Outcomes of hearing aid fitting for older people with hearing impairment and their significant others

Stark, Patrick; Hickson, Louise

doi:10.1080/14992020400050050

Cited by 193 publications

(172 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

152

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The psychometric results for the HHIE questionnaire were consistent with what has been reported in previous studies that used the paper format of the questionnaire (Stark and Hickson 2004;Öberg et al, 2007). A significant main effect of format showed that the participants in general rated a higher score of 3.9 points on a scale of 100 in the internet format than in the paper-and-pencil version.…”

Section: Questionnaire Format Comparisonsupporting

confidence: 80%

Internet Interventions for Hearing Loss: Examing rehabilitation, self-report measures and internet use for hearing-aid users

Thorén¹

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the future, the rehabilitation of adults with hearing loss is likely to involve modern information technology. It is therefore important to determine whether and to what extent adults with hearing losses use the internet. When evaluating hearing rehabilitation, it is reasonable to use self-report questionnaires as outcome measures. The questionnaires used in audiological research are developed and validated for paper-and-pencil administration. Standardized questionnaires used in the audiological context should also be evaluated in an online administration format. Using the internet in the audiological rehabilitation process might be a cost-effective way to include additional rehabilitation components by guiding hearing-aid users on topics such as communication strategies, hearing tactics and how to handle hearing aids. The development of online rehabilitation programs might foster behavioral changes that will positively affect hearing-aid users.Four studies were conducted with a total of 338 participating hearing-aid users. In the first study, the participants' amount of internet use was investigated. In the second study, the administration format (online vs. paper-and-pencil) of four standardized questionnaires used in hearing research and clinics were evaluated. Finally, two randomized controlled trials were performed to evaluate the efficacy of an online rehabilitation program that included professional guidance by an audiologist. The program lasted over five weeks and was designed for adult, experienced hearing-aid users. The effects of the online programs were compared with the effects of a control group. In the first randomized controlled trial, the participants of the control group participated in an online discussion forum without any professional contact (Study III). In the second randomized controlled trial, the control group participants were informed that the rehabilitation program was full and they were transferred to a waiting list pending treatment (Study IV).The results in the first study showed that 60% of the participating hearing-aid users used computers and the internet. The internet use level was at least at the same level for people with hearing loss as for the general age-matched population in Sweden. In the second study a significant main effect of questionnaire format was found for one questionnaire, which evaluated the participants' activity limitations and participation restrictions; the participants had higher scores on the online format than on the paper format. Other than that, no interaction effects for format were found for the other three questionnaires. In the first randomized controlled trial, after the five-week online rehabilitation program, both groups of participants showed significant improvements and the effects were maintained in domains of activity limitation and participation restriction at the six-month follow-up. Moreover, effects in psychosocial domains were found. In the second randomized controlled trial, after the five-week online rehabilitation, the p...

show abstract

Section: Questionnaire Format Comparisonsupporting

confidence: 80%

Internet Interventions for Hearing Loss: Examing rehabilitation, self-report measures and internet use for hearing-aid users

Thorén¹

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of their Wndings was that a more severely impaired hearing loss caused greater problems with hearing aids. In a study after the outcome of hearing-aid Wtting, Stark and Hickson [16] also found a relationship between self-reported hearing disability and degree of hearing impairment. They measured disability with the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE) [20] before and after hearing-aid Wtting and found a signiWcantly greater reduction in HHIE-scores for participants with a three-frequency average (3-FA) hearing loss of greater than 35 dB, when compared to the reduction measured for those with a 3-FA hearing loss of less than 25 dB.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Self-reported disability and handicap after hearing-aid fitting and benefit of hearing aids: comparison of fitting procedures, degree of hearing loss, experience with hearing aids and uni- and bilateral fittings

Metselaar

Maat

Krijnen

et al. 2008

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-reported outcome on hearing disability and handicap as well as overall health-related quality of life were measured after hearing-aid Wtting in a large-scale clinical population. Fitting was performed according to two diVerent procedures in a double-blind study design. We used a comparative procedure based on optimizing speech intelligibility scores and a strictly implemented Wtting formula. Hearing disability and handicap were assessed with the hearing handicap and disability inventory and beneWt of hearing aids with the abbreviated proWle of hearing aid beneWt. EVects on health-related quality of life and depression were assessed with the EuroQol-5D questionnaire and the geriatric depression scale. We found that hearing-aid Wtting according to either procedure had a signiWcantly positive eVect on disability and handicap associated with hearing loss. This eVect lasted for several months. Only the eVect on disability persisted after 1-year of follow-up. Selfreported beneWt from hearing aids was comparable for both Wtting procedures. Unaided hearing disability was more pronounced in groups of participants with greater hearing loss, while the beneWt of hearing aids was independent from the degree of hearing impairment. First-time hearing aid users reported greater beneWt from their hearing aids. The added value from a bilateral hearing-aid Wtting was not signiWcant. Overall health-related quality of life and incidence of depression did not alter after hearing-aid Wtting.

show abstract

“…This is the subject of previous and on-going research (Stark & Hickson, 2004;Kramer et al, 2005;Knudsen et al, 2010Knudsen et al, , 2012Meyer et al, 2014;Ekberg et al, 2015). Although practical support was offered to all patients, this related solely to support available from hearing services.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current process in hearing-aid fitting appointments: An analysis of audiologists’ use of behaviour change techniques using the behaviour change technique taxonomy (v1)

Barker

Mackenzie

Lusignan

2016

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Outcomes of hearing aid fitting for older people with hearing impairment and their significant others

Cited by 193 publications

References 30 publications

Internet Interventions for Hearing Loss: Examing rehabilitation, self-report measures and internet use for hearing-aid users

Internet Interventions for Hearing Loss: Examing rehabilitation, self-report measures and internet use for hearing-aid users

Self-reported disability and handicap after hearing-aid fitting and benefit of hearing aids: comparison of fitting procedures, degree of hearing loss, experience with hearing aids and uni- and bilateral fittings

Current process in hearing-aid fitting appointments: An analysis of audiologists’ use of behaviour change techniques using the behaviour change technique taxonomy (v1)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About