Communication Screening Profile

Schow, Ronald L.; Nerbonne, Michael A.

doi:10.1097/00003446-198205000-00007

Cited by 127 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is unfortunate that we cannot be sure about the degree to which the partner contributed to the outcome, as 60% of SA and 75% of HK partners became involved in the assembly task. The importance of a close friend or family member's involvement in the management of chronic health conditions should not be overlooked; several studies have highlighted the critical role played by the spouse (Scarinci et al, 2008) and other family members (Schow & Nerbonne, 1982) in the audiological rehabilitation process. Given the extent of partner involvement in the current study, future research into the self-fitting hearing aid should focus on the characteristics and contributions of the partner.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hearing-aid assembly management among adults from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds: Toward the feasibility of self-fitting hearing aids

Convery

Keidser

Caposecco

et al. 2013

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hearing-aid assembly management among adults from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds: Toward the feasibility of self-fitting hearing aids

Convery

Keidser

Caposecco

et al. 2013

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This questionnaire is used in the hospital's audiology department, and it was created based on the Nursing Home Hearing Handicap -NHHI 17 , Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly 18 , and Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults -HHIA 19 questionnaires. Based on the questionnaire, the answers were scored as follows: 0 -Never; 1 -Occasionally; 2 -In half of the time; 3 -Always.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparação entre avaliação audiológica e screening: um estudo sobre presbiacusia

Samelli¹,

Negretti²,

Ueda³

et al. 2011

Braz. j. otorhinolaryngol. (Impr.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gi ven the high prevalence of presbycusis and the damage it brings about, a screening test can be useful in the identification of hearing loss in primary care. Aim:To estimate the prevalence of hearing loss in a representative sample of elderly people living at Butantan using an audiological screening method (questionnaire) and a basic audiological evaluation; to compare the results of the two kinds of evaluations, checking the validity of this tool for hearing loss screening.Design: Cross sectional descriptive study.Materials and Methods: 200 individuals (above 60 years old, both genders) were randomly selected to undergo audiological screening (questionnaire). Another randomly selected group encompassed 100 individuals who were submitted to a set of audiological tests. Then, we compared the results from the two methods.Results: There were no statistically significant associations between the questionnaire and the degree of hearing loss of the patients. Conclusion:The prevalence of hearing loss in our sample was of 56% in the screening and of 95% when checked by the audiological evaluation. Therefore, screening was not proven valid to assess hearing when compared to audiological evaluation. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;77(1):70-6. BJORL ORIGINAL ARTICLE

show abstract

“…According to Schow and Nerbonne (1982), the design intent of SAC was to create a screening tool that incorporated elements from more comprehensive subjective measures that existed at that time. To this end, 6 of the 10 original SAC questions (Items 1-6) derived primarily from the 158-item Hearing Performance Inventory (HPI; Giolas, Owens, Lamb, & Schubert, 1979) and the remaining four items (Items 7-10) derived from the Denver Scale of Communication Function (DSCF; Alpiner et al, unpublished study cited in Schow & Nerbonne, 1980).…”

Section: Treatment Outcome Measure: Sac-hxmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To this end, 6 of the 10 original SAC questions (Items 1-6) derived primarily from the 158-item Hearing Performance Inventory (HPI; Giolas, Owens, Lamb, & Schubert, 1979) and the remaining four items (Items 7-10) derived from the Denver Scale of Communication Function (DSCF; Alpiner et al, unpublished study cited in Schow & Nerbonne, 1980). In SAC, Schow and Nerbonne (1982) employed scoring methodologies originally described by High, Fairbanks, and Glorig (1964) for use with the Hearing Handicap Scale (HHS). As in HHS, both SAC and SAC-Hx used a 5-item Likert-type response format along a continuum of relative frequency of occurrence.…”

Section: Treatment Outcome Measure: Sac-hxmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short-Term Hearing Aid Benefit in a Large Group

Ivory

Hendricks

Vliet

et al. 2009

Trends in Amplification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Short-term benefit in a very large group (N = 4,584) following hearing aid treatment was estimated using a revised version of the Self-Assessment of Communication (SAC-Hx). A total of 4,584 veterans with adult-onset hearing loss and mean audiometric findings consistent with a mild to severe, sloping, symmetrical, sensorineural hearing impairment were fitted with hearing aids. Responses to the SAC-Hx were gathered prior to and then 6 weeks following hearing aid fitting. Benefit was defined as the difference between the baseline and the posttreatment SAC-Hx scores. Hearing aid treatment resulted in robust and statistically significant benefit in each category of self-perceived communication consequences. Prior experience influenced benefit: New hearing aid users demonstrated the greatest magnitude of benefit, but even previously satisfied and dissatisfied users obtained significant benefit after new hearing aid fitting. Duration of experience did not have a remarkable effect on the magnitude of benefit: All groups with various durations of experience obtained comparable benefit. Severity of the baseline scores paralleled degree of hearing impairment when impairment was defined using a better ear pure tone average at 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, and 4,000 Hz. Also, severity of perceived communication consequences paralleled poorer monosyllabic word recognition. Hearing aid treatment provided a functional, robust, and statistically significant benefit to individuals in all categories of hearing impairment (normal, mild, moderate, severe, and profound). This report demonstrates the feasibility of the SAC-Hx as a tool to efficiently assess outcome domains in hearing aid fitting.

show abstract

Communication Screening Profile

Cited by 127 publications

References 0 publications

Hearing-aid assembly management among adults from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds: Toward the feasibility of self-fitting hearing aids

Hearing-aid assembly management among adults from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds: Toward the feasibility of self-fitting hearing aids

Comparação entre avaliação audiológica e screening: um estudo sobre presbiacusia

Short-Term Hearing Aid Benefit in a Large Group

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About