Satisfaction and compliance of adult patients using hearing aid and evaluation of factors affecting them

Factors influencing hearing aid use, benefit and satisfaction in adults: a systematic review of the past decade

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review examined the audiological and non-audiological factors that influence hearing aid use, benefit and satisfaction in adults based on studies published during the last decade (2010 and 2023).

DESIGN

Studies were identified by using PRISMA guidelines for systematic searches on five platforms (Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, EBSCOhost including CINAHL and Academic Search Complete). The National Institute of Health Quality assessment tool and the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine tool were used for quality assessment and grading of level of evidence.

RESULTS

Forty-six articles were included in the review. A total of 101 significant factors influencing hearing aid use (n = 47), benefit (n = 17) and satisfaction (n = 37) were identified. Clear determinants of hearing aid use, benefit and satisfaction included hearing sensitivity, self-reported hearing difficulty, speech perception, attitude and beliefs. 34 cross-sectional studies in this review were graded level 4, 9 cohort studies rated level 3, and 3 randomised control trials rated level 2.

CONCLUSION

Factors associated with hearing aid outcomes identified in the past decade support previous evidence. New factors like social networks and service-delivery models, have also been identified. These factors require further investigations through high quality studies to further strengthen existing evidence.

Client Oriented Scale of Improvement in First-Time and Experienced Hearing Aid Users: An Analysis of Five Predetermined Predictability Categories through Audiometric and Speech Testing

Objectives: The aim of our investigation was to explore the relationship between unaided pure-tone and speech audiometry and self-reported aided performance measured according to five predetermined COSI categories among first-time hearing aid users and experienced hearing aid users. Methods: Data from 286 patients were retrospectively evaluated. We divided the sample into first-time hearing aid users (G1) and experienced hearing aid users (G2). The correlation between unaided tonal and speech audiometry and five preliminary selected client-oriented scale of improvement (COSI) categories was studied. Results: A greater percentage of hearing aid users aged >80 years and a higher prevalence of severe-to-profound hearing loss in G2 group were observed (p < 0.05). For the total cohort, a mean hearing threshold of 60.37 ± 18.77 db HL emerged in the right ear, and 59.97 ± 18.76 db HL was detected in the left ear (p > 0.05). A significant statistical difference was observed in the group of first-time hearing aid users for the "Television/Radio at normal volume" item, where patients with a lower speech intellection threshold (SIT) were associated with higher COSI scores (p = 0.019). Studying the relationship between the speech reception threshold (SRT) and the COSI item "conversation with 1 or 2 in noise" evidenced worse speech audiometry in patients who scored ≤2 among experienced hearing aid users (p = 0.00012); a higher mean 4-8 kHz frequencies threshold for the better ear was found within the G2 group among those who scored ≤2 in the COSI item "conversation with 1 or 2 in quiet" (p = 0.043). Conclusions: Our study confirms a poor correlation between unaided tonal and speech audiometry and self-reported patient assessment. Although we included only five COSI categories in this study, it is clear that unaided audiometric tests may drive the choice of proper hearing rehabilitation, but their value in predicting the benefit of hearing aids remains limited.

Determinants of Continuance Intention to Use Hearing Aids among Older Adults in Tehran (Iran)

The present study seeks to evaluate the factors determining the continuance intention to use hearing aids in older adults. This cross-sectional study was carried out in 2021. The technology post-acceptance model (PAM) framework was used to develop a model for the continuance intention to use hearing aids. In total, 300 hearing aid users aged ≥60 years, who were selected via a randomized stratified sampling method, completed the self-evaluation tools used in this study. With a mean age of 71.38 years (SD = 8), the participants comprised 50.7% and 49.3% females and males, respectively. The path analysis results showed that the continuance intention to use hearing aids was positively and significantly influenced by the actual use of hearing aids, the perceived benefits, satisfaction, confirmation, self-efficacy in using hearing aids, an extraverted personality trait, self-perceived hearing handicap, and perceived social support. The main results of the present study can help hearing care providers develop a better understanding of older users to design effective rehabilitation strategies and ensure their continuance intention to use hearing aids.

Factors Associated With Hearing Aid Outcomes Including Social Networks, Self-Reported Mental Health, and Service Delivery Models

PURPOSE

This study aims to identify and describe factors that influence hearing aid outcomes including social networks, self-reported mental health, and service delivery models.

METHOD

A prospective cross-sectional online survey was sent to hearing aid users recruited through an online platform (http://www.hearingtracker.com) between October and November 2021. The survey contained questions on patient demographics, audiological variables, general health and social factors, and self-reported hearing aid outcomes using the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA). Regression models evaluated potential contributing factors of hearing aid outcomes on the IOI-HA.

RESULTS

Three hundred ninety-eight hearing aid users completed the survey with an average age of 66.6 (SD = 13.0) years, of which 59.3% were male. Positive contributing factors of hearing aid outcomes (IOI-HA total score) were social network of people with hearing loss with hearing aids (p < .010; Exp[B] = 0.03, 95% CI [0.01, 0.1]), self-reported mental health (p < .05; Exp[B] = 0.6, 95% CI [0.01, 1.2]), work situation (p < .001; Exp[B] = 1.9, 95% CI [0.7, 2.8]), quality of life (p < .005; Exp[B] = 1.2, 95% CI [0.3, 1.1]), and self-reported hearing difficulty (p < .02; Exp[B] = 0.8, 95% CI [0.2, 1.5]). Negative contributing factors of hearing aid outcomes included social networks of people with hearing loss without hearing aids (p < .001; Exp[B] = -0.1, 95% CI [-0.2, -0.2]) and service delivery model of private or university clinic compared to big-box retailers (p < .001; Exp[B] = -1.6, 95% CI [-2.7, -0.7]).

CONCLUSIONS

Novel factors including social network of persons with hearing loss who use hearing aids, self-reported mental health, service delivery model, and work situation are significant contributors to hearing aid outcomes. These newly identified factors can inform public hearing health promotion and individualized audiological care to optimize hearing aid outcomes.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24060486.

Factors Impacting the Use or Rejection of Hearing Aids-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

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.

Extracellular Vesicles in Inner Ear Therapies-Pathophysiological, Manufacturing, and Clinical Considerations

(1) Background: Sensorineural hearing loss is a common and debilitating condition. To date, comprehensive pharmacologic interventions are not available. The complex and diverse molecular pathology that underlies hearing loss may limit our ability to intervene with small molecules. The current review foccusses on the potential for the use of extracellular vesicles in neurotology. (2) Methods: Narrative literature review. (3) Results: Extracellular vesicles provide an opportunity to modulate a wide range of pathologic and physiologic pathways and can be manufactured under GMP conditions allowing for their application in the human inner ear. The role of inflammation in hearing loss with a focus on cochlear implantation is shown. How extracellular vesicles may provide a therapeutic option for complex inflammatory disorders of the inner ear is discussed. Additionally, manufacturing and regulatory issues that need to be addressed to develop EVs as advanced therapy medicinal product for use in the inner ear are outlined. (4) Conclusion: Given the complexities of inner ear injury, novel therapeutics such as extracellular vesicles could provide a means to modulate inflammation, stress pathways and apoptosis in the inner ear.

Effects of the intensified frequency and time ranges on consonant enhancement in bilateral cochlear implant and hearing aid users

A previous study demonstrated that consonant recognition improved significantly in normal hearing listeners when useful frequency and time ranges were intensified by 6 dB. The goal of this study was to determine whether bilateral cochlear implant (BCI) and bilateral hearing aid (BHA) users experienced similar enhancement on consonant recognition with these intensified spectral and temporal cues in noise. In total, 10 BCI and 10 BHA users participated in a recognition test using 14 consonants. For each consonant, we used the frequency and time ranges that are critical for its recognition (called “target frequency and time range”), identified from normal hearing listeners. Then, a signal processing tool called the articulation-index gram (AI-Gram) was utilized to add a 6 dB gain to target frequency and time ranges. Consonant recognition was monaurally and binaurally measured under two signal processing conditions, unprocessed and intensified target frequency and time ranges at +5 and +10 dB signal-to-noise ratio and in quiet conditions. We focused on three comparisons between the BCI and BHA groups: (1) AI-Gram benefits (i.e., before and after intensifying target ranges by 6 dB), (2) enhancement in binaural benefits (better performance with bilateral devices compared to the better ear alone) via the AI-Gram processing, and (3) reduction in binaural interferences (poorer performance with bilateral devices compared to the better ear alone) via the AI-Gram processing. The results showed that the mean AI-Gram benefit was significantly improved for the BCI (max 5.9%) and BHA (max 5.2%) groups. However, the mean binaural benefit was not improved after AI-Gram processing. Individual data showed wide ranges of the AI-Gram benefit (max −1 to 23%) and binaural benefit (max −7.6 to 13%) for both groups. Individual data also showed a decrease in binaural interference in both groups after AI-Gram processing. These results suggest that the frequency and time ranges, intensified by the AI-Gram processing, contribute to consonant enhancement for monaural and binaural listening and both BCI and BHA technologies. The intensified frequency and time ranges helped to reduce binaural interference but contributed less to the synergistic binaural benefit in consonant recognition for both groups.

Cochlear Implantation in Hearing-Impaired Elderly: Clinical Challenges and Opportunities to Optimize Outcome

Cochlear implant (CI) overall provides a very good outcome, but speech comprehension outcome in the elderly is more variable. Several clinical factors play an important role. The management of residual hearing, the presence of comorbidities, and especially the progression of cognitive decline seem to be the clinical parameters that strongly determine the outcome of cochlear implantation and need to be discussed prospectively in the consultation process with the elderly hearing impaired. In the context of this review article, strategies for dealing with these will be discussed. Timely cochlear implantation should already be considered by hearing aid acousticians or practicing otolaryngologists and communicated or initiated with the patient. This requires intensive cooperation between hearing aid acousticians and experts in the clinic. In addition, residual hearing and comorbidities in the elderly need to be considered to make realistic predictions about speech comprehension with CI. Long-term aftercare and its different implementations should be discussed preoperatively, so that the elderly person with hearing impairments feels well taken care of together with his or her relatives. Elderly patients with hearing impairments benefit most from a CI in terms of speech comprehension if there is a large cochlear coverage (electrical or acoustic electrical) and the therapy is not hampered by comorbidities, especially cognitive decline.

Listening Effort in Hearing Aid Users: Is It Related to Hearing Aid Use and Satisfaction?

BACKGROUND

 Listening effort is primarily reflective of real-world performance. Therefore, it is crucial to evaluate the listening effort to predict the performance of hearing aid (HA) users in their daily lives.

PURPOSE

 This study aimed to investigate the relationship between listening effort, daily HA use time, and HA satisfaction.

RESEARCH DESIGN

 This is a cross-sectional study.

STUDY SAMPLE

 Thirty-three bilateral behind-the-ear HA users (17 females and 16 males) between 19 and 37 years were participated. All participants had bilateral, symmetric, moderate sensorineural hearing loss and at least 6 months of experience using HAs. The pure-tone average thresholds (PTA) of the participants' left and right ears were 55.34 ± 4.38 and 54.85 ± 5.05, respectively.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

 First, daily HA use times of the last 30 days were derived from data logging. Second, participants were asked to fill in the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life Scale questionnaire (SADL). Lastly, participants performed the dual-task paradigm to evaluate listening effort. The dual-task paradigm consisted of a primary speech recognition task that included three different individualized signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) conditions, that is, SNR100, SNR80, and SNR50, which the participant could understand 100, 80, and 50% of the speech, respectively. The secondary task was a visual reaction time task that required participants to press the key in response to a visual probe (an image of a white or red rectangle). Multiple linear regression analyses were used to model the effect of factors (daily HA use time and HA satisfaction) on reaction times (RT) of each three individualized SNR sessions.

RESULTS

 Mean daily HA use time of the participants was 5.72 ± 4.14 hours. Mean RTs of SNR50, SNR80, and SNR100 conditions were 1,050.61 ± 286.49, 893.33 ± 274.79, and 815.45 ± 233.22 ms, respectively. Multiple linear regression analyses showed that daily HA use time and HA satisfaction are significantly related to listening effort in all SNR conditions. For SNR80 condition; F (2,30) = 47.699, p < 0.001, with an adjusted R 2 of 0.745.

CONCLUSION

 As far as we know, this study is the first to demonstrate a strong link between listening effort, daily HA use time, and HA satisfaction. Evaluating listening effort following the HA fitting session may provide preliminary information about the treatment success of HA.

Effects of demographic, audiologic, and hearing-aid-related variables on the outcomes of using hearing aids

PURPOSE

To examine the influence of demographic, audiologic, and hearing-aid (HA)-related variables on HA outcomes.

METHODS

In total, 235 adults with hearing loss (HL) who used HAs for at least 3 months were included in the study, and completed audiologic tests and the Chinese version of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA). Spearman correlation analysis and Wilcoxon test were conducted to identify factors related to IOI-HA overall and subscales scores. Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis was subsequently performed to determine the influence of factors on HA outcomes.

RESULTS

Age, daily use time, HA price, pure tone average (PTA) threshold, word recognition score (WRS), fitting (bilateral or unilateral), and HA style were associated with IOI-HA overall and subscales scores. However, only WRS, daily HA use time, HA price, and age entered the final regression model and were factors determining HA outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

HA outcome is a multi-dimensional construct. In this study, WRS had the greatest influence on HA outcomes and seemed to be a primary predictor. Thus, HA owners with a higher WRS before HA fitting may indicate better satisfaction. Daily use time, HA price, and patient age also made significant contributions to HA outcomes and should be considered in clinical practice to facilitate auditory rehabilitation.

How do patients decide on interventions for single sided deafness? A qualitative investigation of patient views

BACKGROUND

Single-sided deafness presents communication challenges for adults. There are a range of care options, including CROS hearing aids, available but little is known about patient preferences for these interventions.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to understand the viewpoints of patients making decisions about audiological interventions they use.

METHODS

A constructivist worldview using thematic analysis to undertake a constant comparative analysis of 8 semi-structured interviews.

SAMPLING

Participants were recruited from Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust audiology service in England.

FINDINGS

The results of the study describe ongoing iterative judgements being made by participants, informed by their access to information, effectiveness of audiological interventions, stigma, barriers to accessing care, and constant cost-benefit analyses being made. The key factors involved in decision-making by individuals with Single-sided deafness (SSD) are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the first in-depth exploration of the individual's lifeworld related to which factors influence use of different audiological interventions by individuals with SSD. It highlights the complex and ongoing nature of how decisions are made by these individuals and identifies the need for greater information provision by clinicians, such as through use of a decision aid tool.

Patient-reported long-term benefit with an active transcutaneous bone-conduction device

Purpose

To evaluate the long-term benefits in hearing-related quality of life, patient satisfaction and wearing time of patients rehabilitated with an active transcutaneous bone-conduction device. Adverse events and audiological outcomes are reported as secondary outcomes.

Methods

This retrospective, mono-centric cohort analysis involves 16 adults with conductive or mixed hearing loss with a mean device experience of 51.25 months. Patient-reported outcome measures were assessed using the short version of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12-B) and the German version of the Audio Processor Satisfaction Questionnaire (APSQ). Audiological outcomes as well as incidence of adverse events were obtained from patients´ charts.

Results

The hearing-related quality of life improved significantly within all subscales of the SSQ12-B scoring a mean overall of 2.95 points. Patient satisfaction measured with the APSQ scored 8.8 points on average. Wearing times differed considerably and patients with lower levels of education seemed to use their device longer compared to patients with academic education. Eight minor adverse events were documented, all of which resolved during follow-up. The mean gain in word recognition score at the last follow-up measured at 65 dB was 75.9%, while speech reception threshold was lowered by 35.1 dB.

Conclusion

Even after several years, patients report significant benefits in hearing-related quality of life and device satisfaction. In combination with a low rate of minor adverse events and significantly improved audiological outcomes, the device is considered as a comfortable and effective option in hearing rehabilitation.

Better defining best-aided condition: The role of hearing aids on cochlear implantation qualification rates

OBJECTIVE

Describe the effect of hearing aid type used during cochlear implantation evaluation on qualification rates.

METHODS

Consecutive adult patients at an academic cochlear implant program undergoing cochlear implantation evaluation were identified to determine cochlear implantation qualification rate according to history of hearing aid use and type of hearing aid used during evaluation.

RESULTS

609 patients met criteria. 90.1% of patients reported prior use of a hearing aid, and 77.4% reported current use of a hearing aid. Patients were most likely to undergo cochlear implantation evaluation utilizing their own personal hearing aids exclusively (61.6%) followed by loaner hearing aids fitted at the time of the evaluation (28.2%). White patients were more likely to be tested using personal hearing aids (OR = 2.60, 95% CI 1.43 to 4.71). Married patients were more likely to be current hearing aid users (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.51) and were more likely to be tested using personal hearing aids (OR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.56). Patients with a history of any hearing aid use (OR = 2.50, 95% CI 1.42 to 4.40) and current hearing aid use (OR = 1.62, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.49) were more likely to qualify for cochlear implantation. Patients tested using personal hearing aids were 1.5 times more likely to qualify for cochlear implantation (95% CI 0.99 to 2.27).

CONCLUSION

History of hearing amplification and current amplification predict cochlear implant qualification. Hearing aids fitted at the time of cochlear implantation evaluation may result in lower qualification rates.

Evaluation Tools for Assistive Technologies: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Assistive technologies (ATs) support independence and well-being in people with cognitive, perceptual, and physical limitations. Given the increasing availability and diversity of ATs, evaluating the usefulness of current and emerging ATs is crucial for informed comparison. We aimed to chart the landscape and development of AT evaluation tools (ETs; ATETs) across disparate fields in order to improve the process of AT evaluation and development.

DATA SOURCES

We performed a scoping review of ATETs through database searching of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, HaPI, PsycINFO, Cochrane Reviews, and Compendex as well as citation mining.

STUDY SELECTION

Articles explicitly referencing ATETs were retained for screening. We included ETs if they were designed to specifically evaluate ATs.

DATA EXTRACTION

We extracted 5 attributes of ATETs: AT category, construct evaluated, conceptual frameworks, type of end user input used for ATET development, and presence of validity testing.

DATA SYNTHESIS

From screening 23,434 records, we included 159 ATETs. Specificity of tools ranged from single to general ATs across 40 AT categories. Satisfaction, functional performance, and usage were the most common constructs of 103 identified. We identified 34 conceptual frameworks across 53 ETs. Finally, 36% incorporated end user input and 80% showed validation testing.

CONCLUSIONS

We characterized a wide range of AT categories with diverse approaches to their evaluation based on varied conceptual frameworks. Combining these frameworks in future ATETs may provide more holistic views of AT usefulness. ATET selection may be improved with guidelines for conceptually reconciling results of disparate ATETs. Future ATET development may benefit from more integrated approaches to end user engagement.

Evaluation of patient satisfaction with different hearing aids: A study of 107 patients

We retrospectively investigated patient satisfaction with different types of hearing aids in 107 patients-60 males and 47 females, aged 8 to 84 years (mean: 53.8)-with unilateral or bilateral hearing loss, each of whom used two different hearing devices for at least 3 years per device. The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids, Turkish edition (IOI-HA-TR) was used to evaluate satisfaction levels; we also calculated our own total individual subjective satisfaction (TISS) scores. We divided 16 different hearing devices into two types: device 1 and device 2; on average, device 2 had more channels, a lower minimum frequency, and a higher maximum frequency. We found that the IOI-HA-TR scores and TISS scores were higher and usage time was greater during device 2 use, and that there was a positive correlation between IOI-HA-TR and TISS scores. A total of 69 patients (64.5%) used device 2 for more than 8 hours per day, while 38 patients (35.5%) used it for 4 to 8 hours per day during the final 2 weeks of the trial. In contrast, 40 patients (37.4%) used device 1 for more than 8 hours, 50 (46.7%) used it for 4 to 8 hours, and the remaining 17 (15.9%) used it for less than 4 hours; the difference in the duration of use of the two devices was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Younger patients and patients with more education were more satisfied with their devices than were older patients and those who were not as well educated. We conclude that devices with good technologic features such as more channels, a lower minimum frequency, and a higher maximum frequency result in better hearing. Also, based on the age difference that we observed, we recommend that psychological support be provided to older patients with aided hearing to enhance their mental health and quality of life.