Guest editorial: accessible and affordable hearing health care for adults with mild to moderate hearing loss

Demographic and Audiological Characteristics of Candidates for Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids in the United States

OBJECTIVES

This report presents descriptive data on the demographic and audiological characteristics of US adults with perceived mild-to-moderate hearing loss, the primary candidates for over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids.

DESIGN

The analyses are descriptive and present population-weighted responses for various self-reported demographic and audiological variables for adults with mild or moderate perceived hearing trouble. Results of pure-tone audiometry and immittance measures are also presented. Nationally representative datasets from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) for 2011 to 2012, 2015 to 2016, and 2017 to 2020, the three most recent NHANES datasets with audiological information, were used.

RESULTS

The NHANES datasets indicated that there are 49.5 million adults in the United States with perceived mild-to-moderate hearing trouble. Results indicated that OTC hearing-aid candidates are most frequently 50 to 69 years of age, married, and identify as non-Hispanic White race/ethnicity. Most of these individuals graduated from high school, had several risk factors for hearing loss, had not had a hearing test in the past 5 years, and had never used hearing aids or assistive listening devices previously. The typical audiometric profile was a bilaterally symmetrical sloping hearing loss with slight to mild hearing loss above 2000 Hz. Group data showed normal immittance measures and absence of otoscopic abnormalities except for the presence of excessive (not impacted) cerumen in about 13% of the OTC hearing-aid candidates.

CONCLUSIONS

Tens of millions of US adults have perceived mild-to-moderate hearing trouble but have not pursued assistance, either through obtaining a hearing test or acquiring prescription hearing aids.

Perceptions of Hearing Health Care: A Qualitative Analysis of Satisfied and Dissatisfied Online Reviews

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to examine the hearing health care experience of satisfied and dissatisfied consumers as reported on Google reviews.

METHOD

Using qualitative thematic analysis, open-text responses from Google regarding hearing health care clinics across 40 U.S. cities were examined. During the original search, 13,168 reviews were identified. Purposive sampling led to a total of 8,420 five-star reviews and 321 one-star reviews. The sample consisted of 500 five-star (satisfied) and 234 one-star (dissatisfied) reviews, describing experiences with audiology clinics, excluding reviews related to ear, nose, and throat services; other medical specialties; and those not relevant to hearing health care.

RESULTS

Satisfied and dissatisfied consumer reviews yielded nuanced dimensions of the hearing health care consumer experience, which were grouped into distinct domains, themes, and subthemes. Six and seven domains were identified from the satisfied and dissatisfied reviews, encompassing 23 and 26 themes, respectively. The overall experience domain revealed emotions ranging from contentment and gratitude to dissatisfaction and waning loyalty. The clinical outcomes domain highlights the pivotal contribution of well-being and hearing outcomes to the consumer experience, while the standard of care domain underscores shared expectations for punctuality, person-centered care, and efficient communication. Facility quality, professional competence, and inclusive care were also highlighted across positive and negative reviews.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate dimensions of satisfied and dissatisfied hearing health care consumer experiences, identifying areas for potential service refinement. These consumer experiences inform person-centric service delivery in hearing health care.

Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids Challenge the Core Values of Traditional Audiology

PURPOSE

Regulatory changes in the United States introduced over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids with the goal of increasing the accessibility and affordability of hearing health care. It is critical to understand the values inherent to hearing health care systems to evaluate their effectiveness in serving people with hearing difficulty. In this study, we evaluated the relative importance of values across service delivery models and the extent to which the introduction of OTC hearing aids represents a values shift relative to traditional audiology.

METHOD

We performed a qualitative content analysis of two document categories: critique documents that motivated the creation of OTC hearing aids and regulatory documents that defined OTC hearing aids. Team members coded portions of text for the values they expressed. In total, 29,235 words were coded across 72 pages in four documents. Rank-order analyses were performed to determine the prioritization of values within each category of documents and subsequently compare values between OTC and traditional audiology documents analyzed in a previous study.

RESULTS

Critique and regulatory documents both prioritized values related to reducing barriers to hearing aid access and use, but the lack of a significant correlation in the rank order of values in these documents was evidence of inconsistency between the motivation and implementation of OTC hearing aids. Differences in the rank order of values in the OTC documents compared to traditional audiology were consistent with a values shift.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of OTC as a solution to low hearing aid use represents a values shift, challenging the values of traditional audiology. This research demonstrates a need to establish the values of hearing health care service delivery through a consensus of stakeholders, including individuals from diverse backgrounds underserved by the traditional model.

A Perspective on Auditory Wellness: What It Is, Why It Is Important, and How It Can Be Managed

During the last decade, there has been a move towards consumer-centric hearing healthcare. This is a direct result of technological advancements (e.g., merger of consumer grade hearing aids with consumer grade earphones creating a wide range of hearing devices) as well as policy changes (e.g., the U.S. Food and Drug Administration creating a new over-the-counter [OTC] hearing aid category). In addition to various direct-to-consumer (DTC) hearing devices available on the market, there are also several validated tools for the self-assessment of auditory function and the detection of ear disease, as well as tools for education about hearing loss, hearing devices, and communication strategies. Further, all can be made easily available to a wide range of people. This perspective provides a framework and identifies tools to improve and maintain optimal auditory wellness across the adult life course. A broadly available and accessible set of tools that can be made available on a digital platform to aid adults in the assessment and as needed, the improvement, of auditory wellness is discussed.

Comparing Direct-to-Consumer Devices to Hearing Aids: Amplification Accuracy for Three Types of Hearing Loss

PURPOSE

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration finalized regulations for over-the-counter hearing aids (OTC-HAs) on August 17, 2022. Little is known about the comparative performance of OTC-HAs and prescription HAs. This study compared amplification accuracy of prescription HAs and direct-to-consumer devices (DTCDs, including personal sound amplification products [PSAPs] and OTC-HAs).

METHOD

Eleven devices were programmed to meet prescriptive targets in an acoustic manikin for three degrees of hearing loss. Devices consisted of high- and low-end HAs, PSAPS, and OTC-HAs. Each was tested, and deviations from target measured with an HA analyzer at every combination of 10 frequencies and low-, average-, and high-level inputs. Accuracy was compared using a multilevel Poisson model with device-specific intercepts controlling for input level, frequency, and device type.

RESULTS

For mild-moderate hearing loss, deviations from targets were not statistically different between high- and low-end HAs, but PSAPs (5.50 dB, SE = 0.92 dB) and OTC-HAs (8.83 dB, SE = 1.10 dB) had larger differentials. For flat moderate hearing loss, compared to high-end HAs, average differentials were larger for all device types at all input levels and frequencies (Low HA: 3.82 dB, SE = 1.10 dB; PSAP: 9.24 dB, SE = 1.22 dB; OTC-HA: 8.61 dB, SE = 1.19 dB). For mild sloping to severe hearing loss, compared to high-end HAs, OTC-HAs (9.72 dB, SE = 1.20 dB) and PSAPs (7.34 dB, SE = 1.07 dB) had larger differentials and significant variability at the highest and lowest frequencies. Half (three) of the PSAPs and OTC-HAs met most targets within ±5 dB.

CONCLUSIONS

DTCDs were unable to meet prescriptive targets for severe types of hearing loss but could meet them for mild hearing loss. This study provides an examination of current hearing devices. More research is needed to determine whether meeting prescriptive targets provides any benefit in the outcomes and performance with DTCD devices.

Hearing Loss and Disorders: The Repercussions of Climate Change

PURPOSE

Climate change is considered to be the greatest threat to human health in the 21st century, and its effects are accelerating. Extensive research has clearly demonstrated its increasing impact across the continuum of health conditions. Despite this, there has been limited attention to the ramifications of climate change on hearing loss and hearing disorders. This lack of consideration is somewhat surprising as the environment itself and its changing nature have a substantial effect on hearing.

METHOD

Tackling climate change could be the greatest global health opportunity of the 21st century. To address this issue, this tutorial provides a general introduction to climate change and its three major elements (pollution, infectious diseases, and extreme weather events) and their effects on health. The substantial consequences of climate change for the incidence, development, and exacerbation of hearing loss and disorders are clearly described and detailed.

CONCLUSIONS

The challenge of responding to this very real and escalating threat to hearing requires a combination of prevention, advocacy, and education. These three roles place audiologists in the perfect position to take action on the far-reaching effects of climate change on hearing loss and disorders. To respond to this challenge and to fulfill these roles, several strategies, ranging from the individual level to the global level, are delineated for audiologists to incorporate into their practice.

Does experience with hearing aid amplification influence electrophysiological measures of speech comprehension?

OBJECTIVE

To explore if experience with hearing aid (HA) amplification affects speech-evoked cortical potentials reflecting comprehension abilities.

DESIGN

N400 and late positive complex (LPC) responses as well as behavioural response times to congruent and incongruent digit triplets were measured. The digits were presented against stationary speech-shaped noise 10 dB above individually measured speech recognition thresholds. Stimulus presentation was either acoustic (digits 1-3) or first visual (digits 1-2) and then acoustic (digit 3).

STUDY SAMPLE

Three groups of older participants (N = 3 × 15) with (1) pure-tone average hearing thresholds <25 dB HL from 500-4000 Hz, (2) mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) but no prior HA experience, and (3) mild-to-moderate SNHL and >2 years of HA experience. Groups 2-3 were fitted with test devices in accordance with clinical gain targets.

RESULTS

No group differences were found in the electrophysiological data. N400 amplitudes were larger and LPC latencies shorter with acoustic presentation. For group 1, behavioural response times were shorter with visual-then-acoustic presentation.

CONCLUSION

When speech audibility is ensured, comprehension-related electrophysiological responses appear intact in individuals with mild-to-moderate SNHL, regardless of prior experience with amplified sound. Further research into the effects of audibility versus acclimatisation-related neurophysiological changes is warranted.

Efficacy and Effectiveness of Evidence-Based Non-Self-Fitting Presets Compared to Prescription Hearing Aid Fittings and a Personal Sound Amplification Product

PURPOSE

In this study, we compare the efficacy and effectiveness of gain-frequency responses of evidence-based presets developed by our lab for over-the-counter hearing aids to conventional National Acoustic Laboratories' nonlinear fitting procedure, version 2 (NAL-NL2) gain-frequency response and to gain-frequency response of a personal sound amplification product (PSAP). We hypothesized that the hearing aids with our presets would perform better than a PSAP with poor frequency response and comparably to the hearing aid with NAL-NL2 frequency response.

METHOD

We used a single-blinded, randomized cross-over design to compare audibility, speech recognition, sound quality, listening effort, and subjective preferences in 37 participants in laboratory settings and following field trials.

RESULTS

The presets developed in our lab showed comparable outcomes to the hearing aids with NAL-NL2 gain-frequency response in most measured domains. Performance with the presets was better than the PSAP gain-frequency response in the domains of listening effort and sound quality in laboratory testing and speech recognition in our real-world measures. We also found that most participants (54.05%) preferred our presets over the PSAPs and were willing to pay significantly more to purchase the hearing aids with our presets.

CONCLUSION

Our evidence-based presets have better outcomes than a PSAP with a single, poorly suited frequency response while performing comparably to the clinical best-practice National Acoustic Laboratories condition.

Effectiveness of an Over-the-Counter Self-fitting Hearing Aid Compared With an Audiologist-Fitted Hearing Aid: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Hearing loss is a highly prevalent condition, with numerous debilitating consequences when left untreated. However, less than 20% of US adults with hearing loss use hearing aids. Over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids became available in October 2022 to improve access and affordability. However, clinical effectiveness studies of available OTC hearing aids using the existing devices in the market are limited.

Objective

To compare the clinical effectiveness of a self-fitting OTC hearing aid with remote support and a hearing aid fitted using audiologist-fitted best practices.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical effectiveness trial was conducted between April 14 and August 29, 2022. Sixty-eight adults with self-perceived mild to moderate hearing loss were recruited and randomly assigned to either the self-fitting or the audiologist-fitted group. Following bilateral hearing aid fitting, participants first completed a 2-week, take-home field trial without any support. Access to fine-tuning for both groups was only available after the 2-week trial. Support and adjustment were provided remotely for the self-fitting group per request and by the audiologist for the audiologist-fitted group. Participants were then reassessed after an additional 4-week take-home trial.

Interventions

A commercially available self-fitting OTC hearing aid was provided to participants in the self-fitting group who were expected to set up the hearing aids using the commercially supplied instructional material and accompanying smartphone application. In the audiologist-fitted group, audiologists fitted the same hearing aid according to the National Acoustics Laboratories nonlinear version 2 algorithm for prescriptive gain target using real-ear verification with hearing aid use instruction.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome measure was self-reported hearing aid benefit, measured using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB). Secondary measures included the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) and speech recognition in noise measured using an abbreviated speech-in-noise test and a digits-in-noise test. All measures were completed at baseline and at 2 intervals following hearing aid fitting (2 and 6 weeks).

Results

Sixty-four participants were included in the analytic sample (33 men [51.6%]; mean [SD] age, 63.6 [14.1] years), with equal numbers of participants (n = 32) randomized into each group. The groups did not differ significantly in age (effect size r = -0.2 [95% CI, -0.3 to 0.2]) or 4-frequency pure-tone average (effect size r = 0.2 [95% CI, -0.1 to 0.4]). After the 2-week field trial, the self-fitting group had an initial advantage compared with the audiologist-fitted group on the self-reported APHAB (Cohen d = -0.5 [95% CI, -1.0 to 0]) and IOI-HA (effect size r = 0.3 [95% CI, 0.0-0.5]) but not speech recognition in noise. At the end of the 6-week trial, no meaningful differences were evident between the groups on any outcome measures.

Conclusion and relevance

In this randomized clinical effectiveness trial, self-fitting OTC hearing aids with remote support yielded outcomes at 6 weeks post fitting comparable to those of hearing aids fitted using audiologist best practices. These findings suggest that self-fitting OTC hearing aids may provide an effective intervention for mild to moderate hearing loss.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05337748.

Hearing Healthcare Professionals' Views about Over-The-Counter (OTC) Hearing Aids: Analysis of Retrospective Survey Data

Over-the-counter hearing aids have been available to consumers in the US since 17 October 2022 following a ruling by the Food and Drug Administration. However, their reception by hearing healthcare professionals (HHP) has been mixed, and concerns have been expressed by many HHPs. The aim of this study was to examine the concerns that HHPs have towards over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids. The study used a retrospective survey design. The survey data of HHPs (n = 730) was obtained from Hearing Tracker. A 22-item structured questionnaire was administered using a Question Scout platform. Descriptive analyses examined reported areas of concern and a Fisher's exact test examined the relationship between demographics and responses. A cluster analysis with partitioning around medoids (PAM) was used to identify a sub-group of participants based on responses. Nearly half of HHPs who participated reported that they will support patients with OTC hearing aids purchased elsewhere, whereas a quarter reported that they will sell OTC hearing aids in their clinic or website. HHPs expressed over 70% agreement in 'concern' statements in 14 of the 17 items. Issues about safety, counseling, and audiological care were the key concerns expressed by HHPs about OTC hearing aids. Some demographics (i.e., profession, primary position) were associated with responses to some statements. Two groups were identified based on the responses to concern statements. The HHPs in the first cluster 'OTC averse' (51%) agreed on all the 17 concern statements, whereas the second cluster 'OTC apprehensive' (49%) had some items rated as disagree (i.e., consumers will give up on amplification) and neither agree nor disagree (i.e., do not provide good value, warranties and return periods will be worse), and remaining items were rated as agree. OTC hearing aids were initiated to improve affordability, accessibility, and hearing aid uptake and are currently a rapidly emerging category of hearing devices. Overall, the results of the current study indicate that HHPs have serious concerns about OTC hearing aids. HHP concerns cited in this study provide useful feedback to stakeholders (e.g., HHP professional agencies, FDA, industry, and insurance payers) involved in improving OTC hearing aid implementation.

Impacts of the hearing aid intervention on healthcare utilization and costs among middle-aged and older adults: results from a randomized controlled trial in rural China

BACKGROUND

Hearing impairment has become a major global health issue. To reduce the burden of hearing impairment, we explored impacts of the hearing aid intervention on healthcare utilization and costs.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial, participants aged 45+ were allocated with a ratio of 1:1.5 (intervention: control). Neither the investigators nor the assessors were blinded to the allocation status. Those in the intervention group were fitted with hearing aids, and those in the control group received no care. We applied the difference-in-difference (DID) approach to examine the impacts on healthcare utilization and costs. Given that social network and age can be significant variables affecting effectiveness of the intervention, subgroup analyses by social network and age were used to explore the heterogeneity.

FINDINGS

395 subjects were successfully recruited and randomized. 10 subjects did not meet the inclusion criteria and therefore, 385 eligible subjects (150 in the treatment group and 235 in the control group) were analyzed. The intervention significantly reduced their total healthcare costs (average treatment effect (ATE) = -1.26, 95% CI = -2.39, -0.14, p = 0.028) and total out-of-pocket (OOP) healthcare costs (ATE = -1.29, 95% CI = -2.37, -0.20, p = 0.021) in the 20-month follow-up. To be exact, it reduced self-medication costs (ATE = -0.82, 95% CI = -1.49, -0.15, p = 0.016) and OOP self-medication costs (ATE = -0.84, 95% CI = -1.46, -0.21, p = 0.009). Subgroup analysis showed that the impacts on self-medication costs and OOP self-medication costs varied by social network (ATE for self-medication costs = -0.26, 95% CI = -0.50, -0.01, p = 0.041; ATE for OOP self-medication costs = -0.27, 95% CI = -0.52, -0.01, p = 0.038). The impacts also varied by age groups (ATE for self-medication costs = -0.22, 95% CI = -0.40, -0.04, p = 0.019; ATE for OOP self-medication costs = -0.17, 95% CI = -0.29, -0.04, p = 0.010). There were no adverse events or side effects during the trial.

INTERPRETATION

Hearing aid use significantly lowered self-medication costs and total healthcare costs, but had no impacts on inpatient or outpatient services utilization or costs. The impacts were manifested among people with active social network or younger age. It can be speculated that the intervention may be adapted to other similar settings in developing countries to reduce healthcare costs.

FUNDING

P.H. reports grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71874005) and Major Project of the National Social Science Fund of China (No. 21&ZD187).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR1900024739.

Audiologists' perceived value of ototoxicity management and barriers to implementation for at-risk cancer patients in VA: the OtoMIC survey

PURPOSE

Platinum-based chemotherapies used to treat many types of cancers are ototoxic. Ototoxicity management (OtoM) to mitigate the ototoxic outcomes of cancer survivors is recommended practice yet it is not a standard part of oncologic care. Although more than 10,000 patients each year are treated with platinum-based chemotherapies at the US Veterans Health Administration (VA), the current state of OtoM in VA is not well-defined. This study reports on a national survey of VA audiologists' perceptions regarding OtoM in cancer patients.

METHODS

A 26-item online survey was administered to VA audiologists and service chiefs across the VA's 18 regional systems of care. Descriptive statistics and deductive thematic analysis were used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

The 61 respondents included at least one from each VA region. All reported they felt some form of OtoM was necessary for at-risk cancer patients. A pre-treatment baseline, the ability to detect ototoxicity early, and management of ototoxic effects both during and after treatment were considered high value objectives of OtoM by respondents. Roughly half reported routinely providing these services for patients receiving cisplatin and carboplatin. Respondents disagreed regarding appropriate hearing testing schedules and how to co-manage OtoM responsibilities with oncology. They identified barriers to care that conformed to three themes: care and referral coordination with oncology, audiology workload, and lack of protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

Although VA audiologists value providing OtoM for cancer patients, only about half perform OtoM for highly ototoxic treatment regimens. The OtoMIC survey provides clinician perspectives to benchmark and address OtoM care gaps.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Collaboration between oncology and audiology is needed to improve current OtoM processes, so that cancer survivors can have more control over their long term hearing health.

Over-the-counter Hearing Aids: From Research to Policy to Practice

In this Viewpoint from officials at NIH and FDA, the authors discuss research collaborations between federal agencies and the private sector, using new regulations for over-the-counter hearing aids as an illustration.

Age Differences in Speech Perception in Noise and Sound Localization in Individuals With Subjective Normal Hearing

Hearing loss in old age, which often goes untreated, has far-reaching consequences. Furthermore, reduction of cognitive abilities and dementia can also occur, which also affects quality of life. The aim of this study was to investigate the hearing performance of seniors without hearing complaints with respect to speech perception in noise and the ability to localize sounds. Results were tested for correlations with age and cognitive performance. The study included 40 subjects aged between 60 and 90 years (mean age: 69.3 years) with not self-reported hearing problems. The subjects were screened for dementia. Audiological tests included pure-tone audiometry and speech perception in two types of background noise (continuous and amplitude-modulated noise) which was either co-located or spatially separated (multi-source noise field, MSNF) from the target speech. Sound localization ability was assessed and hearing performance was self-evaluated by a questionnaire. Speech in noise and sound localization was compared with young normal hearing adults. Although considering themselves as hearing normal, 17 subjects had at least a mild hearing loss. There was a significant negative correlation between hearing loss and dementia screening (DemTect) score. Speech perception in noise decreased significantly with age. There were significant negative correlations between speech perception in noise and DemTect score for both spatial configurations. Mean SRTs obtained in the co-located noise condition with amplitude-modulated noise were on average 3.1 dB better than with continuous noise. This gap-listening effect was severely diminished compared to a younger normal hearing subject group. In continuous noise, spatial separation of speech and noise led to better SRTs compared to the co-located masker condition. SRTs in MSNF deteriorated in modulated noise compared to continuous noise by 2.6 dB. Highest impact of age was found for speech perception scores using noise stimuli with temporal modulation in binaural test conditions. Mean localization error was in the range of young adults. Mean amount of front/back confusions was 11.5% higher than for young adults. Speech perception tests in the presence of temporally modulated noise can serve as a screening method for early detection of hearing disorders in older adults. This allows for early prescription of hearing aids.

A Pilot Study to Develop the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Audiology

Background:

Health literacy describes an individuals' ability to maximize their potential in health care, including one's ability to understand information needed to make informed health decisions. A variety of general and condition-specific health literacy assessment tools have been created to help health professionals assess patients' health literacy skills and tailor the need for health care communication or education; however, there are no such tools available for the audiology field.

Objective:

The purpose of the study was to develop an objective reading recognition audiology-related health literacy assessment tool, the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Audiology (REALA).

Methods:

This was a cross-sectional study (N = 200). The initial version of the REALA contained 99 words specifically related to audiology. The final version, revised to have improved clinical utility, contained a total of 48 words that were selected based on item difficulty, item discrimination score, and point-biserial index using classical item analysis.

Key Results:

The total pass rate for the final version of the 48-word REALA was 0.72 (standard deviation = 0.45) and the Cronbach coefficient alpha was 0.93. Once the comprehension component is added to the tool, the REALA can be a valuable health literacy assessment tool that health professionals use to evaluate patients' audiology-related health literacy.

Conclusion:

Once the comprehension component is added to the tool, the REALA can be a valuable health literacy assessment tool that health professionals use to evaluate patients' audiology-related health literacy. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2022;6(2):e88–e95.]

Plain Language Summary:

A health literacy assessment tool, the REALA, was developed in the study. The final version of REALA contained 48 words relative to hearing healthcare. The results suggested that REALA can help health professionals assess patients' hearing related health literacy and tailor the need for hearing health care communication or education.

The impact of hearing impairment and hearing aid use on progression to mild cognitive impairment in cognitively healthy adults: An observational cohort study

INTRODUCTION

We assessed the association of self-reported hearing impairment and hearing aid use with cognitive decline and progression to mild cognitive impairment (MCI).

METHODS

We used a large referral-based cohort of 4358 participants obtained from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center. The standard covariate-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model, the marginal structural Cox model with inverse probability weighting, standardized Kaplan-Meier curves, and linear mixed-effects models were applied to test the hypotheses.

RESULTS

Hearing impairment was associated with increased risk of MCI (standardized hazard ratio [HR] 2.58, 95% confidence interval [CI: 1.73 to 3.84], P = .004) and an accelerated rate of cognitive decline (P < .001). Hearing aid users were less likely to develop MCI than hearing-impaired individuals who did not use a hearing aid (HR 0.47, 95% CI [0.29 to 0.74], P = .001). No difference in risk of MCI was observed between individuals with normal hearing and hearing-impaired adults using hearing aids (HR 0.86, 95% CI [0.56 to 1.34], P = .51).

DISCUSSION

Use of hearing aids may help mitigate cognitive decline associated with hearing loss.

Amplification Self-Adjustment: Controls and Repeatability

OBJECTIVES

This study was a continuation of work on an explore-and-select approach to the self-adjustment of amplification. Goals were to determine (i) the effect of changing the number of adjustment controls from three to two, (ii) the effect of changing the initial adjustment from overall output to high-frequency output, (iii) individual repeatability, (iv) the effect on phoneme recognition of increasing and decreasing overall output relative to the starting and adjusted conditions, and (v) listener reactions to, and opinions of, the self-adjustment procedure.

DESIGN

Twenty-two adults with hearing loss, 10 of whom were hearing aid users, adjusted level and spectrum of connected speech to preference, using three configurations of number and order of adjustment parameters. The three adjustments were replicated to give a total of six. Presentation was monaural, in quiet, using the ear with the better threshold at 2 kHz. The starting condition was a generic prescription for a typical mild-to-moderate hearing loss. Real ear output spectra were measured for the 6 self-adjustments, the generic starting condition, and the individual NAL-NL2 prescriptions for speech at 65 dB SPL. Monaural phoneme recognition in monosyllables was assessed, in quiet, at levels of -14, -7, 0 and +7 dB relative to both the starting and the self-adjusted conditions. Participants completed a questionnaire and their comments on each question were transcribed.

RESULTS

Changing the number of listener controls from 3 to 2 reduced mean adjustment time by around 50% but had negligible effect on group-mean output response. Starting adjustment with high-frequency output rather than overall output resulted in a 2 to 3 dB reduction of group-mean self-adjusted output below 1 kHz. Individual self-adjustments were within ±5 dB of NAL-NL2 prescription (for a 65 dB SPL speech input) for two-thirds of the participants in the high frequencies and for just over half in the low frequencies. In six self-adjustments, individuals self-adjusted, on average, to within ±4 dB of their own mean in both high and low frequencies. There was no evidence that these findings differed for hearing aid users and nonusers. Changes of overall output by ±7 dB after self-adjustment did not significantly affect group mean phoneme recognition. Preference for number and order of self-adjustment differed among participants, as did opinions on self-fitting of hearing aids.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the conclusion that, for many adults with hearing loss, an explore-and-select procedure for self-adjustment of amplification leads to output values that are repeatable within a few dB, are relatively immune to the number and order of adjustment parameters, and place the average listener well along the plateau of a phoneme recognition versus amplitude function.

Implementation of Mobile Audiometry During the COVID-19 Pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the utility of portable audiometry became more apparent as elective procedures were deferred in an effort to limit exposure to health care providers. Herein, we retrospectively evaluated mobile-based audiometry in the emergency department and outpatient otology and audiology clinics. Air conduction thresholds with mobile audiometry were within 5 dB in 66% of tests (95% CI, 62.8%-69.09%) and within 10 dB in 84% of tests (95% CI, 81.4%-86.2%) as compared with conventional audiometry. No significant differences were noted between mobile-based and conventional audiometry at any frequencies, except 8 kHz (P < .05). The sensitivity and specificity for screening for hearing loss were 94.3% (95% CI, 91.9%-96.83%) and 92.3% (95% CI, 90.1%-94.4%), respectively. While automated threshold audiometry does not replace conventional audiometry, mobile audiometry is a promising screening tool when conventional audiometry is not available.

Hearing Health Care Utilization Following Automated Hearing Screening

BACKGROUND

 The study examined follow-up rates for pursuing hearing health care (HHC) 6 to 8 months after participants self-administered one of three hearing screening methods: an automated method for testing of auditory sensitivity (AMTAS), a four-frequency pure-tone screener (FFS), or a digits-in-noise test (DIN), with and without the presentation of a 2-minute educational video about hearing.

PURPOSE

 The study aims to determine if the type of self-administered hearing screening method (with or without an educational video) affects HHC follow-up rates.

RESEARCH DESIGN

 The study is a randomized controlled trial of three automated hearing screening methods, plus control group, with and without an educational video. The control group completed questionnaires and provided follow-up data but did not undergo a hearing screening test.

STUDY SAMPLE

 The study sample includes 1,665 participants (mean age 50.8 years; 935 males) at two VA Medical Centers and at university and community centers in Portland, OR; Bay Pines, FL; Minneapolis, MN; Mauston, WI; and Columbus, OH.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

 HHC follow-up data at 6 to 8 months were obtained by contacting participants by phone or mail. Screening methods and participant characteristics were compared in relation to the probability of participants pursuing HHC during the follow-up period.

RESULTS

 The 2-minute educational video did not have a significant effect on HHC follow-up rates. When all participants who provided follow-up data are considered (n = 1012), the FFS was the only test that resulted in a significantly greater percentage of HHC follow-up (24.6%) compared with the control group (16.8%); p = 0.03. However, for participants who failed a hearing screening (n = 467), follow-up results for all screening methods were significantly greater than for controls. The FFS resulted in a greater probability for HHC follow-up overall than the other two screening methods. Moreover, veterans had higher follow-up rates for all screening methods than non-veterans.

CONCLUSION

 The FFS resulted in a greater HHC follow-up rate compared with the other screening methods. This self-administered test may be more motivational for HHC follow-up because participants who fail the screening are aware of sounds they could not hear which does not occur with adaptive assessments like AMTAS or the DIN test. It is likely that access to and reduced personal cost of audiological services for veterans contributed to higher HHC follow-up rates in this group compared with non-veteran participants.

Social representation of hearing aids among people with hearing loss: an exploratory study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the current study was to examine the social representation (SR) of hearing aids in people with hearing loss (PHL) in India, the Republic of Korea (ROK), the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States of America (US).

DESIGN

The study used a cross-sectional survey design. The data collected by using a free association task were analysed qualitatively (i.e. content analysis) and quantitatively (i.e. chi-square analysis, similarities analysis, prototypical analysis).

STUDY SAMPLE

424 participants with hearing loss.

RESULTS

The most commonly reported categories across all countries were "beneficial," "cost and time," and "appearance and design." Approximately 50% of the associations reported were negative. There were variations in terms of the categories that were predominant in the SR of each country. "Others actions and attitude" category was predominantly reported by PHL in India. "Disturbance" and "dissatisfaction" of hearing aids and the "repairs and maintenance of hearing aids" categories were mainly reported from the ROK and the US, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results highlight the main aspects that PHL report spontaneously when they think about hearing aids. The findings will help to further inform public health campaigns and will contribute to develop culturally appropriate media materials regarding hearing aids.

Hearing aid affordability in the United States

PURPOSE

Substantial out-of-pocket costs for hearing aids constitute a barrier to hearing health care accessibility for older adults among whom prevalence of hearing loss is high. This study is the first to estimate the proportion of Americans with functional hearing loss for which out-of-pocket expenditures for hearing aids would be unaffordable at current average costs and determine how affordability varies by sociodemographic factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We utilized data from the 2016 American Community Survey to determine the proportion of adults with functional hearing loss for whom hearing aids would constitute ≥3% of annual income or have post-purchase income below a poverty standard. Chi-square tests were used to identify differences in affordability outcomes by sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Results indicated that an average bundled cost of $2500 would constitute a catastrophic expense for 77% of Americans with functional hearing loss (N = 7,872,292) and would add an additional 4% of the population into poverty for the year (N = 423,548). Affordability outcomes varied significantly by age, race, sex, educational attainment and geographic location.

CONCLUSIONS

Hearing aids were unaffordable for three-fourths of Americans with functional hearing loss, and their purchase would result in impoverishment for hundreds of thousands of individuals. Reductions in out-of-pocket hearing aid costs to $500 or $1000 would alleviate affordability issues for many Americans with hearing loss. Future federal and state policy should address poor rates of insurance coverage for hearing care, specifically among Medicare and Medicaid, to reduce out-of-pocket costs for hearing care particularly for older adults.Implications for rehabilitationAn average out-of-pocket hearing care cost of $2500 was unaffordable for over three quarters of Americans with functional hearing loss.Hearing care affordability varied significantly by demographic characteristics such as age, sex, gender, educational attainment and geographic region.Affordability constitutes a significant barrier to hearing care accessibility in the United States, where most costs of hearing aids and rehabilitation are statutorily excluded from insurance coverage, including the largest insurer of Americans, Medicare.

AutoAudio: Deep Learning for Automatic Audiogram Interpretation

Hearing loss is the leading human sensory system loss, and one of the leading causes for years lived with disability with significant effects on quality of life, social isolation, and overall health. Coupled with a forecast of increased hearing loss burden worldwide, national and international health organizations have urgently recommended that access to hearing evaluation be expanded to meet demand. The objective of this study was to develop 'AutoAudio' - a novel deep learning proof-of-concept model that accurately and quickly interprets diagnostic audiograms. Adult audiogram reports representing normal, conductive, mixed and sensorineural morphologies were used to train different neural network architectures. Image augmentation techniques were used to increase the training image set size. Classification accuracy on a separate test set was used to assess model performance. The architecture with the highest out-of-training set accuracy was ResNet-101 at 97.5%. Neural network training time varied between 2 to 7 h depending on the depth of the neural network architecture. Each neural network architecture produced misclassifications that arose from failures of the model to correctly label the audiogram with the appropriate hearing loss type. The most commonly misclassified hearing loss type were mixed losses. Re-engineering the process of hearing testing with a machine learning innovation may help enhance access to the growing worldwide population that is expected to require audiologist services. Our results suggest that deep learning may be a transformative technology that enables automatic and accurate audiogram interpretation.

Efficacy and Effectiveness of Advanced Hearing Aid Directional and Noise Reduction Technologies for Older Adults With Mild to Moderate Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the laboratory efficacy and real-world effectiveness of advanced directional microphones (DM) and digital noise reduction (NR) algorithms (i.e., premium DM/NR features) relative to basic-level DM/NR features of contemporary hearing aids (HAs). The study also examined the effect of premium HAs relative to basic HAs and the effect of DM/NR features relative to no features.

DESIGN

Fifty-four older adults with mild-to-moderate hearing loss completed a single-blinded crossover trial. Two HA models, one a less-expensive, basic-level device (basic HA) and the other a more-expensive, advanced-level device (premium HA), were used. The DM/NR features of the basic HAs (i.e., basic features) were adaptive DMs and gain-reduction NR with fewer channels. In contrast, the DM/NR features of the premium HAs (i.e., premium features) included adaptive DMs and gain-reduction NR with more channels, bilateral beamformers, speech-seeking DMs, pinna-simulation directivity, reverberation reduction, impulse NR, wind NR, and spatial NR. The trial consisted of four conditions, which were factorial combinations of HA model (premium versus basic) and DM/NR feature status (on versus off). To blind participants regarding the HA technology, no technology details were disclosed and minimal training on how to use the features was provided. In each condition, participants wore bilateral HAs for 5 weeks. Outcomes regarding speech understanding, listening effort, sound quality, localization, and HA satisfaction were measured using laboratory tests, retrospective self-reports (i.e., standardized questionnaires), and in-situ self-reports (i.e., self-reports completed in the real world in real time). A smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment system was used to collect in-situ self-reports.

RESULTS

Laboratory efficacy data generally supported the benefit of premium DM/NR features relative to basic DM/NR, premium HAs relative to basic HAs, and DM/NR features relative to no DM/NR in improving speech understanding and localization performance. Laboratory data also indicated that DM/NR features could improve listening effort and sound quality compared with no features for both basic- and premium-level HAs. For real-world effectiveness, in-situ self-reports first indicated that noisy or very noisy situations did not occur very often in participants' daily lives (10.9% of the time). Although both retrospective and in-situ self-reports indicated that participants were more satisfied with HAs equipped with DM/NR features than without, there was no strong evidence to support the benefit of premium DM/NR features and premium HAs over basic DM/NR features and basic HAs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although premium DM/NR features and premium HAs outperformed their basic-level counterparts in well-controlled laboratory test conditions, the benefits were not observed in the real world. In contrast, the effect of DM/NR features relative to no features was robust both in the laboratory and in the real world. Therefore, the present study suggests that although both premium and basic DM/NR technologies evaluated in the study have the potential to improve HA outcomes, older adults with mild-to-moderate hearing loss are unlikely to perceive the additional benefits provided by the premium DM/NR features in their daily lives. Limitations concerning the study's generalizability (e.g., participant's lifestyle) are discussed.

Association Between Hearing Aid Use and Health Care Use and Cost Among Older Adults With Hearing Loss

Importance

Hearing loss (HL) is common among older adults and is associated with poorer health and impeded communication. Hearing aids (HAs), while helpful in addressing some of the outcomes of HL, are not covered by Medicare.

Objective

To determine whether HA use is associated with health care costs and utilization in older adults.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used nationally representative 2013-2014 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data to evaluate the use of HAs among 1336 adults aged 65 years or older with HL. An inverse propensity score weighting was applied to adjust for potential selection bias between older adults with and without HAs, all of whom reported having HL. The mean treatment outcomes of HA use on health care utilization and costs were estimated.

Exposures

Encounter with the US health care system.

Main Outcomes and Measures

(1) Total health care, Medicare, and out-of-pocket spending; (2) any emergency department (ED), inpatient, and office visit; and (3) number of ED visits, nights in hospital, and office visits.

Results

Of the 1336 individuals included in the study, 574 (43.0%) were women; mean (SD) age was 77 (7) years. Adults without HAs (n = 734) were less educated, had lower income, and were more likely to be from minority subpopulations. The mean treatment outcomes of using HAs per participant were (1) higher total annual health care spending by $1125 (95% CI, $1114 to $1137) and higher out-of-pocket spending by $325 (95% CI, $322 to $326) but lower Medicare spending by $71 (95% CI, -$81 to -$62); (2) lower probability of any ED visit by 2 percentage points (PPs) (24% vs 26%; 95% CI, -2% to -2%) and lower probability of any hospitalization by 2 PPs (20% vs 22%; 95% CI, -3% to -1%) but higher probability of any office visit by 4 PPs (96% vs 92%; 95% CI, 4% to 4%); and (3) 1.40 more office visits (95% CI, 1.39 to 1.41) but 0.46 (5%) fewer number of hospital nights (95% CI, -0.47 to -0.44), with no association with the number of ED visits, if any (95% CI, 0.01 to 0).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study demonstrates the beneficial outcomes of use of HAs in reducing the probability of any ED visits and any hospitalizations and in reducing the number of nights in the hospital. Although use of HAs reduced total Medicare costs, it significantly increased total and out-of-pocket health care spending. This information may have implications for Medicare regarding covering HAs for patients with HL.

Can Hearing Aids Delay Time to Diagnosis of Dementia, Depression, or Falls in Older Adults?

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between hearing aids (HAs) and time to diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (AD) or dementia, anxiety or depression, and injurious falls among adults, aged 66 years and older, within 3 years of hearing loss (HL) diagnosis.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

We used 2008 to 2016 national longitudinal claims data (based on office visit, inpatient, or outpatient healthcare encounters) from a large private payer. We used Kaplan-Meier curves to examine unadjusted disease-free survival and crude and adjusted Cox regression models to examine associations between HAs and time to diagnosis of three age-related/HL-associated conditions within 3 years of HL diagnosis. All models were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, census divisions, and prior diagnosis of cardiovascular conditions, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, and diabetes.

PARTICIPANTS

The participants included 114 862 adults, aged 66 years and older, diagnosed with HL.

MEASUREMENT

Diagnosis of (1) AD or dementia; (2) depression or anxiety; and (3) injurious falls.

INTERVENTION

Use of HAs.

RESULTS

Large sex and racial/ethnic differences exist in HA use. Approximately 11.3% of women vs 13.3% of men used HAs (95% confidence interval [CI] difference = -0.024 to -0.016). Approximately 13.6% of whites (95% CI = 0.13-0.14) vs 9.8% of blacks (95% CI = 0.09-0.11) and 6.5% of Hispanics (95% CI = 0.06-0.07) used HAs. The risk-adjusted hazard ratios of being diagnosed with AD/dementia, anxiety/depression, and injurious falls within 3 years after HL diagnosis, for those who used HAs vs those who did not, were 0.82 (95% CI = 0.76-0.89), 0.89 (95% CI = 0.86-0.93), and 0.87 (95% CI = 0.80-0.95), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of HAs is associated with delayed diagnosis of AD, dementia, depression, anxiety, and injurious falls among older adults with HL. Although we have shown an association between use of HAs and reduced risk of physical and mental decline, randomized trials are needed to determine whether, and to what extent, the relationship is causal. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2362-2369, 2019.

Home Hearing Test: Within-Subjects Threshold Variability

BACKGROUND

The Home Hearing Test (HHT) is an automated pure-tone threshold test that obtains an air conduction audiogram at five test frequencies. It was developed to provide increased access to hearing testing and support home telehealth programs.

PURPOSE

Test and retest thresholds for 1000-Hz stimuli were analyzed to determine intrasubject variability from two independent data sets.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Prospective, repeated measures.

STUDY SAMPLE

In the Veterans Affairs (VA) study, results from 26 subjects 44 to 88 years of age (mean = 65) recruited from the Nashville VA audiology clinic were analyzed. Subjects were required to have a Windows PC in the home and were self-reported to be comfortable with using computers. Two subjects had normal hearing, and 24 had hearing losses of various severities and configurations. The National Center for Rehabilitative Auditory Research (NCRAR) sample included 100 subjects (68 males; 32 females) with a complaint of hearing difficulty recruited from the local community and Veteran population. Subjects ranged in age from 32 to 87 years (mean = 63.7 years). They were tested in a quiet room at the NCRAR.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Subjects in the VA study were provided kits for installing HHT on their home computers. HHT was installed on a computer at NCRAR to test subjects in the NCRAR study. HHT obtains a five-frequency air conduction audiogram with a retest of 1000 Hz in both ears. Only the 1000-Hz test-retest results are analyzed in this report. Six statistical measures of test-retest variability are reported.

RESULTS

Test and retest thresholds were highly correlated in both studies (r ≥ 0.96). Test-retest differences were within ±5 dB ≥92% of the time in the two studies. Standard deviations of absolute test-retest difference were ≤3.5 dB in the two studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Intrasubject variability is comparable to that obtained with manual testing by audiologists in sound-treated test rooms.

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.

Translating Public Health Practices: Community-Based Approaches for Addressing Hearing Health Care Disparities

Epidemiologic studies reveal disparities in hearing health care with lower prevalence of hearing aid use among older adults from racial/ethnic minority groups and lower socioeconomic positions. Recent national reports recommend exploring innovative delivery models to increase the accessibility and affordability of hearing health care, particularly for underserved and vulnerable populations. With an expected rise in the prevalence of age-related hearing loss over the next four decades due to a rapidly aging population, the condition is a growing public health imperative. This review describes key public health practices for developing and delivering community-based care that characterizes an emerging area of research in novel approaches of hearing loss management programs to reach underserved populations. With evolving technologies that enable care to extend beyond the clinic, adapting a long-utilized community health worker approach presents a strategy for the field of hearing health care to be actively involved in designing and leading initiatives for achieving hearing health equity. Principles from community-based participatory research offer a paradigm for the field to integrate into its research endeavors for addressing disparities. An interdisciplinary approach for engaging these challenges offers hearing health care researchers and providers an opportunity to advance the field and delivery of care.

A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Hearing Aids, Including the Benefits of Reducing the Symptoms of Dementia

We carried out a CBA of hearing aids (HAs) in which we estimated the direct utility benefits, and included the indirect utility benefits working through a reduction in dementia symptoms. The benefits methodology involved using QALYs as the outcome measure and then applying the price of a QALY to convert the outcome measure into monetary terms. The price of a QALY was derived from an age specific VSL estimate. The effects of HAs on utility were estimated from a fixed effects regression on a large national panel data set provided by NACC where we used a negative proxy for the QoL. We also used a fixed effects regression for the estimate of the indirect benefits involving HAs reducing dementia symptoms. We found that the total benefits, mainly coming from the direct benefits, were extremely large relative to the costs, with benefit-cost ratios over 30.

Internet-Based Interventions for Adults With Hearing Loss, Tinnitus, and Vestibular Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Internet-based interventions have been developed to improve access to audiovestibular health care. This review aimed to identify outcomes of Internet interventions for adults with hearing loss, tinnitus, and vestibular disorders. Electronic databases and manual searches were performed to identify studies meeting eligibility for inclusion. Fifteen studies (1,811 participants) met the inclusion criteria, with nine studies targeting tinnitus distress, five considering hearing loss, and one for vestibular difficulties. Only the tinnitus and hearing loss Internet intervention studies were eligible for data synthesis. Internet-based interventions for hearing loss were diverse. Overall, they showed no significant effects, although a statistically significant moderate effect (d = 0.59) was found after removing the study with the highest risk of bias (as a result of high attrition). Most Internet-based interventions for tinnitus provided cognitive behavioural therapy. They yielded statistically significant mean effect sizes for reducing tinnitus distress compared with both inactive (d = 0.59) and active controls (d = 0.32). Significant effects were also present for the secondary outcomes of anxiety, depression, insomnia, and quality of life (combined effect d = 0.28). Only Internet-based interventions for tinnitus evaluated the 1-year postintervention effects indicated that results were maintained long term (d = 0.45). Scientific study quality was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach and found to vary from very low to moderate. This review indicates the potential of Internet interventions for tinnitus to provide evidence-based accessible care. There is a need for additional high-quality evidence before conclusive results can be established regarding the effects of audiovestibular Internet interventions.

Implications of Hearing Care Policy for Nurses

Hearing loss (HL) becomes increasingly common with age and can lead to multiple negative outcomes, including isolation, falls, depression, altered social relationships, and altered cognitive functioning. HL also can affect patient-provider communication and lead to misunderstandings. Despite the negative effects that HL has on multiple domains, less than 20% to 25% of individuals who might benefit from amplification devices and/or hearing aids own them. Barriers to use include stigma, cost, and access. Nurses can play a critical role in promoting appropriate care for individuals with HL and providing access for those who need hearing aids. The current article (a) briefly reviews how history and policies, especially Medicare and Medicaid, but also those defining the practice of audiology and dispensing of hearing aids, affect insurance coverage for hearing care; (b) reviews how a combination of forces brought the need for accessible and affordable hearing care to national attention and resulted in the Over-the-Counter (OTC) Hearing Aid Act; and (c) discusses the implications of the OTC Act for nurses and nursing practice. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 44(9), 9-14.].

Accuracy of Smartphone Self-Hearing Test Applications Across Frequencies and Earphone Styles in Adults

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate smartphone-based self-hearing test applications (apps) for accuracy in threshold assessment and validity in screening for hearing loss across frequencies and earphone transducer styles.

METHOD

Twenty-two adult participants (10 = normal hearing; 12 = sensorineural hearing loss; n = 44 ears) underwent conventional audiometry and performed 6 self-administered hearing tests using two iPhone-based apps (App 1 = uHear [Version 2.0.2, Unitron]; App 2 = uHearingTest [Version 1.0.3, WooFu Tech, LLC.]) each with 3 different transducers (earbud earphones, supra-aural headphones, circumaural headphones). Hearing sensitivity results using the smartphone apps across frequencies and transducers were compared with conventional audiometry.

RESULTS

Differences in accuracy were revealed between the hearing test apps across frequencies and earphone styles. The uHear app using the iPhone standard EarPod earbud earphones was accurate to conventional thresholds (p > .002 with Bonferroni correction) at 1000, 2000, 4000, and 6000 Hz and found valid (81%-100% sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values) for screening mild or greater hearing loss (> 25 dB HL) at 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, and 6000 Hz. The uHearingTest app was accurate in threshold assessment and determined valid for screening mild or greater hearing loss (> 25 dB HL) using supra-aural headphones at 2000, 4000, and 8000 Hz.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-hearing test apps can be accurate in hearing threshold assessment and screening for mild or greater hearing loss (> 25 dB HL) when using appropriate transducers. To ensure accuracy, manufacturers should specify earphone model instructions to users of smartphone-based self-hearing test apps.

Internet-based interventions for adults with hearing loss, tinnitus and vestibular disorders: a protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Internet-based interventions are emerging as an alternative way of delivering accessible healthcare for various conditions including hearing and balance disorders. A comprehensive review regarding the evidence-base of Internet-based interventions for auditory-related conditions is required to determine the existing evidence of their efficacy and effectiveness. The objective of the current protocol is to provide the methodology for a systematic review regarding the effects of Internet-based interventions for adults with hearing loss, tinnitus and vestibular disorders.

METHOD

This protocol was developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses for Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 guidelines. Electronic database searches will include EBSCOhost, PubMed and Cochrane Central Register performed by two researchers. This will be complemented by searching other resources such as the reference lists for included studies to identify studies meeting the eligibility for inclusion with regard to study designs, participants, interventions, comparators and outcomes. The Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) for randomised trials will be used for the bias assessments in the included studies. Criteria for conducting meta-analyses were defined.

DISCUSSION

The result of this systematic review will be of value to establish the effects of Internet-based interventions for hearing loss, tinnitus and vestibular disorders. This will be of importance to guide future planning of auditory intervention research and clinical services by healthcare providers, researchers, consumers and stakeholders.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018094801.

Profound Hearing Loss: Addressing Barriers to Hearing Healthcare

The impact of profound hearing loss on infants and adults is variable and greatly influenced by improved audition derived from hearing aids and cochlear implants. However, barriers to healthcare, hearing healthcare in particular, can offset the benefits provided by these sensory devices. Common barriers include cost, location, availability of trained professionals, acceptance of the hearing loss, language and cultural differences, secondary disabilities, and mental health issues. These barriers and their distinct presentations vary somewhat by age, language, and where people live (urban vs. rural), and can interfere with receiving testing and devices in a timely manner. They also can limit auditory, speech and language therapies, and interfere with acceptance of the hearing loss and devices. Rehabilitation should focus on eliminating or reducing the adverse impact of these barriers on patients and their families. Some of which can be done through professional training and multidisciplinary activities, counseling, and community outreach.

Hearing Loss Treatment in Older Adults With Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess studies of treating hearing loss in older adults with cognitive impairment. Of interest to this review is identifying clinical adaptations that may be used to tailor hearing loss treatment to older adults with cognitive impairment in order to better serve this vulnerable population.

METHOD

A systematic search with controlled vocabulary and key word terms was applied to PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Search concepts included terms related to hearing loss and cognitive impairment. The overall search resulted in 4,945 unique references, 50 of which were eligible for full-text review and 13 of which were included in the final review. Included manuscripts were categorized according to the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's levels of evidence and the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tools.

RESULTS

Only 1 study implemented a randomized controlled trial design to assess cognitive function and behavioral symptoms after treatment with hearing aids. Other quasiexperimental studies evaluated dementia-related symptoms and/or auditory function after treating hearing loss in pre/post research designs. Finally, evidence from case studies suggested that hearing loss treatment is feasible, reduces stressful communication for caregivers, and improves dementia-related behavior problems.

CONCLUSION

Based on the systematic review, evidence suggests that treating hearing loss in persons with cognitive impairment can have benefits to communication and quality of life. Because of the quasi- and nonexperimental nature of most of the evidence found in this review, further studies are necessary to understand the effect of treatment in the context of a variable and progressive disease.

Enhancing Screening Systems to Facilitate Hearing-Healthcare Access: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Although hearing loss is a common health issue, hearing healthcare (HHC) is poorly accessed. Screening to identify hearing loss is an important part of HHC access, specifically for those who screen positive for hearing loss and would benefit from seeing a HHC provider. New technologies can be automated to provide information and recommendations that are tailored to the needs of individual users, potentially enhancing rates of HHC access after positive screens. A greater understanding of the facilitators of postscreening HHC access that could be leveraged in such systems is needed.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this project was to identify facilitators of postscreening HHC access that can be used in automated screening systems.

RESEARCH DESIGN

This qualitative study used focus groups (FGs) to understand perceived barriers, perceived benefits, and potential cues to action, as informed by the Health Belief Model, for accessing HHC after use of automated hearing screening systems.

STUDY SAMPLE

Fifty individuals participated in one of seven FGs. FGs were conducted separately with three types of stakeholders: four FGs included adults who reported some degree of perceived hearing loss and had recently completed a hearing screening; two FGs included adults who had recently sought HHC for the first time because of hearing loss; and one FG involved significant others/family members of individuals with hearing loss.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

FGs were 60-90 minutes in length and were led by a trained facilitator following a discussion guide. A research audiologist was present at each FG and served as a notetaker. FGs were recorded and transcribed by research team members, and transcripts were then coded in an iterative process by multiple team members. Qualitative content analysis was used to reduce data and to identify salient themes and subthemes, following an inductive approach. We focused on identifying themes that were related to facilitators of HHC access after positive screens for hearing loss and, separately, potential enhancements to automated hearing screening systems that would leverage these facilitators to improve HHC access.

RESULTS

We identified five key themes related to HHC access after a positive screen for hearing loss, along with ideas for enhancing automated hearing screening systems based on these themes. The themes included knowledge, trust, access, quality of life, and interpersonal influence.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our work help inform the development of innovative hearing screening systems that can be automated to leverage individual facilitators of HHC access.

Benefits from, Satisfaction with, and Self-Efficacy for Advanced Digital Hearing Aids in Users with Mild Sensorineural Hearing Loss

Little evidence is available regarding outcomes of advanced digital technology (ADT) hearing aid wearers with mild sensorineural hearing loss (MSNHL). The purpose of this article is to report the characteristics of and outcomes for this population. A cross-sectional research design was employed with 56 participants from a private practice setting. The International Outcomes Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA), Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life (SADL), and the Measure of Audiologic Rehabilitation Self-Efficacy for Hearing Aids (MARS-HA) were completed, scored, and compared with normative data. Results revealed that ADT aids were worn 10.5 hours/day, were mostly advanced to premium (55%), had an average cost per aid of $2,138 (SD = $840), and provided significant benefit (IOI-HA overall score: mean = 4.1; SD = 0.6) and satisfaction (SADL global score: mean = 5.4; SD = 0.8) to users who had good overall self-efficacy (MARS-HA composite score: mean = 81.7; SD = 12.8). Patients were most dissatisfied with and had the least self-efficacy for managing background noise and advanced handling of their devices. ADT hearing aid users with MSNHL achieved excellent outcomes, but ongoing follow-up and counseling from hearing health care providers may be important for successful management of background noise and mastery of advanced handling skills.

Hearing Aids as a Treatment for Tinnitus Patients with Slight to Mild Sensorineural Hearing Loss

Persons with clinically significant tinnitus also may have mild sensorineural hearing loss (MSNHL). The purpose of this study was to describe patients with tinnitus and MSNHL and factors predicting hearing-aid uptake (HAU). We conducted a retrospective chart review with regression modeling of patients presenting to a specialty tinnitus clinic over a 2.5-year period. Stepwise logistic regression on data from patient charts was conducted. Of 133 patients seen, two-thirds had MSNHL (95% confidence interval [CI]: 58.9-75.0; mean age = 53.4 years; standard deviation = 14.5); approximately 50% had severe-to-catastrophic tinnitus. Logistic regression indicated that four-frequency pure-tone average (FFPTA; left) ( β  = 0.3899, χ²  = 10.96, degrees of freedom [DF] = 1, p  = 0.0009) and age ( β  = 0.1273, χ²  = 4.86, DF = 1, p  = 0.0274) were positively associated with HAU; tinnitus severity was inversely related ( β  = - 1.0533, χ²  = 4.24, DF = 1, p  = 0.0395). Adjusting for key variables, odds of receiving hearing aids was 1.14 (95% CI: 1.01-1.27) times higher with every year increase in age, 1.48 (95% CI: 1.17-1.86) times higher per one point increase in FFPTA (left), and 0.35 (95% CI: 0.13-0.95) times less per one point increase in tinnitus severity score. Reasons why HAU was not high for this special sample of young adults with severe tinnitus and MSNHL are discussed; hearing aid treatment requires extensive counseling and follow-up for this population.

Disruptive Hearing Technologies and Mild Sensorineural Hearing Loss I: Accessibility and Affordability Issues

Limited accessibility to and affordability of hearing health care (HHC) and hearing aids (HAs) are two reasons why people do not seek treatment for their hearing losses. This article is the first in a series of two and discusses affordability issues (i.e., billing models, cost-effectiveness, insurance coverage, and reimbursement) related to and provides a historical context for the Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Act of 2017. This piece of legislation supports development of a new class of over-the-counter HAs that represents a disruptive technology that may transform the HHC industry by reducing costs specific to the device. A discussion of ethical issues and the importance of using evidence-based practice guidelines set the stage for the second article in this series, which reviews relevant research on issues pertaining to persons with mild hearing loss.

Prevalence of Untreated Hearing Loss by Income among Older Adults in the United States

Age-related hearing loss is highly prevalent and only 20% of adults with hearing loss report using hearing aids. A major barrier to increased hearing aid use is the high out-of-pocket costs associated with hearing aids. The objective of this brief report is to estimate the numbers of millions of Americans 60 years or older with untreated hearing loss stratified by income level. Using multiple cycles from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES; 1999-2006 and 2009-2010), the prevalence of untreated hearing loss is reported based on audiometric hearing tests and self-reported hearing aid use from a cross-sectional, nationally representative sample. Overall, approximately 20 million Americans 60 years or older have an untreated clinically significant hearing loss. Importantly for the nearly six million low-income older adults with untreated hearing loss, the high cost of hearing aids makes hearing treatment particularly inaccessible for this vulnerable population.

Validation of a Computer-Administered Version of the Digits-in-Noise Test for Hearing Screening in the United States

BACKGROUND

The sooner people receive treatment for hearing loss (HL), the quicker they are able to recognize speech and to master hearing aid technology. Unfortunately, a majority of people with HL wait until their impairments have progressed from moderate to severe levels before seeking auditory rehabilitation. To increase the number of individuals with HL who pursue and receive auditory rehabilitation, it is necessary to improve methods for identifying and informing these people via widely accessible hearing screening procedures. Screening for HL is the first in a chain of events that must take place to increase the number of patients who enter the hearing health-care system. New methods for hearing screening should be readily accessible through a common medium (e.g., telephone or computer) and should be relatively easy and quick for people to self-administer.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess a digits-in-noise (DIN) hearing screening test that was delivered via personal computer.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Participants completed the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults (HHIA) questionnaire, audiometric testing in a sound booth, and computerized DIN testing. During the DIN test, sequences of three spoken digits were presented in noise via headphones at varying signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). Participants entered each three-digit sequence they heard using an on-screen keypad.

STUDY SAMPLE

Forty adults (16 females, 24 males) participated in the study, of whom 20 had normal hearing and 20 had HL (pure-tone average [PTA] thresholds for 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz >25 dB HL).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

DIN SNR and PTA data were analyzed and compared for each ear tested. Receiver operating characteristic curves based on these data were plotted. A measure of overall accuracy of a screening test is the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). This measures the average true positive rate across false positives at varying DIN SNR cutoffs. Larger values of the AUC indicate, on average, more accurate screening tests. HHIA responses were analyzed and compared to PTA and DIN SNR results using Pearson correlation statistics.

RESULTS

HHIA scores were positively correlated with audiometric PTA and DIN SNR results (p < 0.001 for all correlations). For an HL criterion of one or more frequencies from 0.25 to 8 kHz >25 dB HL, the AUC for the DIN test was 0.95. When a criterion of hearling level was set at one or more frequencies from 0.25 to 8 kHz >20 dB HL, the AUC for the DIN test was 0.96.

CONCLUSIONS

The computer version of the DIN test demonstrated excellent sensitivity and specificity for our sample of 40 participants. AUC results (≥0.95) suggest that this DIN test administered via computer should be very useful for adult hearing screening.

Developing Foundational Counseling Skills for Addressing Adherence Issues in Auditory Rehabilitation

Successfully getting patients with confirmed hearing loss to use hearing aids is a major challenge for hearing health care professionals. Treatment adherence has been defined as the active involvement of patients in collaborating with health care providers to plan and manage treatment regimens. Counseling patients with hearing loss on adherence to recommendations of hearing aid uptake and utilization is dependent upon building a patient-centered therapeutic relationship during the initial diagnostic evaluation. The purpose of this article is to provide resources, tools, and engaging learning activities for training students on the development of a hierarchy of counseling skills: informational counseling (e.g., checking comprehension and problem clarification), communication skills (e.g., promotion of shared-communication space, congruence, listening with the third ear, unconditional positive regard, and empathy), and health behavior change (e.g., Motivational Interviewing and the Teach-Back Method) that are prerequisites for addressing treatment adherence.

Increasing access to hearing rehabilitation for older adults

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update on the recent research and policy developments affecting the current and future care of the 23 million older Americans with untreated hearing loss.

RECENT FINDINGS

Increasing evidence supports the association of age-related hearing loss with significant negative outcomes that affect the ability of older adults to age well. Despite an evolving understanding of the role hearing loss plays in the well being and vitality of older adults, the vast majority of older adults go untreated and hearing health care disparities exist. Recent work to understand the multitude of factors involved in hearing health care decisions, coupled with innovative approaches and technology to deliver hearing care, aim to provide more older adults with equal access to the tools needed to age well. Most importantly, significant national efforts and policy proposals substantiate these efforts and will be reviewed.

SUMMARY

Age-related hearing loss is a critical public health issue that affects almost all older adults. Through the application of novel approaches and perspectives, the delivery of hearing health care for older adults is evolving to provide more affordable and accessible care. Accompanying policy efforts provide the necessary support needed to increase access to care significantly.