scholarly journals An exploratory study identifying a possible response shift phenomena of the Glasgow hearing aid benefit profile

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Arthur ◽  
Tessa Watts ◽  
Ruth Davies ◽  
Vinaya Manchaiah ◽  
Julie Slater
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Exploratory Study ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Psychological Impact ◽  
Response Shift ◽  
Test Technique ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Shift Effect ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

A then-test technique was used to investigate the possibility of a response shift in the Glasgow hearing aid benefit profile (GHABP). Following completion of part 1 of the GHABP, 16 adults were invited for hearing-aid follow up appointments. In accordance with then-test technique, participants were asked to think back to before they had their hearing-aids fitted and the GHABP part 1 was completed again to re-establish the disability and handicap scores. These scores were then compared with the initial GHABP part I scores. Paired T testing and Wilcoxon Rank tests were carried out to investigate the statistical significance of the response shift effect. Statistically significant differences were seen between initial and retrospective GHABP (disability) scores using t test. No significant differences could be seen between the initial and retrospective handicap scores. Results suggest participants may have demonstrated a possible response shift phenomenon with the disability construct of the GHABP questionnaire, related to a possible re-calibration effect or a denial of disability effect. This exploratory study suggests that the GHABP questionnaire may be subject to a response shift phenomena. We suggest that further more robust studies are completed to verify this and recommend that this could have psychological impact on participants when explaining the results of the outcome measure and may affect hearing aid use. There is also potential for this phenomenon to affect global GHABP scores specifically when demonstrating to stakeholders the overall success of an audiology service.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Normative Data for the Attitudes towards Loss of Hearing Questionnaire

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (09) ◽  
pp. 637-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrielle H. Saunders ◽  
Kathleen M. Cienkowski ◽  
Anna Forsline ◽  
Stephen Fausti
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Normative Data ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Patient Attitudes ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Report Data ◽  
Negative Coping ◽  
Loss Of Hearing ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Investigations have shown that patient attitudes toward hearing loss and hearing aids impact self-reported handicap and disability, hearing aid benefit, and hearing aid use. The Attitudes towards Loss of Hearing Questionnaire (ALHQ) was developed by Saunders and Cienkowski (1996) to examine some of the psychosocial factors underlying the use and acquisition of hearing aids. Here we report data from a new version of questionnaire (ALHQ v2.1), which examines attitudes towards hearing loss and hearing aids on five scales: Denial of Hearing Loss, Negative Associations, Negative Coping Strategies, Manual Dexterity and Vision, and Hearing-Related Esteem. Reliability values, internal consistency values, and cut points for typical and atypical scores are provided, along with comparison of the scores of women, men, current hearing aid users, non–hearing aid users, and paying versus nonpaying individuals. The ALHQ takes about ten minutes to complete and identifies for the clinician some of the issues that might jeopardize successful hearing aid outcome.

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.

The Relationship Between Hearing Loss Self-Management and Hearing Aid Benefit and Satisfaction

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Convery ◽  
Gitte Keidser ◽  
Louise Hickson ◽  
Carly Meyer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose Hearing loss self-management refers to the knowledge and skills people use to manage the effects of hearing loss on all aspects of their daily lives. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between self-reported hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Method Thirty-seven adults with hearing loss, all of whom were current users of bilateral hearing aids, participated in this observational study. The participants completed self-report inventories probing their hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Correlation analysis was used to investigate the relationship between individual domains of hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Results Participants who reported better self-management of the effects of their hearing loss on their emotional well-being and social participation were more likely to report less aided listening difficulty in noisy and reverberant environments and greater satisfaction with the effect of their hearing aids on their self-image. Participants who reported better self-management in the areas of adhering to treatment, participating in shared decision making, accessing services and resources, attending appointments, and monitoring for changes in their hearing and functional status were more likely to report greater satisfaction with the sound quality and performance of their hearing aids. Conclusion Study findings highlight the potential for using information about a patient's hearing loss self-management in different domains as part of clinical decision making and management planning.

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.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document