic reported here. It has expanded the program by providing amplification to veterans who could not be fitted with the conventional stock of aids.

Findings From EuroTrak Surveys From 2009 to 2015: Hearing Loss Prevalence, Hearing Aid Adoption, and Benefits of Hearing Aid Use

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (3S) ◽  
pp. 451-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolai Bisgaard ◽  
Stefan Ruf
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Use Patterns ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Product Features ◽  
Hearing Status ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Analyze Data

Purpose The purpose of this study was to analyze data from the EuroTrak surveys performed from 2009 to 2015 in Germany, France, and the United Kingdom to identify factors that could account for the growth in hearing aid sales over that period. Method Data of 132,028 people—approximately 15,000 for each of the 3 countries at 3-year intervals—were collected using a questionnaire. The sample in each country was weighted using the respective country age–gender populations to get balanced results. Furthermore, 11,867 persons with self-reported hearing impairment filled in a comprehensive questionnaire on hearing status and related matters; 4,631 were hearing aid owners. Data were pooled over the 3 countries for each of the years 2009, 2012, and 2015 and analyzed for developments over the 6-year period. In certain cases, data were pooled across countries and years. The analysis focused on hearing loss prevalence, hearing aid adoption rates, satisfaction with hearing aids, and benefits of hearing aid use. Results Hearing loss prevalence was stable over the period around 10%—slightly higher for men than for women. Hearing aid adoption overall increased from 33% to 37%, and bilateral use increased from 55% to 69%. Intervals between hearing aid renewals decreased. These factors contribute to increased hearing aid sales. Bilateral users are more satisfied with the hearing aid product features (76%) and performance (72%) and use their hearing aids 9.1 hr per day, compared with unilateral users where the corresponding numbers are 71%, 67%, and 7.8 hr, respectively. Satisfaction with hearing aid product features and performance in general is slightly increasing; hearing aid users are 14.5% less exhausted at the end of the day compared with nonusers with similar hearing loss and exhibit less depressive and forgetfulness symptoms. Conclusions The prevalence of self-reported hearing loss is 10.6% and stable, and hearing aid adoption has increased, particularly of bilateral fittings that are more satisfactory and exhibit higher daily use patterns. Higher uptake of hearing aids contributes to growing hearing aid sales.

scholarly journals A Comparative Study on Hearing Aid Benefits of Digital Hearing Aid Use (BTE) from Six Months to Two Years

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (03) ◽  
pp. 224-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukeshwari Verma ◽  
Himanshu Sanju ◽  
Bibina Scaria ◽  
Mayank Awasthi ◽  
Aparna Ravichandran ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Listening Skills ◽  
Self Assessment ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Digital Hearing Aid ◽  
Auditory Performance ◽  
One Year ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Introduction For many reasons, it is important for audiologists and consumers to document improvement and benefit from amplification device at various stages of uses of amplification device. Professional are also interested to see the impact of amplification device on the consumer's auditory performance at different stages i.e. immediately after fitting and over several months of use. Objective The objective of the study was to measure the hearing aid benefit following 6 months – 1-year usage, 1 year – 1.5 yeaŕs usage, and 1.5 yeaŕs – 2 years' usage. Methods A total of 45 subjects participated in the study and were divided equally in three groups: hearing aid users from 6 months to 1 year, 1 year to 1.5 year, and 1.5 year to two years. All subjects responded to the Hearing Aid Benefit Questionnaire (63 questions), which assesses six domains of listening skills. Result Results showed the mean scores obtained were higher for all domains in the aided condition, as compared with unaided condition for all groups. Results also showed a significant improvement in the overall score between first-time users with hearing aid experience of six months to one year and hearing aid users using hearing aids for a period between 1.5 and 2 years. Conclusion It is possible to conclude that measuring the hearing aid benefit with the self-assessment questionnaires will assist the clinicians in making judgments about the areas in which a patient is experiencing more difficulty in everyday listening environment and in revising the possible technologies.

NIDCD/VA Hearing Aid Clinical Trial and Follow-Up: Background

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (04) ◽  
pp. 274-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gene W. Bratt ◽  
Mia A.L. Rosenfeld ◽  
David W. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Calidad De Vida ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Life Issues ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

This report provides background regarding the Long Term Follow-Up of Patients in the NIDCD/VA Hearing Aid Clinical Trial study and serves as an introduction to the detailed reports that follow in this issue of Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. The authors investigated five- to seven-year benefit/satisfaction in participants from the original NIDCD/VA Hearing Aid Clinical Trial. The new study was designed to investigate current use of the original study hearing aids, to compare changes in selected audiological measures, and to assess possible predictors of long-term hearing aid use. The outcome measures included estimates of speech intelligibility in quiet and noise, self-reported patterns of hearing aid usage, self-reported estimates of activity limitations and quality-of-life issues, estimates of hearing aid satisfaction, and self-reported hearing aid benefit. Overall, the short-term benefits of hearing aid use observed during the original trial were noted to persist in the long term. Este reporte suministra información relacionada con el Seguimiento a Largo Plazo de los Pacientes del Estudio Clínico de Auxiliares Auditivos del NIDCD/VA, y sirve como una introducción de los reportes detallados que siguen a continuación en esta edición del Journal de la Academia Americana de Audiología. Los autores investigaron por cinco a siete años la satisfacción/beneficio en los participantes del Estudio Clínico de Auxiliares Auditivos del NIDCD/VA original. El nuevo estudio fue designado para investigar el uso actual de los auxiliares auditivos (AA) originales del estudio, para comparar cambios en las medidas audiológicas seleccionadas, y evaluar posibles elementos de predicción a largo plazo en el uso de AA. Las medidas de resultado incluyeron estimados de la inteligibilidad del lenguaje en silencio y en ruido, patrones auto-reportados de uso del AA, estimaciones auto-reportadas de limitación en la actividad y en asuntos de calidad de vida, estimaciones de satisfacción en el uso del AA y auto-reportes de beneficios con el AA. Globalmente, los beneficios a corto plazo del uso de auxiliares auditivos durante el estudio original persistieron en el largo plazo.

Hearing Specific and Generic Measures of the Psychosocial Impact of Hearing Aids

2004 ◽  
Vol 15 (03) ◽  
pp. 238-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrielle H. Saunders ◽  
Jeffrey W. Jutai
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Relative Sensitivity ◽  
Psychosocial Impact ◽  
Assistive Devices ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
One Year ◽  
Generic Measures ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit ◽  
The Relationship

Hearing-specific and generic measures of hearing aid outcome were examined in order (a) to determine their relative sensitivity to hearing aid use and (b) to examine the relationship between pre–hearing aid use expectations and post-use outcomes. Ninety-two hearing-impaired individuals completed some combination of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, Expected Consequences of Hearing Aid Ownership (ECHO), Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life (SADL), and Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale, and provided reports of their daily and lifetime hearing aid use. In general, (a) the longer individuals wear hearing aids, the more positive the reported outcome, and (b) ECHO scores of non–hearing aid users are higher than SADL scores of new hearing aid users (six weeks to one year of use) but are similar to those obtained from experienced users (greater than one year of use). Between-questionnaire comparisons showed the generic measure to be as sensitive as the hearing aid specific measures. We suggest that generic measures have some advantages over hearing specific measures but that each has a place in the clinic.

Short-Term and Long-Term Hearing Aid Benefit and User Satisfaction: A Comparison between Two Fitting Protocols

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (06) ◽  
pp. 482-495 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lu-Feng Shi ◽  
Karen A. Doherty ◽  
Tammy M. Kordas ◽  
Joseph T. Pellegrino
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
User Satisfaction ◽  
Daily Life ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Hearing Aid Fitting ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Noise Test ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Currently published hearing aid fitting protocols recommend speech-in-noise testing and loudness measures, but it remains unclear how these measures affect hearing aid benefit and user satisfaction. This study compared two protocols in their effects on benefit and satisfaction. Protocol A included an electroacoustic analysis, real-ear measures, and hearing aid adjustments based on users' comments. Protocol B included all of Protocol A and a speech-in-noise test, loudness discomfort levels, and aided loudness. Thirty-two participants completed the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life (SADL) at 45 days and three months post–initial fitting. Fewer hearing aid adjustments were made to the hearing aids for participants fitted with Protocol B than participants fitted with Protocol A, but final gains were similar for both groups. Although similar APHAB scores were obtained for both protocols, SADL scores decreased between 45 days and three months for Protocol A. Los protocoles de amplificación de auxiliares auditivo actualmente publicados recomiendan pruebas de lenguaje en ruido y mediciones de apreciación subjetiva de la intensidad (sonoridad), pero no está claro cómo estas mediciones afectan el beneficio de un auxiliar auditivo y la satisfacción del usuario. El estudio comparó dos protocolos en cuanto a sus efectos sobre beneficio y satisfacción. El Protocolo A incluyó un análisis electroacústico, mediciones de oído real y ajuste en el auxiliar auditivo basados en los comentarios del usuario. El Protocolo B incluyó todas las pruebas del Protocolo A, además de una prueba de audición en ruido, de niveles de molestia en la apreciación subjetiva de la intensidad y de sonoridad amplificada. Treinta y dos participantes completaron el Perfil Abreviado de Beneficio del Auxiliar Auditivo (APHAB) y la prueba de Satisfacción con la Amplificación en la Vida Diaria (SADL) a los 45 días y a los tres meses de la adaptación inicial. Tuvieron que hacerse menos ajustes en el audífono en los auxiliares auditivos de participantes adaptados con el Protocolo B, que en los participantes adaptados con el Protocolo A, pero las ganancias finales fueron similares en ambos grupos. Aunque se obtuvieron puntajes APHAB similares en ambos protocolos, los puntajes SADL disminuyeron entre los 45 días y los tres meses para el Protocolo A.

Speech-Recognition Performance after Long-Term Hearing Aid Use

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (04) ◽  
pp. 292-303
Author(s):  
Janet E. Shanks ◽  
Richard H. Wilson ◽  
Patricia Stelmachowicz ◽  
Gene W. Bratt ◽  
David W. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Stimulus Level ◽  
Original Study ◽  
Noise Condition ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Larson et al (2000) reported the findings of a multicenter, NIDCD/VA clinical trial that compared hearing aid performance for three output limiting circuits in 360 adults with symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss. The current study was undertaken to examine long-term hearing aid benefit in this same group of participants following five to six years of hearing aid use. The speech-recognition portion of the follow-up study enrolled 108 participants from the original study, 85% of whom were current hearing aid users and 15% of whom had not worn hearing aids during the past month (nonusers). Recognition performance in sound field on the NU-6 (quiet at 62 dB SPL) and the CST (quiet at 74 dB SPL and with -3 and 3 dB signal-to-babble ratios [S/B] at 62 and 74 dB SPL) was measured unaided and aided whenever possible. Speech-recognition abilities decreased significantly since the original study. Speech-recognition decrements were observed regardless of the speech materials (NU-6 and CST), test condition (quiet and noise), S/B (-3 and 3 dB), or stimulus level (62 and 74 dB SPL). Despite decreases in speech recognition, hearing aid benefit remained largely unchanged since the original study; aided performance exceeded unaided performance regardless of presentation level or noise condition. As in the original study, the relations among stimulus level, S/B, and speech-recognition performance were complex. Larson y col. (2000) reportaron los hallazgos de un estudio clínicos multicéntrico del NIDCD/VA que comparó el desempeño en el uso de auxiliares auditivos (AA) con tres circuitos de limitación de la salida, en 360 adultos con pérdida auditiva sensorineural simétrica. El estudio actual fue conducido para examinar el beneficio a largo plazo del AA en el mismo grupo de participantes, luego de cinco a seis años de utilización del AA. La porción de reconocimiento de lenguaje del estudio de seguimiento involucró a 108 participantes del estudio original, 85% de los cuáles eran actuales usuarios de AA y 15% que no habían usado AA durante el mes anterior (no usuarios). El desempeño en reconocimiento del lenguaje en campo sonoro con el NU-6 (en silencio a 62 dB SPL) y con el CST (en silencio a 74 dB SPL, y con tasas de señal/balbuceo de -3 y +3 dB [S&B] a 62 y 74 dB SPL), fue medido con y sin amplificación cuando resultó posible. Las habilidades de reconocimiento del lenguaje habían disminuido significativamente desde el estudio original. Se observó reducción en el reconocimiento del lenguaje independientemente del material logoaudiométrico (NU-6 y CST), las condiciones de la prueba (en silencio o en ruido), S/B (-3 y +3 dB), o la intensidad del estímulo (62 y 74 dB SPL). A pesar de la disminución en el reconocimiento del lenguaje, el beneficio del AA permaneció sin cambios en relación al estudio original; el desempeño con amplificación superó el desempeño sin amplificación sin importar la intensidad de la presentación o las condiciones de ruido. Al igual que en el estudio original, las relaciones entre el nivel de estímulo, la S/B y el desempeño en el reconocimiento de lenguaje fueron complejas.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document