The Longitudinal Relationship Between Speech Recognition in Noise, Need for Recovery After Work, Job Demand, and Job Control Over a Period of 5 Years

Abstract

Hearing impairment may lead to an increased need to recover from fatigue and distress after a day of work. Also, hearing impairment may negatively affect the balance between workload and control over it (job demand and job control). The uptake of hearing solutions may have a positive effect on these outcomes. We aimed to assess the longitudinal relationship between change in speech recognition in noise and changes in need for recovery after work and job demand and job control, and the influence of hearing solutions on these relationships over a period of 5 years. Research questions (RQs) were as follows: (1) Is a 5-year change in speech recognition in noise associated with a change in need for recovery after work over that same 5-year period?; (2) Is a 5-year change in speech recognition in noise associated with a change in job demand and job control over that same 5-year period?; (3) What is the effect of hearing solution uptake in the 5-year period on the change in these outcomes in that same 5-year period?Method: Data of the Netherlands Longitudinal Study on Hearing, collected between 2006 and January 2019, were divided into two 5-year follow-up intervals: T0 (baseline) to T1 (5-year follow-up) and T1 (5-year follow-up) to T2 (10-year follow-up). An online digit-triplet in noise test was used to assess speech recognition in noise. Online questionnaires on demographic, socioeconomic, and work-related characteristics were administered. For RQ1-RQ2, the study sample included adults working ≥12 hours per week, with at least two consecutive measurements (n = 783). For RQ3, employees who had not yet obtained hearing solutions at baseline, but who would be eligible based on a speech reception threshold in noise ≥ -5.5 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), were included (n = 147). Longitudinal linear regression analyses using mixed models were performed to assess RQ1-RQ3.Results: After adjusting for baseline values, 5-year change in speech recognition in noise showed a statistically significant association with 5-year change in need for recovery. A worsening of 1 dB SNR in speech recognition in noise in an individual was associated with an increase of 0.72 units in need for recovery (scale range 0 to 100). A 5-year change in speech recognition in noise was not significantly associated with a 5-year change in job demand or job control. The uptake of hearing solutions in the 5-year period did not have a significant effect on change in need for recovery in that same 5-year period. Conclusion:The significant longitudinal association between 5-year worsening in speech recognition in noise and increase in need for recovery over the same time period strengthens the evidence for the importance of early detection of a worsening in speech recognition in noise to identify employees with an increase in need for recovery. The absence of an effect of the uptake of a hearing solution on need for recovery indicates that additional alternative interventions may be needed to foster beneficial use of hearing solutions as well as to mitigate t...

Factors associated with change in the need for recovery and subjective listening effort in employees with hearing loss receiving aural rehabilitation

“…Especially, interventions that affect personal adjustments may be promising to reduce NFR in employees with hearing loss. As suggested in previous studies (Backenroth-Ohsako et al 2003;Gussenhoven et al 2017;van Leeuwen et al 2021), we therefore hypothesize that greater improvement in NFR might be obtained when sensory management interventions are not provided in isolation, but combined with interventions that foster adequate coping behavior. Future research is required to assess this hypothesis, since no conclusions on causality can be drawn because of the design of this study.…”

“…Our study is the first that demonstrates that the NFR of employees with hearing loss can be improved by aural rehabilitation. In previous studies, no significant improvement in NFR was reported after aural rehabilitation (Gussenhoven et al 2017;van Leeuwen et al 2021). An explanation might be that the population of Gussenhoven et al ( 2017) included a relatively high number of participants with low NFR, which might have resulted in a floor effect in their study.…”

“…Although it is increasingly acknowledged that it is important to address patient's work needs in aural rehabilitation (Granberg and Gustafsson 2021;Zuriekat et al 2021), due to the lack of literature, it is unclear to what extent these kinds of services are currently provided and what the effects are of current services. To the best of our knowledge, a prospective evaluation of the NFR after the provision of any kind of aural rehabilitation has only been conducted in two recent studies (Gussenhoven et al 2017;van Leeuwen et al 2021). Gussenhoven et al (2017) performed a randomized controlled trial comparing a multidisciplinary program of aural rehabilitation including vocational and audiological components with audiological care as usual.…”

“…No significant decrease in the NFR was found in both groups at 3, 6, 9, or 12 month follow-up, and the effect of the intervention on the NFR did not differ between the two groups. Van Leeuwen et al ( 2021 ) performed a cohort study and evaluated the effect of using hearing aids and/or hearing assistive listening devices on the NFR. They included employees aged 18–67 with normal hearing or with hearing loss.…”

“…After 5 years, 29 of them reported to use hearing aids and/or hearing assistive listening devices and 118 were not. Van Leeuwen et al ( 2021 ) concluded that the uptake of hearing aids and/or hearing assistive devices did not have a significant effect on NFR.…”