Search

Objectives: The study compared the utility of two approaches for collecting real-world listening experiences to predict hearing-aid preference: a retrospective questionnaire (Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale [SSQ]) and in-situ Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA). The rationale being that each approach likely provides different and yet complementary information. In addition, it was examined how self-reported listening activity and hearing-aid data-logging can augment EMAs for individualized and contextualized hearing outcome assessments., Design: Experienced hearing-aid users (N = 40) with mild-to-moderate symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss completed the SSQ questionnaire and gave repeated EMAs for two wear periods of 2-weeks each with two different hearing-aid models that differed mainly in their noise reduction technology. The EMAs were linked to a self-reported listening activity and sound environment parameters (from hearing-aid data-logging) recorded at the time of EMA completion. Wear order was randomized by hearing-aid model. Linear mixed-effects models and Random Forest models with five-fold cross-validation were used to assess the statistical associations between listening experiences and end-of-trial preferences, and to evaluate how accurately EMAs predicted preference within individuals., Results: Only 6 of the 49 SSQ items significantly discriminated between responses made for the end-of-trial preferred versus nonpreferred hearing-aid model. For the EMAs, questions related to perception of the sound from the hearing aids were all significantly associated with preference, and these associations were strongest in EMAs completed in sound environments with predominantly low SNR and listening activities related to television, people talking, nonspecific listening, and music listening. Mean differences in listening experiences from SSQ and EMA correctly predicted preference in 71.8% and 72.5% of included participants, respectively. However, a prognostic classification of single EMAs into end-of-trial preference with a Random Forest model achieved a 93.8% accuracy when contextual information was included., Conclusions: SSQ and EMA predicted preference equally well when considering mean differences, however, EMAs had a high prognostic classifications accuracy due to the repeated-measures nature, which make them ideal for individualized hearing outcome investigations, especially when responses are combined with contextual information about the sound environment., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Ear & Hearing is published on behalf of the American Auditory Society, by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objectives: To assess if a manipulation of copresence was related to speech-in-noise task performance, arousal, and effort of persons with hearing loss. Task-related arousal and effort were measured by means of pupillometry., Design: Twenty-nine participants (mean age: 64.6 years) with hearing loss (4-frequency pure-tone average [4F-PTA] of 50.2 dB HL [SD = 8.9 dB] in the right ear and 51.3 dB HL [SD = 8.7 dB] in the left ear; averaged across 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz) listened to and repeated spoken Danish sentences that were masked by four streams of continuous speech. Participants were presented with blocks of 20 sentences, during which copresence was manipulated by having participants do the task either alone or accompanied by two observers who were recruited from a similar age group. The task was presented at two difficulty levels, which was accomplished by fixing the signal-to-noise ratio of the speech and masker to match the thresholds at which participants were estimated to correctly repeat 50% (difficult) or 80% (easy) of the sentences in a block. Performance was assessed based on whether or not sentences were repeated correctly. Measures of pupil size (baseline pupil size [BPS], peak pupil dilation [PPD], and mean pupil dilation [MPD]) were used to index arousal and effort. Participants also completed ratings of subjective effort and stress after each block of sentences and a self-efficacy for listening-questionnaire., Results: Task performance was not associated with copresence, but was found to be related to 4F-PTA. An increase in BPS was found for copresence conditions, compared to alone conditions. Furthermore, a post-hoc exploratory analysis revealed that the copresence conditions were associated with a significantly larger pupil size in the second half of the task-evoked pupil response (TEPR). No change in PPD or MPD did was detected between copresence and alone conditions. Self-efficacy, 4F-PTA, and age were not found to be related to the pupil data. Subjective ratings were sensitive to task difficulty but not copresence., Conclusion: Copresence was not found to be related to speech-in-noise performance, PPD, or MPD in persons with HL but was associated with an increase in arousal (as indicated by a larger BPS). This could be related to premobilization of effort and/or discomfort in response to the observers' presence. Furthermore, an exploratory analysis of the pupil data showed that copresence was associated with greater pupil dilations in the second half of the TEPR. This may indicate that participants invested more effort during the speech-in-noise task while in the presence of the observers, but that this increase in effort may not necessarily have been related to listening itself. Instead, other speech-in-noise task-related processes, such as preparing to respond, could have been influenced by copresence., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Ear & Hearing is published on behalf of the American Auditory Society, by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to modify a speech perception in noise test to assess whether the presence of another individual (copresence), relative to being alone, affected listening performance and effort expenditure. Furthermore, this study assessed if the effect of the other individual's presence on listening effort was influenced by the difficulty of the task and whether participants had to repeat the sentences they listened to or not., Design: Thirty-four young, normal-hearing participants (mean age: 24.7 years) listened to spoken Dutch sentences that were masked with a stationary noise masker and presented through a loudspeaker. The participants alternated between repeating sentences (active condition) and not repeating sentences (passive condition). They did this either alone or together with another participant in the booth. When together, participants took turns repeating sentences. The speech-in-noise test was performed adaptively at three intelligibility levels (20%, 50%, and 80% sentences correct) in a block-wise fashion. During testing, pupil size was recorded as an objective outcome measure of listening effort., Results: Lower speech intelligibility levels were associated with increased peak pupil dilation (PPDs) and doing the task in the presence of another individual (compared with doing it alone) significantly increased PPD. No interaction effect between intelligibility and copresence on PPD was found. The results suggested that the change of PPD between doing the task alone or together was especially apparent for people who started the experiment in the presence of another individual. Furthermore, PPD was significantly lower during passive listening, compared with active listening. Finally, it seemed that performance was unaffected by copresence., Conclusion: The increased PPDs during listening in the presence of another participant suggest that more effort was invested during the task. However, it seems that the additional effort did not result in a change of performance. This study showed that at least one aspect of the social context of a listening situation (in this case copresence) can affect listening effort, indicating that social context might be important to consider in future cognitive hearing research., Competing Interests: This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie-Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 765329. There are no conflicts of interest financially or otherwise., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Ear & Hearing is published on behalf of the American Auditory Society, by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objective: We describe the construction of a hearing aid long-term use persistence measure based on battery reorder data. The measure is derived from the notion that hearing aid users keep using their devices for some time after placing a battery order., Design: A hearing aid user is defined as persistent at time T if they placed a battery order within a time span W preceding T. We characterize and validate this measure using electronic health records from a large sample of US Veterans., Results: We describe how to choose parameters T and W for calculating persistence rates in the patient sample. For validation, the associations of persistence with: (1) the duration over which users received outpatient hearing aid care; (2) self-reported hearing aid use shortly after fitting; and (3) patient age and hearing loss are investigated. In all cases, plausible dependencies are observed., Conclusions: We conclude that our persistence measure is viable and hope this will motivate its use in similar studies., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Ear & Hearing is published on behalf of the American Auditory Society, by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objectives: This article presents a summary of audiological, general health, and hearing aid (HA) outcome data in a large sample of U.S. Veterans receiving HAs. The current article also provides the foundation for a series of papers that will explore relationships between a wide range of factors and HA outcomes., Design: The patient sample is all (n = 731,213) patients for whom HAs were ordered between April 2012 and October 2014 through the U.S. Veterans Health Administration Remote Order Entry System. For these patients, Veterans Affairs electronic health records (EHRs) stored in various databases provided data on demographics, received diagnostic and procedure codes (2007 to 2017), audiometry, self-reported outcomes up to 6 months postfitting, and HA battery orders (to 2017). Data cleaning and preparation was carried out and is discussed with reference to insights that provide potential value to other researchers pursuing similar studies. HA battery order data over time was used to derive a measure of long-term HA use persistence. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the sample, comparative analyses against other data supported basic validity assessment, and bivariate analyses probed novel associations between patient characteristics and HA use persistence at 2 years postfitting., Results: Following extensive cleaning and data preparation, the data show plausible characteristics on diverse metrics and exhibit adequate validity based on comparisons with other published data. Further, rates of HA use persistence are favorable when compared against therapy persistence data for other major chronic conditions. The data also show that the presence of certain comorbid conditions (Parkinson's disease, diabetes, arthritis, and visual impairment) are associated with significantly lower HA use persistence, as are prior inpatient admissions (especially among new HA recipients), and that increasing levels of multimorbidity, in general, are associated with decreasing HA use persistence. This is all despite the fact that deriving relevant audiological care-process variables from the available records was not straightforward, especially concerning the definition of the date of HA fitting, and the use of battery ordering data to determine long-term HA use persistence., Conclusions: We have shown that utilizing EHRs in audiology has the potential to provide novel insights into clinical practice patterns, audiologic outcomes, and relations between factors pertaining to hearing and to other health conditions in clinical populations, despite the potential pitfalls regarding the lack of control over the variables available and limitations on how the data are entered. We thus conclude that research using EHRs has the potential to be an integral supplement to population-based and epidemiologic research in the field of audiology., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Ear & Hearing is published on behalf of the American Auditory Society, by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objectives: We sought to determine what factors, including acculturation (language and social contact preferences), were associated with self-perceived hearing handicap among adults from Hispanic/Latino background. We utilized the Aday-Andersen behavioral model of health services utilization to frame our hypotheses that predisposing characteristics (age, sex, education, city of residence, Hispanic/Latino background, and acculturation), enabling resources (annual income and current health insurance coverage), and need (measured hearing loss and self-reported hearing loss) would be related to clinically-significant self-perceived hearing handicap as measured by the Hearing Handicap Inventory - Screening (HHI-S) version., Design: We analyzed baseline data collected from 2008 to 2011 as part of the multisite Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos. Data were from 6585 adults with hearing loss (defined by a worse-ear 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz pure-tone average [PTA] of ≥25 dB HL and/or a 4000, 6000, and 8000 Hz high-frequency PTA of ≥25 dB HL) aged 18 to 74 years from various Hispanic/Latino backgrounds. We conducted a series of multivariable logistic regression models examining the roles of independent variables of interest representing predisposing, enabling, and need indicators on the occurrence of clinically-significant self-perceived hearing handicap (e.g., HHI-S score > 8)., Results: Among included participants, 953 (14.5%) had an HHI-S score >8. The final model revealed significant associations between predisposing characteristics, enabling resources, need, and HHI-S outcome. Predisposing characteristics and need factors were associated with higher odds of reporting self-perceived hearing handicap (HHI-S score >8) including acculturation as measured by the Short Acculturation Scale for Hispanics (odds ratio [OR] = 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-1.50), female sex (OR = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.27-2.33), and poorer worse ear 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz PTA (OR = 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01-1.03); suggesting that a 5-decibel increase in a person's PTA was consistent with 10% higher odds of a HHI-S score of >8. Greater enabling resources were associated with lower odds of reporting clinically-significant self-perceived hearing handicap: compared with individuals with income <$10,000/year, the multivariable-adjusted OR among individuals with income $40,000 to $7500/year was 0.55 (95% CI: 0.33-0.89) and among individuals with income >$75,000/year was 0.28 (95% CI: 0.13-0.59]; p-trend < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Our findings suggest there are associations between predisposing, enabling and need variables consistent with the Aday-Andersen model and self-perceived hearing handicap among adults from Hispanic/Latino background. The influence of language and culture on perceived hearing loss and associated handicap is complex, and deserves more attention in future studies. Our findings warrant further investigation into understanding the role of language and language access in hearing health care utilization and outcomes, as the current body of literature is small and shows mixed outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Ideally, public health policies are formulated from scientific data; however, policy-specific data are often unavailable. Big data can generate ecologically-valid, high-quality scientific evidence, and therefore has the potential to change how public health policies are formulated. Here, we discuss the use of big data for developing evidence-based hearing health policies, using data collected and analyzed with a research prototype of a data repository known as EVOTION (EVidence-based management of hearing impairments: public health pOlicy-making based on fusing big data analytics and simulaTION), to illustrate our points. Data in the repository consist of audiometric clinical data, prospective real-world data collected from hearing aids and an app, and responses to questionnaires collected for research purposes. To date, we have used the platform and a synthetic dataset to model the estimated risk of noise-induced hearing loss and have shown novel evidence of ways in which external factors influence hearing aid usage patterns. We contend that this research prototype data repository illustrates the value of using big data for policy-making by providing high-quality evidence that could be used to formulate and evaluate the impact of hearing health care policies.

Objective: Describe how the burden on the communication partner (CP) from the patient's hearing loss, as perceived by both the patient and their CP, influences a patient's pursuit of hearing evaluation., Design: Cross-sectional design. Demographics, perception of patient's hearing loss, and associated burden on the CP were collected from both patient and CP via online questionnaires. Patients and their CPs from Duke University Medical Center Otolaryngology Clinic, 55 to 75 years of age, being seen for any reason, who indicated a CP has expressed concern about their hearing. Final sample was 245 matched pairs., Results: Based on completed questionnaires, on average, patients perceived their own hearing loss as more burdensome to the CP than the CP did. However, CPs of patients who believed themselves to have no hearing handicap scored the patient's hearing loss 54.3% higher than the patient. The patient's perspective about the amount of burden their hearing loss placed on the CP predicted patients seeking a hearing evaluation., Conclusions: Recognition of early stage hearing loss and associated burden on CPs may be delayed in patients; CPs may help elucidate unrecognized concerns. Educational approaches that raise awareness of burden of hearing loss on CPs along with hearing loss indications could be a feasible, multidimensional strategy to promote help seeking behaviors.

Objective: To examine the effectiveness of the Listening and Communication Enhancement (LACE) program as a supplement to standard-of-care hearing aid intervention in a Veteran population., Design: A multisite randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare outcomes following standard-of-care hearing aid intervention supplemented with (1) LACE training using the 10-session DVD format, (2) LACE training using the 20-session computer-based format, (3) placebo auditory training (AT) consisting of actively listening to 10 hr of digitized books on a computer, and (4) educational counseling-the control group. The study involved 3 VA sites and enrolled 279 veterans. Both new and experienced hearing aid users participated to determine if outcomes differed as a function of hearing aid user status. Data for five behavioral and two self-report measures were collected during three research visits: baseline, immediately following the intervention period, and at 6 months postintervention. The five behavioral measures were selected to determine whether the perceptual and cognitive skills targeted in LACE training generalized to untrained tasks that required similar underlying skills. The two self-report measures were completed to determine whether the training resulted in a lessening of activity limitations and participation restrictions. Outcomes were obtained from 263 participants immediately following the intervention period and from 243 participants 6 months postintervention. Analyses of covariance comparing performance on each outcome measure separately were conducted using intervention and hearing aid user status as between-subject factors, visit as a within-subject factor, and baseline performance as a covariate., Results: No statistically significant main effects or interactions were found for the use of LACE on any outcome measure., Conclusions: Findings from this randomized controlled trial show that LACE training does not result in improved outcomes over standard-of-care hearing aid intervention alone. Potential benefits of AT may be different than those assessed by the performance and self-report measures utilized here. Individual differences not assessed in this study should be examined to evaluate whether AT with LACE has any benefits for particular individuals. Clinically, these findings suggest that audiologists may want to temper the expectations of their patients who embark on LACE training.

Objectives: Several models of health behavior change are commonly used in health psychology. This study applied the constructs delineated by two models-the transtheoretical model (in which readiness for health behavior change can be described with the stages of precontemplation, contemplation and action) and the health belief model (in which susceptibility, severity, benefits, barriers, self-efficacy, and cues to action are thought to determine likelihood of health behavior change)-to adults seeking hearing help for the first time., Design: One hundred eighty-two participants (mean age: 69.5 years) were recruited following an initial hearing assessment by an audiologist. Participants' mean four-frequency pure-tone average was 35.4 dB HL, with 25.8% having no hearing impairment, 50.5% having a slight impairment, and 23.1% having a moderate or severe impairment using the World Health Organization definition of hearing loss. Participants' hearing-related attitudes and beliefs toward hearing health behaviors were examined using the University of Rhode Island Change Assessment (URICA) and the health beliefs questionnaire (HBQ), which assess the constructs of the transtheoretical model and the health belief model, respectively. Participants also provided demographic information, and completed the hearing handicap inventory (HHI) to assess participation restrictions, and the psychosocial impact of hearing loss (PIHL) to assess the extent to which hearing impacts competence, self-esteem, and adaptability., Results: Degree of hearing impairment was associated with participation restrictions, perceived competence, self-esteem and adaptability, and attitudes and beliefs measured by the URICA and the HBQ. As degree of impairment increased, participation restrictions measured by the HHI, and impacts of hearing loss, as measured by the PIHL, increased. The majority of first-time help seekers in this study were in the action stage of change. Furthermore, relative to individuals with less hearing impairment, individuals with more hearing impairment were at more advanced stages of change as measured by the URICA (i.e., higher contemplation and action scores relative to their precontemplation score), and they perceived fewer barriers and more susceptibility, severity, benefits and cues to action as measured by the HBQ. Multiple regression analyses showed participation restrictions (HHI scores) to be a highly significant predictor of stages of change explaining 30% to 37% of the variance, as were duration of hearing difficulty, and perceived benefits, severity, self-efficacy and cues to action assessed by the HBQ., Conclusions: The main predictors of stages of change in first-time help seekers were reported participation restrictions and duration of hearing difficulty, with constructs from the health belief model also explaining some of the variance in stages of change scores. The transtheoretical model and the health belief model are valuable for understanding hearing health behaviors and can be applied when developing interventions to promote help seeking.

Objective: Results of objective clinical tests (e.g., measures of speech understanding in noise) often conflict with subjective reports of hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. The Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT) is an outcome measure in which objective and subjective evaluations are made by using the same test materials, testing format, and unit of measurement (signal-to-noise ratio, S/N), permitting a direct comparison between measured and perceived ability to hear. Two variables are measured: a Performance Speech Reception Threshold in Noise (SRTN) for 50% correct performance and a Perceptual SRTN, which is the S/N at which listeners perceive that they can understand the speech material. A third variable is computed: the Performance-Perceptual Discrepancy (PPDIS); it is the difference between the Performance and Perceptual SRTNs and measures the extent to which listeners "misjudge" their hearing ability. Saunders et al. in 2004 examined the relation between PPT scores and unaided hearing handicap. In this publication, the relations between the PPT, residual aided handicap, and hearing aid satisfaction are described., Design: Ninety-four individuals between the ages of 47 and 86 yr participated. All had symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss and had worn binaural hearing aids for at least 6 wk before participating. All subjects underwent routine audiological examination and completed the PPT, the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly/Adults (HHIE/A), and the Satisfaction for Amplification in Daily Life questionnaire. Sixty-five subjects attended one research visit for participation in this study, and 29 attended a second visit to complete the PPT a second time., Results: Performance and Perceptual SRTN and PPDIS scores were normally distributed and showed excellent test-retest reliability. Aided SRTNs were significantly better than unaided SRTNs; aided and unaided PPDIS values did not differ. Stepwise multiple linear regression showed that the PPDIS, the Performance SRTN, and age were significant predictors of scores on the HHIE/A such that greater reported handicap is associated with underestimating hearing ability, poorer aided ability to understand speech in noise, and being younger. Scores on the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life were not well explained by the PPT, age, or audiometric thresholds. When individuals were grouped by their HHIE/A scores, it was seen that individuals who report more handicap than expected based on their audiometric thresholds, have a more negative PPDIS, i.e., underestimate their hearing ability, relative to individuals who report expected handicap, who in turn have a more negative PPDIS than individuals who report less handicap than expected. No such patterns were apparent for the Performance SRTN., Conclusions: The study showed the PPT to be a reliable outcome measure that can provide more information than a performance measure and/or a questionnaire measure alone, in that the PPDIS can provide the clinician with an explanation for discrepant objective and subjective reports of hearing difficulties. The finding that self-reported handicap is affected independently by both actual ability to hear and the (mis)perception of ability to hear underscores the difficulty clinicians encounter when trying to interpret outcomes questionnaires. We suggest that this variable should be measured and taken into account when interpreting questionnaires and counseling patients.

Objective: Measurement of hearing aid outcomes is necessary for demonstration of treatment efficacy, third-party payment, and cost-benefit analysis. Outcomes are usually measured with hearing-related questionnaires and/or tests of speech recognition. However, results from these two types of test often conflict. In this paper, we provide data from a new test measure, known as the Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT), in which subjective and performance aspects of hearing in noise are measured using the same test materials and procedures. A Performance Speech Reception Threshold (SRTN) and a Perceptual SRTN are measured using the Hearing In Noise Test materials and adaptive procedure. A third variable, the discrepancy between these two SRTNs, is also computed. It measures the accuracy with which subjects assess their own hearing ability and is referred to as the Performance-Perceptual Discrepancy (PPDIS)., Design: One hundred seven subjects between 24 and 83 yr of age took part. Thirty-three subjects had normal hearing, while the remaining seventy-four had symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss. Of the subjects with impaired hearing, 24 wore hearing aids and 50 did not. All subjects underwent routine audiological examination and completed the PPT and the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly/Adults on two occasions, between 1 and 2 wk apart. The PPT was conducted for unaided listening with the masker level set to 50, 65, and 80 dB SPL., Results: PPT data show that the subjects with normal hearing have significantly better Performance and Perceptual SRTNs at each test level than the subjects with impaired hearing but that PPDIS values do not differ between the groups. Test-retest reliability for the PPT is excellent (r-values > 0.93 for all conditions). Stepwise multiple regression analysis showed that the Performance SRTN, the PPDIS, and age explain 40% of the variance in reported handicap (Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly/Adults scores). More specifically, poorer performance, underestimation of hearing ability and younger age result in greater reported handicap, and vice versa., Conclusion: Reported handicap consists of a performance component and a (mis)perception component, as measured by the Performance SRTN and the PPDIS respectively. The PPT should thus prove to be a valuable tool for better understanding why some individuals complain of hearing difficulties but have only a mild hearing loss or conversely report few difficulties in the presence of substantial impairment. The measure would thus seem to provide both an explanation and a counseling tool for patients for whom there is a mismatch between reported and measured hearing difficulties.

Objective: To investigate acclimatization to hearing aids., Design: Forty-eight subjects took part in a study in which hearing aid benefit was measured four times over the initial 3 mos of participation. At the start, 24 subjects were experienced hearing aid users and 24 had never worn a hearing aid before. Subjects wore one of three models of hearing aid with one of six different configurations (combination of frequency response and method of output limiting). Hearing aid benefit was measured with CID W-1 spondees and the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) test. Testing took place on Days 0 (day of fitting), 30, 60, and 90. Analyses of variance were used to determine whether hearing aid benefit changed over time as a function of hearing aid user status, hearing aid configuration, and hearing aid volume setting., Results: There were small, nonsignificant changes in hearing aid benefit over the test sessions with both sets of test materials. There were no interactions between hearing aid benefit over time and hearing aid user status or hearing aid volume setting. There was an interaction between benefit over time and hearing aid configuration on one test measure only., Conclusions: The data showed little evidence of acclimatization over the 3 mo of hearing aid use. The test materials used here were low- to mid-frequency sensitive, and, therefore, it is concluded that if acclimatization did occur, it did so primarily at high frequencies. Because the HINT test has good face validity to everyday listening situations, it is suggested that the clinical ramifications of acclimatization are probably small.

Objective: To refine and statistically validate the Attitudes Toward Loss of Hearing Questionnaire (ALHQ) so that it will be appropriate for clinical application and to understand some of the personality attributes underlying attitudes toward hearing loss., Design: An American-English version of an ALHQ, originally designed by Brooks (1989), was completed by 226 men; a subset of 80 also completed personality questionnaires. All subjects underwent pure-tone testing and speech audiometry. Factor analysis was used to extract scales from the ALHQ. Reliability analyses using Cronbach's alpha were carried out on each scale. Test-retest reliability was evaluated from questionnaires completed 6 to 18 mo after initial administration. Multiple regression analysis was used to examine the audiometric and personality determinants of attitudes., Results: Five reliable scales were extracted from a 24-question version of the ALHQ: 1) Social and Emotional Impact of Hearing Loss, 2) Acceptance/ Adjustment to Hearing Loss, 3) Perceived Support from Significant Others, 4) Hearing Aid Stigma, and 5) Awareness of Hearing Loss. Audiometric data explained little of the variance in attitude scores; age and other demographic factors did not correlate with attitudes either. The personality traits of extroversion, self-esteem, and anxiety/neuroticism played a larger role in determining attitude., Conclusions: The ALHQ is psychometrically acceptable and is a potentially useful clinical tool. It is quick and easy to complete and to score and could be used as a basis for counseling and for following attitude change in patients over time.

Obscure Auditory Dysfunction (OAD) is explained by a combination of hearing-related deficits and personality factors Saunders & Haggard (1992). In this study, we determine which factors are associated specifically with OAD and which are associated with the seeking of medical attention in general. We achieved this by obtaining a second patient group with a parallel syndrome to OAD, called "chronic pelvic pain without obvious organic pathology" (CPPWOOP). CPPWOOP patients complain of lower abdominal pain that is not explainable by conventional medical tests. Fifteen CPPWOOPs underwent the OAD test battery. For the analyses they were retrospectively matched to 15 of the original OADs and their matched controls. The three groups were compared by analysis of variance and Kruskall-Wallis analyses. The CPPWOOPs and controls performed significantly better than OADs on hearing-related variables, but did not differ from each other, whereas the OADs and CPPWOOPs were significantly more anxious than the controls, but did not differ from each other. We conclude that anxiety-related traits are associated with the seeking of medical attention in general, whereas the hearing-related deficits we measured are associated specifically with OAD. Anxiety-related traits should, therefore, be considered when dealing with marginal pathologies, but in depth investigation may also reveal an organic basis; therefore, patients should not be dismissed as simply neurotic.

Obscure Auditory Dysfunction (OAD) is defined as a clinical referral for self-reported auditory disability with no audiometric abnormality by stringent criteria. In stage 2 of a case control study of OAD, we have confirmed the general finding of stage 1 that OAD is multifactorial; compared with controls, patients as a group have a genuine performance deficit for understanding speech in noise, accompanied by personality-related factors. Paired logistic regression analysis optimally differentiated the 50 patients from their 50 matched controls on the basis of variables from three different domains: masked thresholds (psychoacoustic domain), dichotic listening ability (central/cognitive domain), and underestimation of own hearing ability (personality domain). A further and influential contributing variable was understanding of speech in noise supplementing the variables in both the psychoacoustic and the cognitive domains. With this model, 82.7% of the total group deviance was explained (i.e., the binary variable of case/control). A corresponding discriminant function analysis correctly classified 80% of patients and 90% of controls. When factors underlying the performance and personality-related variables were investigated with multiple linear regression within the two groups separately, relatively little of the within-group variance among OADs was explained. This is consistent with the multifactorial nature of OAD, in that the combinations of factors leading to OAD status differ between individuals. The research findings have been used to design a clinical test package to provide diagnostic information on the basis of OAD in individuals.

We define obscure auditory dysfunction (OAD) as the clinical presentation of reported difficulty understanding speech in the presence of noise accompanied by clinically "normal" hearing thresholds, and no other obvious cause. The term deliberately avoids particular pathophysiological connotations. A detailed characterization of such patients was undertaken as the basis for future diagnosis and management of OAD by clinicians. Twenty patients were compared with 20 pairs of controls (matched for age, sex, educational level, and noise exposure) on tests of auditory, linguistic, and psychological function. Patients showed a genuine performance deficit on a speech-in-noise task, due in part to minor auditory dysfunction and poor linguistic ability. Their high level of self-rated disability and handicap cannot, however, be entirely explained by this genuine deficit. An anxious personality and a history of otological symptoms typified the patient group; either or both have presumably contributed to patients' seeking of medical or audiological advice. OAD is thus a multifactorial syndrome with contributions from auditory, psychological, and linguistic factors. The variance in (and correlation between) performance levels on two sentence-in-noise tests, present only within the patient group, indicates that these patients are not a homogenous group.