An Application of the Medical Research Council's Guidelines for Evaluating Complex Interventions: A Usability Study Assessing Smartphone-Connected Listening Devices in Adults With Hearing Loss

Attributes, Methods, and Frameworks Used to Evaluate Wearables and Their Companion mHealth Apps: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Wearable devices, mobile technologies, and their combination have been accepted into clinical use to better assess the physical fitness and quality of life of patients and as preventive measures. Usability is pivotal for overcoming constraints and gaining users' acceptance of technology such as wearables and their companion mobile health (mHealth) apps. However, owing to limitations in design and evaluation, interactive wearables and mHealth apps have often been restricted from their full potential.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify studies that have incorporated wearable devices and determine their frequency of use in conjunction with mHealth apps or their combination. Specifically, this study aims to understand the attributes and evaluation techniques used to evaluate usability in the health care domain for these technologies and their combinations.

METHODS

We conducted an extensive search across 4 electronic databases, spanning the last 30 years up to December 2021. Studies including the keywords "wearable devices," "mobile apps," "mHealth apps," "physiological data," "usability," "user experience," and "user evaluation" were considered for inclusion. A team of 5 reviewers screened the collected publications and charted the features based on the research questions. Subsequently, we categorized these characteristics following existing usability and wearable taxonomies. We applied a methodological framework for scoping reviews and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist.

RESULTS

A total of 382 reports were identified from the search strategy, and 68 articles were included. Most of the studies (57/68, 84%) involved the simultaneous use of wearables and connected mobile apps. Wrist-worn commercial consumer devices such as wristbands were the most prevalent, accounting for 66% (45/68) of the wearables identified in our review. Approximately half of the data from the medical domain (32/68, 47%) focused on studies involving participants with chronic illnesses or disorders. Overall, 29 usability attributes were identified, and 5 attributes were frequently used for evaluation: satisfaction (34/68, 50%), ease of use (27/68, 40%), user experience (16/68, 24%), perceived usefulness (18/68, 26%), and effectiveness (15/68, 22%). Only 10% (7/68) of the studies used a user- or human-centered design paradigm for usability evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our scoping review identified the types and categories of wearable devices and mHealth apps, their frequency of use in studies, and their implementation in the medical context. In addition, we examined the usability evaluation of these technologies: methods, attributes, and frameworks. Within the array of available wearables and mHealth apps, health care providers encounter the challenge of selecting devices and companion apps that are effective, user-friendly, and compatible with user interactions. The current gap in usability and user experience in health care research limits our understanding of the strengths and limitations of wearable technologies and their companion apps. Additional research is necessary to overcome these limitations.

What's in a name? A systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of non-medical amplification devices in adults with mild and moderate hearing losses

OBJECTIVE

To assess non-medical amplification devices in adults with mild-to-moderate hearing loss, and the impact of device features on outcomes.

DESIGN

A prospectively registered systematic review.

STUDY SAMPLE

Ten studies evaluating personal sound amplification products (PSAPs), and four evaluating smartphone amplification applications (or apps). Devices were classified as "premium" or "basic" based on the number of compression channels (≥16 or <16, respectively).

RESULTS

Meta-analyses showed that premium PSAPs improved speech intelligibility in noise performance compared to unaided, whereas basic PSAPs and smartphone apps did not. Premium PSAPs performed better than basic hearing aids. Premium hearing aids performed better than premium and basic PSAPs, smartphone apps, and basic hearing aids. Although data could not be pooled, similar findings were also found for quality of life, listening ability, cognition, feasibility, and adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Premium PSAPs appear to be an effective non-medical amplification device for adults with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. Given the overlap in features available, it may be that this is a key consideration when drawing comparisons between devices, rather than the device being named a PSAP or hearing aid. Nevertheless, the extent to which PSAPs are effective without audiological input remains to be determined.

Remote Technologies to Enhance Service Delivery for Adults: Clinical Research Perspectives

There are many examples of remote technologies that are clinically effective and provide numerous benefits to adults with hearing loss. Despite this, the uptake of remote technologies for hearing healthcare has been both low and slow until the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been a key driver for change globally. The time is now right to take advantage of the many benefits that remote technologies offer, through clinical, consumer, or hybrid services and channels. These include greater access and choice, better interactivity and engagement, and tailoring of technologies to individual needs, leading to clients who are better informed, enabled, and empowered to self-manage their hearing loss. This article provides an overview of the clinical research evidence-base across a range of remote technologies along the hearing health journey. This includes qualitative, as well as quantitative, methods to ensure the end-users' voice is at the core of the research, thereby promoting person-centered principles. Most of these remote technologies are available and some are already in use, albeit not widespread. Finally, whenever new technologies or processes are implemented into services, be they clinical, hybrid, or consumer, careful consideration needs to be given to the required behavior change of the key people (e.g., clients and service providers) to facilitate and optimize implementation.

EHealth and Its Role in Supporting Audiological Rehabilitation: Patient Perspectives on Barriers and Facilitators of Using a Personal Hearing Support System With Mobile Application as Part of the EVOTION Study

Background

Hearing loss is a major public health challenge. Audiology services need to utilise a range of rehabilitative services and maximise innovative practice afforded by technology to actively promote personalized, participatory, preventative and predictive care if they are to cope with the social and economic burden placed on the population by the rapidly rising prevalence of hearing loss. Digital interventions and teleaudiology could be a key part of providing high quality, cost-effective, patient-centred management. There is currently very limited evidence that assesses the hearing impaired patient perspective on the acceptance and usability of this type of technology.

Aim

This study aims to identify patient perceptions of the use of a hearing support system including a mobile smartphone app when used with Bluetooth-connected hearing aids across the everyday life of users, as part of the EVOTION project.

Methods

We applied a questionnaire to 564 participants in three countries across Europe and analysed the following topics: connectivity, hearing aid controls, instructional videos, audiological tests and auditory training.

Key Findings

Older users were just as satisfied as younger users when operating this type of technology. Technical problems such as Bluetooth connectivity need to be minimised as this issue is highly critical for user satisfaction, engagement and uptake. A system that promotes user-controllability of hearing aids that is more accessible and easier to use is highly valued. Participants are happy to utilise monitoring tests and auditory training on a mobile phone out of the clinic but in order to have value the test battery needs to be relevant and tailored to each user, easy to understand and use. Such functions can elicit a negative as well as positive experience for each user.

Conclusion

Older and younger adults can utilise an eHealth mobile app to complement their rehabilitation and health care. If the technology works well, is tailored to the individual and in-depth personalised guidance and support is provided, it could assist maximisation of hearing aid uptake, promotion of self-management and improving outcomes.

Knowledge and Expectations of Hearing Aid Apps Among Smartphone Users and Hearing Professionals: Cross-sectional Survey

Background

Despite the increasing prevalence of hearing loss, the cost and psychological barriers to the use of hearing aids may prevent their use in individuals with hearing loss. Patients with hearing loss can benefit from smartphone-based hearing aid apps (SHAAs), which are smartphone apps that use a mobile device as a sound amplifier.

Objective

The aim of this study is to determine how ear, nose, and throat outpatients perceive SHAAs, analyze the factors that affect their perceptions, and estimate the costs of an annual subscription to an app through a self-administered questionnaire survey of smartphone users and hearing specialists.

Methods

This study used a cross-sectional, multicenter survey of both ear, nose, and throat outpatients and hearing specialists. The questionnaire was designed to collect personal information about the respondents and their responses to 18 questions concerning SHAAs in five domains: knowledge, needs, cost, expectations, and information. Perception questions were rated on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Questions about the expected cost of SHAAs were included in the questionnaire distributed to hearing experts.

Results

Among the 219 smartphone users and 42 hearing specialists, only 8 (3.7%) respondents recognized SHAAs, whereas 18% (47/261) of respondents reported considering the use of an assistive device to improve their hearing capacity. The average perception score was 2.81 (SD 1.22). Among the factors that shaped perceptions of SHAAs, the needs category received the lowest scores (2.02, SD 1.42), whereas the cost category received the highest scores (3.29, SD 1.14). Age was correlated with the information domain (P<.001), and an increased level of hearing impairment resulted in significantly higher points in the needs category (P<.001). Patients expected the cost of an annual app subscription to an SHAA to be approximately US $86, and the predicted cost was associated with economic status (P=.02) and was higher than the prices expected by hearing specialists (P<.001).

Conclusions

Outpatients expected SHAAs to cost more than hearing specialists. However, the perception of the SHAA was relatively low. In this regard, enhanced awareness is required to popularize SHAAs.

Smartphone-Connected Hearing Aids Enable and Empower Self-Management of Hearing Loss: A Qualitative Interview Study Underpinned by the Behavior Change Wheel

OBJECTIVES

To identify patient-reported barriers and facilitators to using smartphone-connected hearing aids, using the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) to understand experiences and how these can be addressed.

DESIGN

A single-center, prospective, observational study. Eight hearing aid users (new = 1, existing = 7; mean age = 71.75 years, SD = 5.23, range = 65 to 81 years) were identified through convenience sampling from 44 participants who took part in a 7-week evaluation of smartphone-connected hearing aids controlled by a prototype app. The app allowed users to manually control settings such as gain, noise reduction, and microphone directionality, preset, and customized programmes. Participants were assigned to one of two focus groups following trial of the app.

RESULTS

Focus group transcripts were thematically analyzed and underpinned by the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior) model and Theoretical Domains Framework to identify barriers and facilitators to using smartphone-connected hearing aids (the target behavior). Mapping of themes to the BCW allowed use of the Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy (version 1) to identify behavior change techniques that audiologists could implement in clinical practice to address the barriers and facilitators. Capability: The app increased participants' knowledge of hearing aid controls, encouraging use of the app for improved hearing loss self-management. However, barriers to using the app included perception of insufficient digital literacy skills for smartphone-connected hearing aid use and an increased cognitive load caused by decisions over which controls to use. Opportunity: Perceived smartphone norms (i.e., acceptable occasions to use smartphones) and differing listening contexts acted as both facilitators and barriers. Motivation: The ability to control hearing aid settings in any listening situation (e.g., to reduce noise) empowered users to successfully self-manage their hearing loss, leading to greater confidence and participation in everyday life. The app also reduced hearing aid-related and self-stigma, and the ability to self-adjust hearing aids benefitted both participants and communication partners. It was the adjustability and interaction afforded by the app that empowered users, rather than the hearing aid technology itself. Perceived beliefs and knowledge about digital literacy skills, and specifically abilities to use a smartphone, were perceived to be barriers in this typically older population, particularly when they compared themselves to younger generations. Using the Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy (version 1), behavior change techniques that could be used by audiologists to address these barriers included enablement, goal setting, reframing perceptions toward technology, and addressing patient educational needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Smartphone-connected hearing aids, when used in their everyday lives, were viewed positively by participants across a range of domains, empowering them and enabling hearing loss self-management. Audiologists should consider smartphone-connected hearing aid candidacy for all who have access to smartphones and are willing to use one. Use of the BCW has identified that modifiable barriers to using smartphone-connected hearing aids exist. Audiologists could use these evidence-based behavior change techniques to support patients in adopting and using these technologies to successfully self-manage hearing loss. Overall, by reframing smartphone technologies as a tool to remain connected with society, smartphone-connected hearing aids could shift the power of managing hearing loss from clinician to patient.

SARS-CoV-2 and hearing: An audiometric analysis of COVID-19 hospitalized patients

PURPOSE

COVID-19 associated hearing loss is still an ongoing matter of debate. No original studies exist on audiological effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized patients. The main objective was to determine whether SARS-CoV-2 may affect auditory function in clinically ill COVID-19 patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

COVID-19 patients with moderate-severe disease and without prior history of hearing abnormalities were enrolled from a tertiary referral center, and matched with controls. Participants performed an audiometric evaluation, and thresholds were compared.

RESULTS

120 ears from 60 patients were enrolled. Patients with COVID-19 showed worse mean auditory thresholds starting from 1000 Hz through higher frequencies, when compared to controls (1000 Hz: 18.52 ± 5.49 dB HL in controls vs 25.36 ± 6.79 dB HL in COVID-19, p < 0.001; 2000Hz: 17.50 ± 5.57 dB HL in controls vs 21.96 ± 7.05 dB HL in COVID-19, p = 0.010; 3000Hz: 17.97 ± 8.07 dB HL in controls vs 25 ± 9.38 dB HL in COVID-19, p = 0.003; 4000 Hz: 20.16 ± 10.12 dB HL in controls vs 29.55 ± 11.26 dB HL in COVID-19, p = 0.001; 8000 Hz: 31.09 ± 12.75 dB HL in controls vs 40.71 ± 19.40 dB HL in COVID-19, p = 0.030; Pure Tone Average: 20.42 ± 4.29 dB HL in controls vs 24.85 ± 5.62 dB HL in COVID-19, p = 0.001). Statistical significance persisted after adjusting for confounders such as age, gender and various comorbidities (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 may affect hearing in COVID-19 patients with moderate-severe disease. Results are in line with the previous suggested effects of COVID-19 on auditory system. This study is expected to encourage further research on this topic.

Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: Smartphone-Connected Listening Devices

In this article, we review the current literature assessing the application and benefits of connected hearing technologies, as well as their potential to improve accessibility to and affordability of hearing healthcare. Over the past decade, there has been a proliferation of hearing devices that connect wirelessly to smartphone technologies via Bluetooth. These devices include (1) smartphone-connected hearing aids that must be obtained from a licensed audiologist or hearing aid dispenser; (2) direct-to-consumer devices, such as personal sound amplification products; and (3) smartphone-based hearing aid applications (or apps). Common to all these connected devices is that they permit the user to self-adjust and customize their device programs via an accompanying smartphone app. There has been a growing body of literature assessing connected hearing devices in adults living with hearing loss. Overall, the evidence to date supports the notion that all connected hearing devices can improve accessibility to and affordability of amplification. It is unclear, however, whether connected technologies are a clinically effective alternative to traditional hearing aids. Even so, the impact of connectivity is especially pertinent given the sudden disruption caused by the recent global COVID-19 pandemic, whereby connected technologies enable patients to receive treatment through mobile-based, tele-audiology platforms.

Evidence-Based Interventions for Adult Aural Rehabilitation: That Was Then, This Is Now

More than a decade after Arthur Boothroyd published "Adult Aural Rehabilitation: What Is It and Does It Work?," the four cornerstones of adult aural rehabilitation are re-examined in terms of research that we and others in the field have undertaken. The focus is on novel advances in high-quality research relating to interventions to support self-management for hearing aids and other listening devices (sensory management), knowledge and skill (instruction), auditory and cognitive training (perceptual training), and motivational engagement (counseling). Much of this new research has a theoretical underpinning (e.g., behavior change theory) to better guide the development and evaluation of interventions, with a focus on self-management and patient-centered approaches. New and emerging technologies that support e- and m-health delivery of interventions provide greater personalization and interactivity to promote self-management of hearing loss. Looking to the future, there remains a requirement for a set of relevant and appropriate outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions trialed in clinical studies. There is a continuing need for high-quality evidence, underpinned by contemporary theory, to increase the likelihood that translational adult aural rehabilitation research that aims to benefit patients will be applied in future clinical practice.

Internet and Audiology: A Review of the Third International Meeting

PURPOSE

In this introduction, the four members of the scientific committee for the Third International Meeting on Internet and Audiology describe the meeting that took place at the University of Louisville on July 27-28, 2017.

METHOD

This special issue, with a decidedly clinical focus, includes 14 articles that arose from presentations given at the Third International Meeting on Internet and Audiology. All touch upon the theme of innovation as it pertains to teleaudiology and mobile health (mHealth), application of Big Data to audiology, and ethics of internet and telemedicine.

CONCLUSION

Innovations in teleaudiology, mHealth, and Internet-based audiology are developing at a rapid pace and thus research in the field must continue. We invite readers to the next International Meeting on Internet and Audiology that will take place in Southampton, England, June 17-18, 2019.