Hearing Aid Fitting Outcome: Clinical Application and Psychometric Properties of a Swedish Translation of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA)

2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (08) ◽  
pp. 512-521 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Jonas Brännström ◽  
Ingegerd Wennerström
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Demographic Variables ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Hearing Aid Fitting ◽  
Digital Hearing Aids ◽  
Conductive Hearing

Background: The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) is a seven-item hearing-specific questionnaire. It was developed with the purpose of evaluating the efficacy of hearing aid rehabilitation. Few psychometric properties have been presented for a Swedish translation of the IOI-HA. Furthermore, previous studies have examined the IOI-HA in mainly sensorineural hearing losses, and we do not know how the type of hearing loss affects the outcome. Purpose: To evaluate the hearing aid fitting outcome measured in a clinical setting using a Swedish translation of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA), to determine the psychometric properties of the translation, and to examine how a number of demographic variables such as type of hearing loss affect the outcome. Research Design: A descriptive and correlational study in a retrospective sample. Study Sample: Two hundred and twenty-four (107 females and 117 males; ages 27–94 yr with an average of 66.1 yr) first-time hearing aid users. Intervention: Mostly digital hearing aids (97.8%) were fitted monaurally (60%) or binaurally (40%) between 2007 and 2009. Data Collection and Analysis: The subjects were mailed the IOI-HA questionnaire six months after their final appointment, and the completed questionnaire was returned by mail to the clinic. The psychometric properties were evaluated and compared to previous studies using the IOI-HA. The associations between the outcome scores and a number of demographic variables (age, gender, degree of hearing loss, type of hearing loss, number of hearing aids, and type of hearing aids) were examined. Based on the pure tone audiograms, the subjects were divided into three groups; those with conductive hearing losses, sensorineural hearing losses, and mixed hearing losses. For these groups, the differences in outcome measured as IOI-HA were examined. Results: The psychometric properties of the present translation of the IOI-HA showed resemblance in many aspects to previous reports. Furthermore, the type of hearing loss seems to affect the IOI-HA outcome. Hearing loss increases with increasing age, and hearing aid use increases with increasing degree of hearing loss. Subjects with sensorineural hearing losses show significantly poorer scores on items concerning introspective aspects of the outcome in comparison to subjects with mixed hearing losses and subjects with conductive hearing losses. Monaurally fitted subjects tend to report lower scores on average, but monaural or binaural hearing aid fitting do not significantly affect the subjective outcome. Conclusions: The psychometric properties of the present Swedish translation of the IOI-HA show resemblance in many aspects to previous reports, but the differences observed could be due to differences in the study populations. Overall, the demographic variables examined could not be used as predictors for the hearing aid fitting outcome, and more reliable predictors need to be identified.

scholarly journals Analysis of the results of hearing aids fitting using the questionnaire «Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile»

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-33
Author(s):  
L. E. Golooanooa ◽  
E. V. Zhiunskaya ◽  
M. . Yu
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Hearing Aid Fitting ◽  
Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

164 patients with moderate to severe ehronie bilateral sensorineural hearing loss were asked to fill in the Glasgow hearing aid benefit profile. Its usefulness was showed in eases of diffieult hearing aid fitting.

scholarly journals Benefits from, Satisfaction with, and Self-Efficacy for Advanced Digital Hearing Aids in Users with Mild Sensorineural Hearing Loss

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (02) ◽  
pp. 158-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Jilla ◽  
Jeffrey Danhauer ◽  
J. Sullivan ◽  
Kristin Sanchez ◽  
Carole Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Digital Hearing Aids

AbstractLittle evidence is available regarding outcomes of advanced digital technology (ADT) hearing aid wearers with mild sensorineural hearing loss (MSNHL). The purpose of this article is to report the characteristics of and outcomes for this population. A cross-sectional research design was employed with 56 participants from a private practice setting. The International Outcomes Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA), Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life (SADL), and the Measure of Audiologic Rehabilitation Self-Efficacy for Hearing Aids (MARS-HA) were completed, scored, and compared with normative data. Results revealed that ADT aids were worn 10.5 hours/day, were mostly advanced to premium (55%), had an average cost per aid of $2,138 (SD = $840), and provided significant benefit (IOI-HA overall score: mean = 4.1; SD = 0.6) and satisfaction (SADL global score: mean = 5.4; SD = 0.8) to users who had good overall self-efficacy (MARS-HA composite score: mean = 81.7; SD = 12.8). Patients were most dissatisfied with and had the least self-efficacy for managing background noise and advanced handling of their devices. ADT hearing aid users with MSNHL achieved excellent outcomes, but ongoing follow-up and counseling from hearing health care providers may be important for successful management of background noise and mastery of advanced handling skills.

An approach to bilateral bone-anchored hearing aid surgery in children: contralateral placement of sleeper fixture

2008 ◽  
Vol 123 (5) ◽  
pp. 555-557 ◽  
Author(s):  
J M Bernstein ◽  
P Z Sheehan
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Contralateral Side ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Calvarial Bone ◽  
Optimal Position ◽  
Bone Anchored Hearing Aid ◽  
Conductive Hearing

AbstractObjective:Bone-anchored hearing aid surgery in younger children is a two-stage procedure, with a titanium fixture being allowed to osseointegrate for several months before an abutment is fitted through a skin graft. In the first procedure, it has been usual to place a reserve or sleeper fixture approximately 5 mm from the primary fixture as a backup in case the primary fixture fails to osseointegrate. This ipsilateral sleeper fixture is expensive, is often not used, and is placed in thinner calvarial bone where it is less likely to osseointegrate successfully. The authors have implanted the sleeper fixture on the contralateral side, with the additional objective of reducing the number of procedures for bilateral bone-anchored hearing aid implantation, providing a cost-effective use for the sleeper.Methods:The authors implanted the bone-anchored hearing aid sleeper fixture in the contralateral temporal bone instead of on the ipsilateral side in seven successive paediatric cases with bilateral conductive hearing loss requiring two-stage bone-anchored hearing aids, treated at the Royal Manchester Children's Hospital, UK.Results:The seven patients ranged in age from five to 15 years, with a mean age of 10 years; in addition, a 20-year-old with learning disability was also treated. In each case, the contralateral sleeper fixture was not needed as a backup fixture, but was used in four patients (57 per cent) as the basis for a second-side bone-anchored hearing aid.Conclusions:In children with bilateral conductive hearing loss, in whom a bilateral bone-anchored hearing aid is being considered and the second side is to be operated upon at a later date, we recommend placing the sleeper fixture on the contralateral side at the time of primary first-side surgery. Our technique provides a sleeper fixture located in an optimal position, where it also offers the option of use for a second-side bone-anchored hearing aid and reduces the number of procedures needed.

scholarly journals Investigating the Impact of Hearing Aid Use and Auditory Training on Cognition, Depressive Symptoms, and Social Interaction in Adults With Hearing Loss: Protocol for a Crossover Trial (Preprint)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Nkyekyer ◽  
Denny Meyer ◽  
Peter J Blamey ◽  
Andrew Pipingas ◽  
Sunil Bhar
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Social Interaction ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Hearing Aid Use

BACKGROUND Sensorineural hearing loss is the most common sensory deficit among older adults. Some of the psychosocial consequences of this condition include difficulty in understanding speech, depression, and social isolation. Studies have shown that older adults with hearing loss show some age-related cognitive decline. Hearing aids have been proven as successful interventions to alleviate sensorineural hearing loss. In addition to hearing aid use, the positive effects of auditory training—formal listening activities designed to optimize speech perception—are now being documented among adults with hearing loss who use hearing aids, especially new hearing aid users. Auditory training has also been shown to produce prolonged cognitive performance improvements. However, there is still little evidence to support the benefits of simultaneous hearing aid use and individualized face-to-face auditory training on cognitive performance in adults with hearing loss. OBJECTIVE This study will investigate whether using hearing aids for the first time will improve the impact of individualized face-to-face auditory training on cognition, depression, and social interaction for adults with sensorineural hearing loss. The rationale for this study is based on the hypothesis that, in adults with sensorineural hearing loss, using hearing aids for the first time in combination with individualized face-to-face auditory training will be more effective for improving cognition, depressive symptoms, and social interaction rather than auditory training on its own. METHODS This is a crossover trial targeting 40 men and women between 50 and 90 years of age with either mild or moderate symmetric sensorineural hearing loss. Consented, willing participants will be recruited from either an independent living accommodation or via a community database to undergo a 6-month intensive face-to-face auditory training program (active control). Participants will be assigned in random order to receive hearing aid (intervention) for either the first 3 or last 3 months of the 6-month auditory training program. Each participant will be tested at baseline, 3, and 6 months using a neuropsychological battery of computer-based cognitive assessments, together with a depression symptom instrument and a social interaction measure. The primary outcome will be cognitive performance with regard to spatial working memory. Secondary outcome measures include other cognition performance measures, depressive symptoms, social interaction, and hearing satisfaction. RESULTS Data analysis is currently under way and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in June 2018. CONCLUSIONS Results from the study will inform strategies for aural rehabilitation, hearing aid delivery, and future hearing loss intervention trials. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03112850; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03112850 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6xz12fD0B).

Outcomes of Hearing Aid Use by Individuals with Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss (USNHL)

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 941-949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles E. Bishop ◽  
Elgenaid Hamadain ◽  
Jason A. Galster ◽  
Mary Frances Johnson ◽  
Christopher Spankovich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Spatial Separation ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Hearing Aid Use

Background: Unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (USNHL) can have a negative impact on functions associated with the advantages of balanced, binaural hearing. Although single-sided deafness, which is a complete loss of audibility in one ear, has gained increased interest in the published research, there is a gap in the literature concerning hearing aid outcomes for individuals with residual, or otherwise “aidable,” hearing in the affected ear. Purpose: To assess hearing aid outcomes for a group of individuals with USNHL with residual, aidable function. Research Design: A quasi-experimental study of hearing aid outcomes with paired comparisons made between unaided and aided test conditions. Study Sample: A convenience sample of twenty-two individuals with USNHL, with sufficient residual hearing in the affected ear as to receive audibility from use of a hearing aid, were recruited into the study from September 2011 to August 2012. Intervention: Each participant was fit with a digital behind-the-ear hearing aid coupled to a custom ear mold. Data Collection and Analysis: Assessments were performed at baseline (unaided) and after a three-month field trial (aided) with primary outcomes involving objective measures in sound field yielding signal-to-noise ratio loss (SNR Loss) via the Quick Speech-in-Noise Test and word recognition scores (WRS) via the Northwestern University Auditory Test, No. 6. Outcomes also involved the administration of two well-established subjective benefit questionnaires: The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the 49-item Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ49). Results: As a group, participants showed significantly improved median SNR Loss thresholds when aided in a test condition that included spatial separation of speech and noise, with speech stimuli directed toward the worse ear and noise stimuli directed toward the better ear (diff. = −4.5; p < 0.001). Hearing aid use had a small, though statistically significant, negative impact on median SNR Loss thresholds, when speech and noise stimuli originated from the same 0° azimuth (diff. = 1.0; p = 0.018). This was also evidenced by the median WRS in sound field (diff. = −6.0; p = 0.006), which was lowered from 98% in the unaided state to 92% in the aided state. Results from the SSQ49 showed statistically significant improvement on all subsection means when participants were aided (p < 0.05), whereas results from the APHAB were generally found to be unremarkable between unaided and aided conditions as benefit was essentially equal to the 50th percentile of the normative data. At the close of the study, it was observed that only slightly more than half of all participants chose to continue use of a hearing aid after their participation. Conclusions: We observed that hearing aid use by individuals with USNHL can improve the SNR Loss associated with the interference of background noise, especially in situations when there is spatial separation of the stimuli and speech is directed toward the affected ear. In addition, hearing aid use by these individuals can provide subjective benefit, as evidenced by the APHAB and SSQ49 subjective benefit questionnaires.

The Effects of Changes in Head Angle on Auditory and Visual Input for Omnidirectional and Directional Microphone Hearing Aids

2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Henry ◽  
Todd Ricketts
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Visual Cues ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Increase Signal Intensity ◽  
Visual Mode

Improving the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for individuals with hearing loss who are listening to speech in noise provides an obvious benefit. Although binaural hearing provides the greatest advantage over monaural hearing in noise, some individuals with symmetrical hearing loss choose to wear only one hearing aid. The present study tested the hypothesis that individuals with symmetrical hearing loss fit with one hearing aid would demonstrate improved speech recognition in background noise with increases in head turn. Fourteen individuals were fit monaurally with a Starkey Gemini in-the-ear (ITE) hearing aid with directional and omnidirectional microphone modes. Speech recognition performance in noise was tested using the audiovisual version of the Connected Speech Test (CST v.3). The test was administered in auditory-only conditions as well as with the addition of visual cues for each of three head angles: 0°, 20°, and 40°. Results indicated improvement in speech recognition performance with changes in head angle for the auditory-only presentation mode at the 20° and 40° head angles when compared to 0°. Improvement in speech recognition performance for the auditory + visual mode was noted for the 20° head angle when compared to 0°. Additionally, a decrement in speech recognition performance for the auditory + visual mode was noted for the 40° head angle when compared to 0°. These results support a speech recognition advantage for listeners fit with one ITE hearing aid listening in a close listener-to-speaker distance when they turn their head slightly in order to increase signal intensity.

Are Two Ears Not Better Than One?

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (03) ◽  
pp. 171-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel A. McArdle ◽  
Mead Killion ◽  
Monica A. Mennite ◽  
Theresa H. Chisolm
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Analysis Experiment ◽  
Insert Earphones ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Background: The decision to fit one or two hearing aids in individuals with binaural hearing loss has been debated for years. Although some 78% of U.S. hearing aid fittings are binaural (Kochkin , 2010), Walden and Walden (2005) presented data showing that 82% (23 of 28 patients) of their sample obtained significantly better speech recognition in noise scores when wearing one hearing aid as opposed to two. Purpose: To conduct two new experiments to fuel the monaural/binaural debate. The first experiment was a replication of Walden and Walden (2005), whereas the second experiment examined the use of binaural cues to improve speech recognition in noise. Research Design: A repeated measures experimental design. Study Sample: Twenty veterans (aged 59–85 yr), with mild to moderately severe binaurally symmetrical hearing loss who wore binaural hearing aids were recruited from the Audiology Department at the Bay Pines VA Healthcare System. Data Collection and Analysis: Experiment 1 followed the procedures of the Walden and Walden study, where signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) loss was measured using the Quick Speech-in-Noise (QuickSIN) test on participants who were aided with their current hearing aids. Signal and noise were presented in the sound booth at 0° azimuth under five test conditions: (1) right ear aided, (2) left ear aided, (3) both ears aided, (4) right ear aided, left ear plugged, and (5) unaided. The opposite ear in (1) and (2) was left open. In Experiment 2, binaural Knowles Electronics Manikin for Acoustic Research (KEMAR) manikin recordings made in Lou Malnati's pizza restaurant during a busy period provided a typical real-world noise, while prerecorded target sentences were presented through a small loudspeaker located in front of the KEMAR manikin. Subjects listened to the resulting binaural recordings through insert earphones under the following four conditions: (1) binaural, (2) diotic, (3) monaural left, and (4) monaural right. Results: Results of repeated measures ANOVAs demonstrated that the best speech recognition in noise performance was obtained by most participants with both ears aided in Experiment 1 and in the binaural condition in Experiment 2. Conclusions: In both experiments, only 20% of our subjects did better in noise with a single ear, roughly similar to the earlier Jerger et al (1993) finding that 8–10% of elderly hearing aid users preferred one hearing aid.

Digital hearing aids for high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss: Preliminary experience with the RetroX® device

2005 ◽  
Vol 125 (7) ◽  
pp. 693-696 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maurizio Barbara ◽  
Giorgio Bandiera ◽  
Bruno Serra ◽  
Vania Marrone ◽  
Silvia Tarentini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Digital Hearing Aids

Evaluation of Hardwire Personal Assistive Listening Devices

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
James J. Dempsey ◽  
Mark Ross
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Frequency Responses ◽  
Subjective Evaluations ◽  
Potential Benefits

A large number of personal amplifiers have recently become available commercially. These devices have not been classified as hearing aids by the FDA and are therefore not subject to the FDA rules and regulations governing the sales of hearing aid devices. In this investigation, several of these personal amplifiers were evaluated to determine potential benefits and problems for each device. The devices were evaluated electroacoustically and, also, subjectively by a group of adults with sensorineural hearing loss. The results of the electroacoustic evaluation revealed very sharply peaked frequency responses. The subjective evaluations revealed tremendous variability, with some preferences for power and low-frequency amplification. Clinical implications of these results and suggestions for further research are provided.

Large Vestibular Aqueduct Syndrome: A Case Study

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 822-828 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jackie L. Clark ◽  
Ross J. Roeser
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Behavioral Testing ◽  
Hearing Aid Fitting ◽  
Hearing Sensitivity ◽  
Vestibular Aqueduct ◽  
Brainstem Response ◽  
Large Vestibular Aqueduct Syndrome ◽  
Large Vestibular Aqueduct

A 23-month-old female was referred for hearing aid fitting after failing newborn hearing screening and being diagnosed with significant hearing loss through subsequent diagnostic testing. Auditory brainstem response (ABR) and behavioral testing revealed a moderate-to-severe bilateral mixed hearing loss. Prior to the hearing aid evaluation, tympanostomy tubes had been placed bilaterally with little or no apparent change in hearing sensitivity. Initial testing during the hearing aid fitting confirmed earlier findings, but abnormal middle ear results were observed, requiring referral for additional otologic management. Following medical clearance, binaural digital programmable hearing aids were fit using Desired Sensation Level parameters. Behavioral testing and probe microphone measures showed significant improvements in audibility. Decrease in hearing sensitivity was observed six months following hearing aid fitting. Radiological studies, ordered due to the mixed component and decreased hearing sensitivity, revealed large vestibular aqueduct syndrome (LVAS). Based on the diagnosis of LVAS, a cochlear implant was placed on the right ear; almost immediate speech-language gains were observed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document