Search

BACKGROUND: Data suggest that having high expectations about hearing aids results in better overall outcome. However, some have postulated that excessively high expectations will result in disappointment and thus poor outcome. It has been suggested that counseling patients with unrealistic expectations about hearing aids prior to fitting may be beneficial. Data, however, are mixed as to the effectiveness of such counseling, in terms of both changes in expectations and final outcome. PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether supplementing prefitting counseling with demonstration of real-world listening can (1) alter expectations of new hearing aid users and (2) increase satisfaction over verbal-only counseling. Secondary goals of the study were to examine (1) the relationship between prefitting expectations and postfitting outcome, and (2) the effect of hearing aid fine-tuning on hearing aid outcome. RESEARCH DESIGN: Sixty new hearing aid users were fitted binaurally with Beltone Oria behind-the-ear digital hearing aids. Forty participants received prefitting counseling and demonstration of listening situations with the Beltone AVE (Audio Verification Environment) system; 20 received prefitting counseling without a demonstration of listening situations. Hearing aid expectations were measured at initial contact and following prefitting counseling. Reported hearing aid outcome was measured after eight to ten weeks of hearing aid use. STUDY SAMPLE: Sixty new hearing aid users aged between 55 and 81 years with symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups, between which the prefitting counseling and follow-up differed: Group 1 received prefitting counseling in combination with demonstration of listening situations. Additionally, if the participant had complaints about sound quality at the follow-up visit, the hearing aids were fine-tuned using the Beltone AVE system. Group 2 received prefitting counseling in combination with demonstration of listening situations with the Beltone AVE system, but no fine-tuning was provided at follow-up. Group 3 received prefitting hearing aid counseling that did not include demonstration of listening, and the hearing aids were not fine-tuned at the follow-up appointment. RESULTS: The results showed that prefitting hearing aid counseling had small but significant effects on expectations. The two forms of counseling did not differ in their effectiveness at changing expectations; however, anecdotally, we learned from many participants that that they enjoyed listening to the auditory demonstrations and that they found them to be an interesting listening exercise. The data also show that positive expectations result in more positive outcome and that hearing aid fine-tuning is beneficial to the user. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that prefitting counseling can be advantageous to hearing aid outcome and recommend the addition of prefitting counseling to address expectations associated with quality of life and self-image. The data emphasize the need to address unrealistic expectations prior to fitting hearing aids cautiously, so as not to decrease expectations to the extent of discouraging and demotivating the patient. Data also show that positive expectations regarding the impact hearing aids will have on psychosocial well-being are important for successful hearing aid outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Investigations have shown that patient attitudes toward hearing loss and hearing aids impact self-reported handicap and disability, hearing aid benefit, and hearing aid use. The Attitudes towards Loss of Hearing Questionnaire (ALHQ) was developed by Saunders and Cienkowski (1996) to examine some of the psychosocial factors underlying the use and acquisition of hearing aids. Here we report data from a new version of questionnaire (ALHQ v2.1), which examines attitudes towards hearing loss and hearing aids on five scales: Denial of Hearing Loss, Negative Associations, Negative Coping Strategies, Manual Dexterity and Vision, and Hearing-Related Esteem. Reliability values, internal consistency values, and cut points for typical and atypical scores are provided, along with comparison of the scores of women, men, current hearing aid users, non-hearing aid users, and paying versus nonpaying individuals. The ALHQ takes about ten minutes to complete and identifies for the clinician some of the issues that might jeopardize successful hearing aid outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Outcomes measurement in audiology has received much attention because of the need to demonstrate efficacy of treatment, provide evidence for third-party payment, carry out cost-benefit analyses, and justify resource allocation. Outcomes measurement shows the benefits obtained from a hearing aid and determines the costs of obtaining those benefits. In this article, we discuss why the seemingly simple issue of outcomes measurement is highly complex and the use of generic and disease-specific tools and the relationship between them; we also provide information regarding the International Classification of Functioning (ICF) system for selecting outcome measures. We then discuss factors complicating outcomes measurement, including discrepancies between clinically derived outcomes and functional outcomes, the ways clinicians can affect outcomes, and factors intrinsic to the patient that influence outcomes. We conclude that if the vision of moving quickly and efficiently from bench to chairside is to be realized, then clinicians must routinely measure hearing aid outcomes and researchers investigate their validity and usefulness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hearing-specific and generic measures of hearing aid outcome were examined in order (a) to determine their relative sensitivity to hearing aid use and (b) to examine the relationship between pre-hearing aid use expectations and post-use outcomes. Ninety-two hearing-impaired individuals completed some combination of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, Expected Consequences of Hearing Aid Ownership (ECHO), Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life (SADL), and Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale, and provided reports of their daily and lifetime hearing aid use. In general, (a) the longer individuals wear hearing aids, the more positive the reported outcome, and (b) ECHO scores of non-hearing aid users are higher than SADL scores of new hearing aid users (six weeks to one year of use) but are similar to those obtained from experienced users (greater than one year of use). Between-questionnaire comparisons showed the generic measure to be as sensitive as the hearing aid specific measures. We suggest that generic measures have some advantages over hearing specific measures but that each has a place in the clinic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this project was to investigate the provision of counselling in adult audiological rehabilitation and to highlight training barriers and needs., Design: A service evaluation in which respondents completed a survey in which they rated their knowledge, confidence and competence in addressing the hearing, social and emotional needs of their patients. They were also asked to define counselling., Sample: 64 UK practising audiologists in adult audiological rehabilitation, aged 20->60 years (84% females, 16% males), with a range of years in clinical practice., Results: Counselling definitions fell into three main categories: the audiologist as the doer, the audiologist as the facilitator, and the audiologist and patient as partners. Respondents reported feeling more able to counsel the hearing related needs of their patients, than emotional or social needs. There were significant positive statistical associations between counselling training completed and self-rated counselling abilities for managing emotional needs. Clinical experience was not associated with self-rated counselling. Lack of supervision and training were identified as some of the main barriers to providing emotional support. Almost all respondents reported a desire for further training in delivering emotional support, with the belief that this would improve services and patient outcomes., Conclusions: UK audiologists demonstrated person-centred thinking through their definitions of counselling. However, they reported significant barriers in being able to support the needs of adults with hearing loss. Training needs around emotional support in audiology counselling are not currently being met. It is important for clinical training programmes to address this gap by incorporating more counselling courses into their curricula.

Purpose: Occupational stress is known to have detrimental effects on health care professionals worldwide. This study aimed to address a research gap by investigating sources and levels of occupational stress in U.K. audiologists., Method: A mixed-methods cross-sectional design and convenience sampling were utilized. The study used the Audiologist Occupational Stress Questionnaire (AOSQ) and an audiological working practices questionnaire. The study included 100 registered U.K. audiologists., Results: The research revealed that over a third of participants reported experiencing moderate or higher levels of occupational stress. Pediatric audiologists and those with a high daily patient load reported significantly higher stress scores than other specialties and those seeing fewer patients per day. Identified sources of stress for U.K. audiologists included clinical demands and time constraints, staffing issues, leadership in the workplace, and equipment availability. Reported impacts of stress encompassed mental health issues, fatigue, social life disruptions, and physical health concerns., Conclusions: The research validated the use of the AOSQ in a U.K. setting, and the findings provided insights into the sources and levels of occupational stress experienced by U.K. audiologists, supporting existing research on occupational stress in audiologists in other countries. The identification of consistent stress themes across the literature underscores the need for targeted support and interventions to ensure the well-being of audiologists and empower them in maintaining their pivotal role in health care.

Objective: Phone- and tablet-based hearing testing systems are now widely available. Here, we evaluated one such system from TympaHealth by comparing air conduction thresholds and resultant hearing aid targets and output, measured with the TympaHealth system with those measured using standard audiometry., Design: The hearing thresholds of 35 adults were measured using standard audiometry and the TympaHealth system. Each set of thresholds was used to generate NAL-NL2 targets and program a hearing aid. The data from each system were compared., Results: Bland-Altman analyses showed overall mean differences between thresholds measured with each system to be small, with 85% of TympaHealth thresholds being within ±5 dB of the standard audiometric thresholds, although TympaHealth thresholds were higher (poorer) than the standard audiometric thresholds. The hearing aid targets and gains generated from the standard audiometric thresholds were lower (less amplification) than those generated from the TympaHealth thresholds but again, mean differences at each frequency were small and likely imperceptible., Conclusion: These findings support the possibility that valid hearing testing can take place outside of a clinical booth using portable systems like that from TympaHealth, opening up the possibility of testing hearing and fitting hearing aids through pharmacies, opticians, and in care homes.

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: Clinician acceptance influences technology adoption, but UK health professionals' attitudes towards artificial intelligence (AI) in hearing healthcare are unclear. This study aimed to address this knowledge gap., Methods: An online survey, based on the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys, was distributed to audiologists, ENT specialists and general practitioners. The survey collected quantitative and qualitative data on demographics and attitudes to AI in hearing healthcare., Results: Ninety-three participants (mean age 39 years, 56 per cent female) from three professional groups (21 audiologists, 24 ENT specialists and 48 general practitioners) responded. They acknowledged AI's benefits, emphasised the importance of the clinician-patient relationship, and stressed the need for proper training and ethical considerations to ensure successful AI integration in hearing healthcare., Conclusion: This study provides valuable insights into UK healthcare professionals' attitudes towards AI in hearing health and highlights the need for further research to address specific concerns and uncertainties surrounding AI integration in hearing healthcare.

Objective: Explore the impact of Ida's "My Hearing Explained" (MHE) tool on audiologists' language and patients' understanding/interpretation of hearing test results., Design: Audiologists were video-recorded in two sequential conditions: 1) giving standard audiogram explanations to 13 patients and, 2) following discretionary self-training, giving explanations using the MHE tool (nine patients). Outcomes of interest were audiologists' language complexity, use of jargon, and audiologist-patient interactivity. Semi-structured patient interviews, conducted 1-7 days after appointments, were analysed using inductive qualitative content analysis. Patient recall was verified., Study Sample: Four audiologists from one United Kingdom audiology service, and 22 patients (mean age 63.5 yrs) participated., Results: In comparison to standard audiogram explanations, audiologists' language was simpler and audiologist-patient interactivity greater with the MHE tool. Interview data analysis revealed differences between explanation types within the themes of "Understanding" and "Interpretation." 54% (standard audiogram) and 22% (MHE tool) of patients expressed a desire for takeaway information. 31% (standard audiogram) and 67% (MHE tool) of patients reported their explanation helped them relay their results to others. Four patients (one receiving the MHE tool) incorrectly recalled information, suggesting inadequate understanding in these cases., Conclusions: The MHE tool has potential for improving the accessibility and comprehensibility of hearing test results.

The use of face coverings can make communication more difficult by removing access to visual cues as well as affecting the physical transmission of speech sounds. This study aimed to assess the independent and combined contributions of visual and auditory cues to impaired communication when using face coverings. In an online task, 150 participants rated videos of natural conversation along three dimensions: (1) how much they could follow, (2) how much effort was required, and (3) the clarity of the speech. Visual and audio variables were independently manipulated in each video, so that the same video could be presented with or without a superimposed surgical-style mask, accompanied by one of four audio conditions (either unfiltered audio, or audio-filtered to simulate the attenuation associated with a surgical mask, an FFP3 mask, or a visor). Hypotheses and analyses were pre-registered. Both the audio and visual variables had a statistically significant negative impact across all three dimensions. Whether or not talkers' faces were visible made the largest contribution to participants' ratings. The study identifies a degree of attenuation whose negative effects can be overcome by the restoration of visual cues. The significant effects observed in this nominally low-demand task (speech in quiet) highlight the importance of the visual and audio cues in everyday life and that their consideration should be included in future face mask designs., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: Consistent symptom reporting for conditions like tinnitus that do not have an associated sign is critical for evaluating severity and intervention effectiveness, and for interpreting research findings. There is little research examining reporting of tinnitus and hearing difficulty over time. We address this here by comparing reported hearing difficulty and tinnitus at two time-points. Design: A cross-sectional study comparing symptom reporting in March 2019 and August/September 2021 using data from two online surveys of the same cohort. Although each survey was designed to address a different question, both asked about symptoms of tinnitus and hearing difficulties and enabled this exploratory analysis. Study sample: 6881 members of the UK general public aged 18+ years. Results: Inconsistent reporting was evident - many participants who reported experiencing tinnitus and/or hearing difficulties in 2019, said in 2021 that they had never had such symptoms before. Additionally, reports of new tinnitus/hearing difficulties in 2021 were unexpectedly high, equating to 18-month incidence rates of 13.6% and 11.7%, respectively. Conclusions: Psychosocial factors, expectations and context impact symptom reporting. This should be considered when treating patients and interpreting research findings. Using real-time data collection methods could thus provide a better understanding of experiences of tinnitus and hearing.

Purpose: Noise reduction technologies in hearing aids provide benefits under controlled conditions. However, differences in their real-life effectiveness are not established. We propose that a deep neural network (DNN)-based noise reduction system trained on naturalistic sound environments will provide different real-life benefits compared to traditional systems., Method: Real-life listening experiences collected with Ecological Momentary Assessments (EMAs) of participants who used two premium models of hearing aid are compared. One hearing aid model (HA1) used traditional noise reduction; the other hearing aid model (HA2) used DNN-based noise reduction. Participants reported listening experiences several times a day while ambient SPL, SNR, and hearing aid volume adjustments were recorded. Forty experienced hearing aid users completed a total of 3,614 EMAs and recorded 6,812 hr of sound data across two 14-day wear periods., Results: Linear mixed-effects analysis document that participants' assessments of ambient noisiness were positively associated with SPL and negatively associated with SNR but were not otherwise affected by hearing aid model. Likewise, mean satisfaction with the two models did not differ. However, individual satisfaction ratings for HA1 were dependent on ambient SNR, which was not the case for HA2., Conclusions: Hearing aids with DNN-based noise reduction resulted in consistent sound satisfaction regardless of the level of background noise compared to hearing aids implementing noise reduction based on traditional statistical models. While the two hearing aid models also differed on other parameters (e.g., shape), these differences are unlikely to explain the difference in how background noise impacts sound satisfaction with the aids., Supplemental Material: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25114526.

Objective: To explore the perspectives of patients and hearing care providers (HCPs) about an adult remote hearing-aid delivery service implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic., Design: Service evaluation via surveys. The patient survey measured satisfaction with the service, perceived hearing-aid handling skills, and preferences for future services. The HCP survey explored the impact of teleaudiology on outcomes compared to in-person care and factors important for successful teleaudiology., Study Sample: 378 patients and 14 HCPs., Results: Patients were highly satisfied with the service and self-reported good hearing-aid handling skills. However, 2 in 3 patients said they would prefer a future hearing-aid fitting to be in-person rather than remote. HCPs thought teleaudiology had positive impacts on convenience, accessibility, and flexibility, but negative impacts on communication, rapport, and the quality of care. HCPs considered computer literacy and individual preferences to be important for successful remote care; the age of the patient was considered less important., Conclusions: Patients were generally highly satisfied with the service and for 1 in 3 it was their preferred mode of future hearing-aid fitting. Future services should be aware that a one-size-fits-all approach will not satisfy all patients and that teleaudiology should be offered on the basis of individual preference.

In daily life, both acoustic factors and social context can affect listening effort investment. In laboratory settings, information about listening effort has been deduced from pupil and cardiovascular responses independently. The extent to which these measures can jointly predict listening-related factors is unknown. Here we combined pupil and cardiovascular features to predict acoustic and contextual aspects of speech perception. Data were collected from 29 adults (mean  =  64.6 years, SD  =  9.2) with hearing loss. Participants performed a speech perception task at two individualized signal-to-noise ratios (corresponding to 50% and 80% of sentences correct) and in two social contexts (the presence and absence of two observers). Seven features were extracted per trial: baseline pupil size, peak pupil dilation, mean pupil dilation, interbeat interval, blood volume pulse amplitude, pre-ejection period and pulse arrival time. These features were used to train k-nearest neighbor classifiers to predict task demand, social context and sentence accuracy. The k-fold cross validation on the group-level data revealed above-chance classification accuracies: task demand, 64.4%; social context, 78.3%; and sentence accuracy, 55.1%. However, classification accuracies diminished when the classifiers were trained and tested on data from different participants. Individually trained classifiers (one per participant) performed better than group-level classifiers: 71.7% (SD  =  10.2) for task demand, 88.0% (SD  =  7.5) for social context, and 60.0% (SD  =  13.1) for sentence accuracy. We demonstrated that classifiers trained on group-level physiological data to predict aspects of speech perception generalized poorly to novel participants. Individually calibrated classifiers hold more promise for future applications., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

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.)

About one-third of all recently published studies on listening effort have used at least one physiological measure, providing evidence of the popularity of such measures in listening effort research. However, the specific measures employed, as well as the rationales used to justify their inclusion, vary greatly between studies, leading to a literature that is fragmented and difficult to integrate. A unified approach that assesses multiple psychophysiological measures justified by a single rationale would be preferable because it would advance our understanding of listening effort. However, such an approach comes with a number of challenges, including the need to develop a clear definition of listening effort that links to specific physiological measures, customized equipment that enables the simultaneous assessment of multiple measures, awareness of problems caused by the different timescales on which the measures operate, and statistical approaches that minimize the risk of type-I error inflation. This article discusses in detail the various obstacles for combining multiple physiological measures in listening effort research and provides recommendations on how to overcome them., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest There are no conflicts of interest, financial, or otherwise., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Longitudinal electronic health records from a large sample of new hearing-aid (HA) recipients in the US Veterans Affairs healthcare system were used to evaluate associations of fitting laterality with long-term HA use persistence as measured by battery order records, as well as with short-term HA use and satisfaction as assessed using the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA), completed within 180 days of HA fitting. The large size of our dataset allowed us to address two aspects of fitting laterality that have not received much attention, namely the degree of hearing asymmetry and the question of which ear to fit if fitting unilaterally. The key findings were that long-term HA use persistence was considerably lower for unilateral fittings for symmetric hearing loss (HL) and for unilateral worse-ear fittings for asymmetric HL, as compared to bilateral and unilateral better-ear fittings. In contrast, no differences across laterality categories were observed for short-term self-reported HA usage. Total IOI-HA score was poorer for unilateral fittings of symmetric HL and for unilateral better-ear fittings compared to bilateral for asymmetric HL. We thus conclude that bilateral fittings yield the best short- and long-term outcomes, and while unilateral and bilateral fittings can result in similar outcomes on some measures, we did not identify any HL configuration for which a bilateral fitting would lead to poorer outcomes. However, if a single HA is to be fitted, then our results indicate that a better-ear fitting has a higher probability of long-term HA use persistence than a worse-ear fitting.

Objectives: Hearing-aid use may reduce risk of dementia, but cognitive impairment makes use more challenging. An observed association between reduced hearing-aid use and incident dementia could reflect either or both of these causal paths. The objective was to examine the effects of each path while minimising contamination between paths., Methods: Health records data from 380,794 Veterans who obtained hearing aids from the US Veterans Affairs healthcare system were analysed. Analysis 1 (n = 72,180) used multivariable logistic regression to model the likelihood of incident dementia 3.5-5 years post hearing-aid fitting for patients free of dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Analysis 2 (n = 272,748) modelled the likelihood of being a persistent hearing-aid user at 3 years 2 months after fitting, contrasting subgroups by level of cognitive function at the time of fitting. Analysis time windows were optimized relative to dataset constraints. Models were controlled for available relevant predictors., Results: The adjusted OR for incident dementia was 0.73 (95% CI 0.66-0.81) for persistent (versus non-persistent) hearing-aid users. The adjusted OR for hearing-aid use persistence was 0.46 (95% CI 0.43-0.48) in those with pre-existing dementia (versus those remaining free of MCI and dementia)., Conclusion: Substantial independent associations are observed in both directions, suggesting that hearing-aid use decreases risk of dementia and that better cognitive function predisposes towards persistent use. Research studying protective effects of hearing-aid use against dementia needs to account for cognitive status. Clinically, hearing devices and hearing care processes must be accessible and usable for all, regardless of their cognitive status., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.)

Introduction: Satisfaction with telemedicine is generally high; however, it can lead to communication problems for people with hearing loss (HL), especially when encounters are conducted by telephone, because of the inability to see the face and lips on which many people with HL rely. Despite acknowledgement that HL might affect telemedicine outcomes, no studies have directly examined this. The primary aims of this study were to determine whether and how HL impacts patient satisfaction and willingness to use telemedicine. Methods: Opinions about telemedicine were assessed in a survey of 383 members of the general public. Data regarding reported hearing ability, use of hearing assistive technology, and preferred form of communication (oral/aural vs. sign language) were also collected; people with HL were intentionally oversampled. Survey items included closed set and open-ended responses. Results: People with HL declined the offer of telemedicine appointments, rated telemedicine outcomes significantly less positively, and had stronger preferences for in person care than did people without HL. Explanations provided for this were directly associated with hearing-related difficulties or the indirect consequences of those difficulties. HL resulted in concerns about communication during the appointment, a lack of privacy when an intermediary helped with communication during the appointment, worries that critical information has been misheard/missed, and anxiety/stress. Conclusions: The needs of people with HL during telemedicine encounters must be addressed to ensure equitable access. Health care providers should take responsibility to communicate clearly with people with HL and individuals with HL should be willing to advocate for their needs and use special access tools during telemedicine appointments.

There are reports of associations between SARS-CoV2, COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccines, and auditory symptoms (hearing difficulty, tinnitus). However, most studies have relied on self-report and lack baseline and/or non-COVID control groups. This makes it problematic to differentiate if symptoms are associated with SARS-CoV2, COVID-19, the vaccine, psychosocial factors or recall bias. In this study, we differentiate these by comparing hearing and tinnitus survey data collected pre- and during the pandemic. The survey conducted during the pandemic asked about the onset and change in three types of symptom. Type One-known association (loss of smell, memory/concentration issues, persistent fatigue), Type Two-indeterminate association (auditory symptoms), and Type Three-no established association with COVID-19 (toothache). We hypothesized that if auditory symptoms are directly associated with COVID-19, their onset and change would be similar to Type One symptoms, but if indirectly associated (reflecting psychosocial factors and/or recall bias) would be more similar to Type Three symptoms. Of the 6,881 individuals who responded, 6% reported confirmed COVID-19 (positive test), 11% probably had COVID-19, and 83% reported no COVID-19. Those with confirmed or probable COVID-19 more commonly reported new and/or worsened auditory symptoms than those not reporting COVID-19. However, this does not imply causality because: (1) new auditory symptoms coincided with COVID-19 illness among just 1/3 of those with confirmed or probable COVID-19, and another 1/3 said their symptoms started before the pandemic-despite reporting no symptoms in the pre-pandemic survey. (2) >60% of individuals who had COVID-19 said it had affected their Type 3 symptoms, despite a lack of evidence linking the two. (3) Those with confirmed COVID-19 reported more Type 1 symptoms, but reporting of Type 2 and Type 3 symptoms did not differ between those with confirmed COVID-19 and those without COVID-19, while those who probably had COVID-19 most commonly reported these symptom types. Despite more reports of auditory symptoms in confirmed or probable COVID-19, there is inconsistent reporting, recall bias, and possible nocebo effects. Studies that include appropriate control groups and use audiometric measures in addition to self-report to investigate change in auditory symptoms relative to pre-COVID-19 are urgently needed., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Saunders, Beukes, Uus, Armitage, Kelly and Munro.)

Objective: To canvas the views of Australia-based hearing healthcare clinicians regarding group audiological rehabilitation practices., Design: A national cross-sectional self-report survey. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and content analysis., Study Sample: Sixty-two Australia-based hearing healthcare clinicians, with experience working in an adult rehabilitation setting., Results: Clinicians appeared to positively view the provision of group audiological rehabilitation services, yet were limited in their ability to deliver these services due to organisational barriers. Although some organisational barriers were non-modifiable by the clinician (such as group AR services not prioritised within their workplace, a lack of support from colleagues/managers, lack of resources, and a lack of funding for the delivery of group AR services), others were within the clinicians' ability to change (such as habit formation for recommending these services during clinical appointments). Participants expressed a desire for resources to assist them in delivering group AR, including downloadable lesson plans and information sheets for clients, clinician training videos and client educational videos. Clinicians called for increased diversity in program offerings, specifically relating to the emotional, relational and social impacts of hearing loss., Conclusions: These results provide a framework for the development of interventional studies to increase the utilisation of group audiological rehabilitation services.

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.)

Data for monitoring individual hearing aid usage has historically been limited to retrospective questionnaires or data logged intrinsically in the hearing aid cumulatively over time (e. g., days or more). This limits the investigation of longitudinal interactions between hearing aid use and environmental or behavioral factors. Recently it has become possible to analyze remotely logged hearing aid data from in-market and smartphone compatible hearing aids. This can provide access to novel insights about individual hearing aid usage patterns and their association to environmental factors. Here, we use remotely logged longitudinal data from 64 hearing aid users to establish basic norms regarding smartphone connectivity (i.e., comparing remotely logged data with cumulative true hearing aid on-time) and to assess whether such data can provide representative information about ecological usage patterns. The remotely logged data consists of minute-by-minute timestamped logs of cumulative hearing aid on-time and characteristics of the momentary acoustic environment. Using K-means clustering, we demonstrate that hourly hearing aid usage patterns (i.e., usage as minutes/hour) across participants are separated by four clusters that account for almost 50% of the day-to-day variation. The clusters indicate that hearing aids are worn either sparsely throughout the day; early morning to afternoon; from noon to late evening; or across the day from morning to late evening. Using linear mixed-effects regression modeling, we document significant associations between daily signal-to-noise, sound intensity, and sound diversity with hearing aid usage. Participants encounter louder, noisier, and more diverse sound environments the longer the hearing aids are worn. Finally, we find that remote logging via smartphones underestimates the daily hearing aid usage with a pooled median of 1.25 h, suggesting an overall connectivity of 85%. The 1.25 h difference is constant across days varying in total hearing aid on-time, and across participants varying in average daily hearing aid-on-time, and it does not depend on the identified patterns of daily hearing aid usage. In sum, remote data logging with hearing aids has high representativeness and face-validity, and can offer ecologically true information about individual usage patterns and the interaction between usage and everyday contexts., Competing Interests: JC, LH, and NP are employed by Oticon A/S. The remaining author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Christensen, Saunders, Havtorn and Pontoppidan.)

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.)

Objective: To understand the impact of face coverings on hearing and communication., Design: An online survey consisting of closed-set and open-ended questions distributed within the UK to gain insights into experiences of interactions involving face coverings, and of the impact of face coverings on communication., Sample: Four hundred and sixty members of the general public were recruited via snowball sampling. People with hearing loss were intentionally oversampled to more thoroughly assess the effect of face coverings in this group., Results: With few exceptions, participants reported that face coverings negatively impacted hearing, understanding, engagement, and feelings of connection with the speaker. Impacts were greatest when communicating in medical situations. People with hearing loss were significantly more impacted than those without hearing loss. Face coverings impacted communication content, interpersonal connectedness, and willingness to engage in conversation; they increased anxiety and stress, and made communication fatiguing, frustrating and embarrassing - both as a speaker wearing a face covering, and when listening to someone else who is wearing one., Conclusions: Face coverings have far-reaching impacts on communication for everyone, but especially for people with hearing loss. These findings illustrate the need for communication-friendly face-coverings, and emphasise the need to be communication-aware when wearing a face covering.

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.)

Background: Age-related changes (both normal and pathological), and health literacy are relevant to audiological practice. Changes associated with the musculoskeletal, vascular, and nervous systems drive manual, visual, and cognitive function. These in turn affect the capabilities required for effective hearing aid (HA) skill acquisition, use, and management. Meanwhile, health literacy influences the ability to gain access to, understand, and use information, which is important for promoting and maintaining HA use and management. Understanding the interindividual variability of these variables can help audiologists characterize those individuals who might have suboptimal HA outcomes. This knowledge can then inform better clinical practices and guide implementation of processes to improve care quality and outcomes., Purpose: The aim of the study is to assess the variation in manual, visual, and cognitive function, and health literacy, among community-dwelling older individuals, and to determine whether and which of these variables are associated with reported HA outcome and/or the knowledge and skill to manage HAs., Research Design: Data presented here were collected as part of an efficacy trial of four variants of HA orientation. The data were collected at baseline (prior to HA fitting) and after 4 to 8 weeks of HA use., Study Sample: The study sample consists of 265 U.S. Veterans aged 51 to 87 years with no previous HA experience who were scheduled to receive their first pair of HAs from the Veterans Administration., Data Collection and Analysis: We assessed baseline measures of hand function, vision, cognition, and health literacy just prior to participants receiving their first pair of HAs. HA management skills and knowledge, and HA outcome were measured after 4 to 8 weeks of HA use using the Hearing Aid Skills and Knowledge (HASK) and International Outcomes Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA), respectively. Data collected here was compared with published norms to assess variation in baseline measures. Associations between baseline performance and outcomes data were examined using t -tests comparing participants who performed at or above age-based norms with those who performed below age-based norms., Results: Participants' performance on the baseline measures was highly variable, with the proportions of individuals performing below norms varying by test measure. When combining data across the nine baseline measures, approximately 10% of participants performed below published norms on five or more measures, and 85% performed below norms on at least one measure. Poor manual dexterity, ability to learn a new task, and ability to draw inferences from spoken information negatively impacted HA management and outcome., Conclusion: There was a considerable heterogeneity among a community-dwelling sample of first time HA users in terms of sensory, cognitive, and motor function. Clinicians should consider modifying their clinical practice to account for such heterogeneity and best support their patients in adapting to new HAs., Competing Interests: None declared., (American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.)

Objective: To document changes in audiology practice resulting from COVID-19 restrictions and to assess audiologists' opinions about teleaudiology., Design: A survey consisting of closed-set and open-ended questions that assessed working practices during the COVID-19 restrictions and audiologists' attitudes towards teleaudiology., Sample: About 120 audiologists in the UK recruited via snowball sampling through social media and emails., Results: About 30% of respondents said they had used teleaudiology prior to COVID-19 restrictions; 98% had done at the time of survey completion, and 86% said they would continue to do so even when restrictions are lifted. Reasons for prior non-use of teleaudiology were associated with clinical limitations/needs, available infrastructure and patient preferences. Respondents believe teleaudiology will improve travel, convenience, flexibility and scheduling, that it will have little/no impact on satisfaction and quality of care, but that it will negatively impact personal interactions. Concerns about teleaudiology focussed on communication, inability to conduct some clinical procedures and technology., Conclusions: Respondents' experience with teleaudiology has generally been positive however improvements to infrastructure and training are necessary, and because many procedures must be conducted in-person, it will always be necessary to have hybrid-care pathways available.

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., Competing Interests: None declared., (American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.)

We investigate the short-term association between multidimensional acoustic characteristics of everyday ambient sound and continuous mean heart rate. We used in-market data from hearing aid users who logged ambient acoustics via smartphone-connected hearing aids and continuous mean heart rate in 5 min intervals from their own wearables. We find that acoustic characteristics explain approximately 4% of the fluctuation in mean heart rate throughout the day. Specifically, increases in ambient sound pressure intensity are significantly related to increases in mean heart rate, corroborating prior laboratory and short-term real-world data. In addition, increases in ambient sound quality-that is, more favourable signal to noise ratios-are associated with decreases in mean heart rate. Our findings document a previously unrecognized mixed influence of everyday sounds on cardiovascular stress, and that the relationship is more complex than is seen from an examination of sound intensity alone. Thus, our findings highlight the relevance of ambient environmental sound in models of human ecophysiology., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Objective: To identify the approaches taken by audiologists to address their adult clients' psychosocial needs related to hearing loss., Design: A participatory mixed methods design. Participants generated statements describing the ways in which the psychosocial needs of their adult clients with hearing loss are addressed, and then grouped the statements into themes. Data were obtained using face-to-face and online structured questions. Concept mapping techniques were used to identify key concepts and to map each of the concepts relative to each other., Study Sample: An international sample of 65 audiologists., Results: Ninety-three statements were generated and grouped into seven conceptual clusters: Client Empowerment; Use of Strategies and Training to Personalise the Rehabilitation Program; Facilitating Peer and Other Professional Support; Providing Emotional Support; Improving Social Engagement with Technology; Including Communication Partners; and Promoting Client Responsibility., Conclusions: Audiologists employ a wide range of approaches in their attempt to address the psychosocial needs associated with hearing loss experienced by their adult clients. The approaches described were mostly informal and provided in a non-standardised way. The majority of approaches described were not evidence-based, despite the availability of several options that are evidence-based, thus highlighting the implementation gap between research and clinical practice.

Objective: To discuss the steps necessary to facilitate hearing health care in the context of well-being and healthy living., Design: Common themes among the articles in this special supplement of the International Journal of Audiology were used to identify issues that must be addressed if audiology is to move from being hearing-focussed to taking a holistic perspective of hearing care in the context of healthy aging. These are discussed within the context of other published literature., Results and Conclusions: Three needs were identified: (i) Increased interdisciplinary education to raise awareness of the interplay between hearing and health. (ii) Increased emphasis on counselling education in audiology programs so that audiologists are equipped with the knowledge, competence and confidence to provide counselling and emotional support to their patients, beyond care. (iii) Redefinition of therapeutic goal setting and hearing outcomes to include aspects of well-being, so that audiologists can capture and patients realise that that good hearing outcomes can have a direct positive impact on a person's quality of life that extends beyond their improved ability to hear. It was emphasised that each of these needs to be considered within the context of the audiologists' scope of practice and audiologists' well-being.