Virtual methods for conducting focus group studies are increasingly being used in many fields, including rehabilitation sciences. This is partly due to the current pandemic, and the need for social distancing, however, may also relate to factors such as convenience and practicality. Virtual research methods enable investigators to collect data at a distance from the participant(s) through the use of technology-mediated data collection methods incorporating new tools and technologies. The aim of this scoping review was to identify, synthesize, and present current evidence related to the methods for conducting virtual focus groups. A comparison of asynchronous and synchronous data collection methods was conducted. The objectives, inclusion criteria, and scoping review methods were specified in advance and documented in a protocol. The 40 articles in this review included virtual focus group research conducted in rehabilitation sciences including data collection conducted using both synchronous (22.5%) and asynchronous (77.5%) models and using a defined moderation method. Three modes of focus group discussion were reported including email, chat-based, and videoconferencing; these were facilitated through the various technology platforms reported in the review. Reported barriers and facilitators to conducting virtual focus group research were extracted and summarized. Commonly reported facilitators to virtual focus group research included the ability to recruit participants from diverse geographical locations and the participants’ ability to engage at times convenient to them. Both computer literacy and access to technology were reported as common barriers. This review highlighted the need for further research and guidance around virtual focus groups conducted using face-to-face synchronous methods and with younger participants groups.

Objective: To develop a conceptual framework around the factors that influence audiologists in the clinical uptake of remote follow-up hearing aid support services. Design: A purposive sample of 42 audiologists, stratified according to client-focus of either paediatric or adult, were recruited from professional associations in Ontario, Canada, as members of the six-step, participatory-based concept mapping process. Analyses included multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis. Results: Six main themes emerged from this research according to overall level of importance: (1) technology and infrastructure; (2) audiologist-centred considerations; (3) hearing healthcare regulations; (4) client-centred considerations; (5) clinical implementation considerations; and (6) financial considerations. Subthemes were identified at the group-level and by subgroup. These highlight the importance of TECH factors (accessible Technology, Easy to use, robust Connection, and Help available), as well as the multifaceted nature of the perceived attitudes/aptitudes across stakeholders. Conclusion: Findings can be utilised in tailored planning and development efforts to support future research, knowledge dissemination, best-practice protocol/guideline development, and related training to assist in the clinical uptake of remote follow-up hearing aid support services, across variable practice contexts.

Purpose: The digital health revolution has brought forward integral technological advancements enabling virtual care as a readily accessible delivery model. Despite this forward momentum, the field of audiology still faces barriers that impede the uptake of virtual services into routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to gather, synthesize, and summarize the literature around virtual hearing aid intervention studies and the related technology and infrastructure requirements. Method: A scoping review was conducted using MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Nursing and Allied Health, and Web of Science databases. Objectives, inclusion criteria, and scoping review methods were specified in advance and documented in a protocol. Results: The 11 studies identified through this review related to virtual hearing aid services delivered by a licensed health care provider and/or facilitator(s) specific to hearing aid management, programming, verification, and validation services. Service delivery models varied according to patient population, technology experience, type(s) and time course of care, type of remote location, and technology/support requirements. Barriers and facilitators to implementation-related themes including technology access and function, client sociotechnical, convenience, education and training, interaction quality, service delivery, and technology innovation. Conclusions: This scoping review provides evidence around the technology and infrastructure required for full integration of virtual hearing aid services into practice and according to care type. Low-tech versus high-tech requirements may be used to guide virtual service delivery triaging efforts. Research and development efforts in the areas of pediatrics, clinical support tools, and hearing aid/app-based solutions will support further uptake of virtual service delivery in audiology.

This document was informed by literature reviews conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute’s guide to evidence synthesis (Aromataris & Munn, 2017; https://joannabriggs.org) and includes evidence related to client candidacy, delivery models, modalities of delivery, and outcomes of virtual hearing aid fitting and management. This document provides clinical practice guidance for virtual hearing aid fitting and management processes and technological requirements in the delivery of such services (herein referred to as virtual hearing aid care). Virtual hearing aid care can include services delivered directly to a client by a provider or using facilitator-supported services and specialized equipment, depending on client factors, type of care, and the timepoint in the care process (e.g., initial versus follow-up appointments). This document will address virtual care including the following types of hearing aid care: o Programming o Verification o Validation o Management (counselling and education) Currently, virtual hearing aid care is better suited to follow-up appointments

Background: Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) methods allow for real-time, real-world survey data collection. Studies with adults have reported EMA as a feasible and valid tool in the measurement of real-world listening experience. Research is needed to investigate the use of EMA with children who wear hearing aids. Objectives: This study explored the implementation of EMA with children using a single-blinded repeated measures design to evaluate real-world aided outcome. Methods: Twenty-nine children, aged 7-17, used manual program switching to access hearing aid programs, fitted according to Desired Sensation Level (DSL) version 5.0 child quiet and noise prescriptive targets. Aided outcome was measured using participant-triggered twice-daily EMA entries, across listening situations and hearing dimensions. Results: Adherence to the EMA protocol by the children was high (82.4% compliance rate). Speech loudness, understanding and preference results were found to relate to both the hearing aid program and the listening situation. Aided outcomes related to prescription-based noise management were found to be highest in noisy situations. Conclusions: Mobile device-based EMA methods can be used to inform daily life listening experience with children. Prescription-based noise management was found to decrease perceived loudness in noisy, non-school environments; this should be evaluated in combination with hearing aid noise reductions features.