摘要 :
Purpose: To examine the prevalence of adherence to hearing aids and determine their rejection causes. Methods: This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting terms for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) g...
展开
Purpose: To examine the prevalence of adherence to hearing aids and determine their rejection causes. Methods: This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting terms for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We performed an electronic search using PubMed, BVS, and Embase. Results: 21 studies that met the inclusion criteria were selected. They analyzed a total of 12,696 individuals. We observed that the most common causes for positive adherence to hearing aid use included having a higher degree of hearing loss, patients being aware of their condition, and requiring the device in their daily life. The most common causes for rejection were the lack of perceived benefits or discomfort with the use of the device. The results from the meta-analysis show a prevalence of patients who used their hearing aid of 0.623 (95% CI 0.531, 0.714). Both groups are highly heterogeneous (I2 = 99.31% in each group, p < 0.05). Conclusions: A significant proportion of patients (38%) do not use their hearing aid devices. Homogeneous multicenter studies using the same methodology are needed to analyze the causes of rejection of hearing aids.
收起
摘要 :
Background:The ability to manage hearing aids is crucial for successful outcomes and for maintaining hearing aid use. It is therefore important to have a tool that can effectively identify which hearing aid management skills are l...
展开
Background:The ability to manage hearing aids is crucial for successful outcomes and for maintaining hearing aid use. It is therefore important to have a tool that can effectively identify which hearing aid management skills are lacking so that the audiologist can provideadditional education and training on that skill. Such a tool can also provide useful quantitative data for researchers.Purpose:To collect normative data (Experiment 1) and assess inter- and intrarater reliability (Experiment 2) for a hearing aid management assessment toolknown as the Hearing Aid Skills and Knowledge (HASK) test.Study Sample:Two hundred thirty-six new hearing aid users recruited from the VA Portland Health Care System and 126 experienced hearing aid users recruited from the local Portland community participated in Experiment1. The veteran participants were taking part in a larger hearing aid study, and the community participants were recruited at community events that took place around Portland, OR. Three clinical audiologists and two AuD students completing their fourth year externship participated in Experiment2.Data Collection and Analysis:In Experiment 1, HASK data were collected from the new hearing aid users at 4‐8 wk and 6‐8 mo after the fitting of their first pair of hearing aids, and from experienced users on a single occasion. In addition, self-reported hearingaid use, benefit, and satisfaction were assessed for all participants. The audiologists/students in Experiment 2 watched and independently scored videos of six individuals completing the HASK. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) across audiologists were computed for HASK scores. Threeaudiologists/students rated at least one video on two occasions to provide interrater reliability data.Results:Mean performance on the HASK was about 70% for knowledge and 80% for skills for both the new and experienced hearing aid users. Performance did not change amongthe new users between the 4‐8 wk and 6‐8 mo administration. The specific skills lacking were associated with advanced management abilities (cleaning and troubleshooting). Experiment 2 revealed ICCs for inter- and intrarater reliability for HASK to range from 0.76 to 0.94, showingacceptable to excellent reliability.Conclusions:The HASK is a quick and easy test with good-to-excellent inter- and intrarater reliability. It can effectively identify which hearing aid management skills are lacking so that the audiologist can provide additional educationand training on those skills. Data show performance is ∼70% for knowledge and 80% for skills and this does not change with hearing aid experience. The significant positive correlations between HASK scores and hearing aid use and satisfaction highlight the notion that ability to managehearing aids successfully is integral to good hearing aid outcome.
收起
摘要 :
(1) Background: To improve hearing-aid rehabilitation, the Danish ‘Better hEAring Rehabilitation’ (BEAR) project recently developed methods for individual hearing loss characterization and hearing-aid fitting. Four auditory prof...
展开
(1) Background: To improve hearing-aid rehabilitation, the Danish ‘Better hEAring Rehabilitation’ (BEAR) project recently developed methods for individual hearing loss characterization and hearing-aid fitting. Four auditory profiles differing in terms of audiometric hearing loss and supra-threshold hearing abilities were identified. To enable auditory profile-based hearing-aid treatment, a fitting rationale leveraging differences in gain prescription and signal-to-noise (SNR) improvement was developed. This report describes the translation of this rationale to clinical devices supplied by three industrial partners. (2) Methods: Regarding the SNR improvement, advanced feature settings were proposed and verified based on free-field measurements made with an acoustic mannikin fitted with the different hearing aids. Regarding the gain prescription, a clinically feasible fitting tool and procedure based on real-ear gain adjustments were developed. (3) Results: Analyses of the collected real-ear gain and SNR improvement data confirmed the feasibility of the clinical implementation. Differences between the auditory profile-based fitting strategy and a current ‘best practice’ procedure based on the NAL-NL2 fitting rule were verified and are discussed in terms of limitations and future perspectives. (4) Conclusion: Based on a joint effort from academic and industrial partners, the BEAR fitting rationale was transferred to commercially available hearing aids.
收起
摘要 :
As early as the 1930s the term Master Hearing Aid (MHA) described a device used in the fitting of hearing aids. In their original form, the MHA was a desktop system that allowed for simulated or actual adjustment of hearing aid co...
展开
As early as the 1930s the term Master Hearing Aid (MHA) described a device used in the fitting of hearing aids. In their original form, the MHA was a desktop system that allowed for simulated or actual adjustment of hearing aid components that resulted in a changed hearing aid response. Over the years the MHA saw many embodiments and contributed to a number of rationales for the fitting of hearing aids. During these same years, the MHA was viewed by many as an inappropriate means of demonstrating hearing aids; the audio quality of the desktop systems was often superior to the hearing aids themselves. These opinions and the evolution of the MHA have molded the modern perception of hearing aids and the techniques used in the fitting of hearing aids. This article reports on a history of the MHA and its influence on the fitting of hearing aids.
收起
摘要 :
Objective:? To present key data from a private marketing report that characterizes US hearing aid (HA) utilization, HA candidate and user population sizes, and HA pricing. Patients:? HA candidates and users in the United States. I...
展开
Objective:? To present key data from a private marketing report that characterizes US hearing aid (HA) utilization, HA candidate and user population sizes, and HA pricing. Patients:? HA candidates and users in the United States. Interventions:? Hearing amplification. Main Outcome Measures:? HA utilization, HA candidate and user population sizes, HA market size and value, and HA pricing. Results:? In 2015, an estimated 8.5 million HA users accounted for a total of 15.4 million individual HA devices in the United States. Approximately 81% of HA users owned bilateral devices. In 2015, approximately 87% of devices were purchased as replacements by current HA users, while the remaining 13% of devices were purchased by new HA users. HA utilization rates among the candidate population approximated 21% in 2015, which was stable over the 3-year study period. In 2015, there was a net increase of 696,060 individuals who met HA candidacy criteria but did not undergo treatment with HAs, adding to the backlog of 31.0 million untreated HA candidates who existed before that year. The HA market was valued at $6.0 billion in 2015, with an average retail selling price of $1798 per device ($3596 per pair). In the same year, the average manufacturer selling price was $495 per device ($990 per pair), or nearly 1 quarter of the retail price. Conclusions:? HAs are substantially under-utilized in the United States with an annually growing backlog of untreated HA candidates.
收起
摘要 :
Background Hearing loss is a growing health concern worldwide. Hearing aids (HAs) are the treatment of choice for hearing rehabilitation in most cases of mild-to-moderate hearing loss. However, many patients with hearing loss do n...
展开
Background Hearing loss is a growing health concern worldwide. Hearing aids (HAs) are the treatment of choice for hearing rehabilitation in most cases of mild-to-moderate hearing loss. However, many patients with hearing loss do not use HAs due to their high cost, stigma, and inaccessibility. Since smartphones are widely used, many apps that mimic the amplification function of HAs have been introduced. Smartphone-based HA apps (SHAAs) are affordable and easy to access. However, the audiological benefit of SHAAs has not been determined. Objective We compared the audiological performance between an SHAA and a conventional HA in a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial. Methods Patients with mild-to-moderate hearing loss were prospectively enrolled from 2 tertiary hospitals and randomly assigned to either an SHAA (Petralex; IT4YOU Corp LLC) or a conventional HA (Siya 1 miniRITE; Oticon A/S). For the cross-over study design, participants used the alternate device and repeated the same 2-month trial. Audiological measurements were obtained using hearing tests, real-ear measurements, and the hearing-in-noise test (HINT). Subjective satisfaction was evaluated using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA). Results Overall, 63 participants were screened and 38 completed the study. In sound-field audiometry testing, the SHAA showed a 20- to 60-dB gain in the low-to-high frequencies of the hearing threshold level. The HA provided adequate gain in the middle-to-high frequencies (55, 65, and 75 dB in real-ear measurements), which is the sound level for most speaking volumes. However, the SHAA could not improve word recognition at 50 dB. The HA showed better audiological performance than the SHAA in both quiet and noisy conditions in the HINT. The IOI-HA scores were significantly improved by both the HA and SHAA versus unaided conditions. Among the SHAA users, 37% (14/38), 42% (16/38), 24% (9/38), and 32% (12/38) showed improvement in APHAB scores for ease of communication, reverberation, background noise, and aversiveness of sounds, respectively. There were no differences in adverse events between the 2 study groups. Conclusions The HA showed better performance than the SHAA in word recognition and the HINT. However, the SHAA was significantly better than unaided hearing in terms of amplification. The SHAA may be a useful hearing assistance device for patients with mild-to-moderate hearing loss when listening to soft sounds in quiet conditions. The SHAA demonstrated poorer performance than the HA in the mid- to high-frequency sounds that are important for word recognition, sound quality, and hearing in noisy conditions. Further development of the signal technology of SHAAs is needed to improve the sound quality of mid- to high-frequency sounds and overcome noisy environments. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05644106; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05644106.
收起
摘要 :
Introduction:Contact hearing aids (CHA) offer potential advantages over conventional acoustic hearing aids (AHA) in terms of sound quality, reduced occlusion, and increased high-frequency gain. This study evaluates objective and s...
展开
Introduction:Contact hearing aids (CHA) offer potential advantages over conventional acoustic hearing aids (AHA) in terms of sound quality, reduced occlusion, and increased high-frequency gain. This study evaluates objective and subjective outcome data for CHA compared to AHA.Methods:Clinical outcome data were retrospectively reviewed for patients wearing CHA. Individual and group data were analyzed and then compared to unaided and AHA data. Adverse effects, device complaints, and clinical utility were documented throughout the device fitting and follow-up process.Results:CHA outcomes were better than unaided hearing and AHA for all patients completing the 3-month CHA trial period (45%). However, CHA return rate was high (55%), most often due to device repair and fit issues. Two patients returned the devices due to poor hearing benefit, though both were off-label audiometric candidates. Significantly more clinical time was required from both audiologists and otolaryngologists to successfully fit and maintain maximum device benefit.Conclusions:For proper audiometric and otologic candidates, this light-driven CHA can offer significant improvements in high-frequency sound fidelity, word recognition, and sound quality compared to AHA technology. Administering questionnaires was helpful in illuminating real-world improvements. Device fit, alignment, and quality control issues are improving, though still contributing to high device return rates at this time. Operational factors should be considered when incorporating CHA into a hearing health care practice.
收起
摘要 :
We propose a new audiometric test to assess French speakers' speech discrimination in noise. This soundfield test uses a standard cocktail-party background noise superimposed on Fournier's disyllabic word lists. The background noi...
展开
We propose a new audiometric test to assess French speakers' speech discrimination in noise. This soundfield test uses a standard cocktail-party background noise superimposed on Fournier's disyllabic word lists. The background noise is CD-recorded at constant 55dB SPL. The discrimination score is measured at a signal-to-noise ratio of -5dB, 0, and +5dB. In comparison with other audiometric tests in noise, our test requires only 5 minutes and is simple for both patient and audiologist. All patients are tested using the same standard condition, one that approaches daily life and uses a noise of moderate intensity. The result is reproducible and easy to calculate and graph. We propose this test for diagnosing in-noise speech intelligibility disorders and for assisting the process of conventional or implantable hearing-aid fitting.
收起
摘要 :
In the field of audiology, change is inevitable: changes in technologies with hearing devices, changes in consumer knowledge, and changes in consumer-driven solutions. With these changes, the audiol-ogist must adapt to meet the ne...
展开
In the field of audiology, change is inevitable: changes in technologies with hearing devices, changes in consumer knowledge, and changes in consumer-driven solutions. With these changes, the audiol-ogist must adapt to meet the needs of the consumer. There are potential predictors that the audiologist could use to determine who is more likely to pursue and use amplification; by using these data, the audiologists may increase their productivity and increase patient satisfaction. The goal of this article is to investigate the MarkeTrak 10 (MT10) data to determine the trends in adoption and use of hearing aids as well as examine predictive factors that can be used to determine hearing aid adoption.
收起
原文获取