Estimated Costs Associated With Management of Otosclerosis With Hearing Aids vs Surgery in Europe.

Importance: Surgery and hearing aids have similar outcomes in terms of hearing acuity but differ in terms of cost, aesthetics, and patient quality of life. The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of otosclerosis treatments have never been studied in Europe. Objectives: To compare the estimated mean costs per patient over 10 years of surgery vs hearing aids for the treatment of otosclerosis and to estimate the budget impact of an increase in the proportion of patients receiving surgical treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation analyzed French and European epidemiological data on the surgical management of symptomatic otosclerosis and compared them with data from the literature to build economic models. The analysis was conducted in January 2021. Exposures: Two care pathways were considered in the treatment of otosclerosis, either hearing aid or surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Costs were studied over 10 years using Markov models of the 2 care pathways (hearing aid vs surgery). The budget impact analysis was performed over 5 and 10 years, assuming a 1-percentage point yearly increase in the proportion of patients receiving surgical treatment. Results: Over 10 years, the estimated mean cost per patient was significantly lower in the surgery group compared with the hearing aid group (€3446.9 vs €6088.4; mean difference, -€2641.5; 95% CI -€4064.8 to -€1379.4 [US $3913.4 vs US $6912.4; mean difference, -US $2999.0; 95% CI, -US $4614.9 to -US $1566.1]). Increasing surgical treatment by 1 percentage point per year for 10 years would lead to overall savings of €1 762 304 (US $2 000 798) in France, with an increase of €1 322 920 (US $1 501 952) at 10 years for the public health insurance system and a decrease of €3 085 224 (US $3 502 750) at 10 years for patients and private health insurers. Sensitivity analyses showed that these results were robust. Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that in France, treating otosclerosis surgically is slightly less expensive over 10 years than using hearing aids, when considering all payers. The proposed models developed in this study could be adjusted to perform the same analysis in other countries.

Global return on investment and cost-effectiveness of WHO's HEAR interventions for hearing loss: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: To address the growing prevalence of hearing loss, WHO has identified a compendium of key evidence-based ear and hearing care interventions to be included within countries' universal health coverage packages. To assess the cost-effectiveness of these interventions and their budgetary effect for countries, we aimed to analyse the investment required to scale up services from baseline to recommended levels, and the return to society for every US$1 invested in the compendium. METHODS: We did a modelling study using the proposed set of WHO interventions (summarised under the acronym HEAR: hearing screening and intervention for newborn babies and infants, pre-school and school-age children, older adults, and adults at higher risk of hearing loss; ear disease prevention and management; access to technologies such as hearing aids, cochlear implants, or hearing assistive technologies; and rehabilitation service provision), which span the life course and include screening and management of hearing loss and related ear diseases, costs and benefits for the national population cohorts of 172 countries. The return on investment was analysed for the period between 2020 and 2030 using three scenarios: a business-as-usual scenario, a progress scenario with a scale-up to 50% of recommended coverage, and an ambitious scenario with scale-up to 90% of recommended coverage. Using data for hearing loss burden from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019, a transition model with three states (general population, diagnosed, and those who have died) was developed to model the national populations in countries. For the return-on-investment analysis, the monetary value of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted in addition to productivity gains were compared against the investment required in each scenario. FINDINGS: Scaling up ear and hearing care interventions to 90% requires an overall global investment of US$238·8 billion over 10 years. Over a 10-year period, this investment promises substantial health gains with more than 130 million DALYs averted. These gains translate to a monetary value of more than US$1·3 trillion. In addition, investment in hearing care will result in productivity benefits of more than US$2 trillion at the global level by 2030. Together, these benefits correspond to a return of nearly US$15 for every US$1 invested. INTERPRETATION: This is the first-ever global investment case for integrating ear and hearing care interventions in countries' universal health coverage services. The findings show the economic benefits of investing in this compendium and provide the basis for facilitating the increase of country's health budget for strengthening ear and hearing care services. FUNDING: None.

Longitudinal economic analysis of Bonebridge 601 versus percutaneous bone-anchored hearing devices over a 5-year follow-up period.

OBJECTIVES: Percutaneous bone-anchored hearing devices (pBAHDs) are the most commonly used bone conduction implants (BCI). Concerns surround the long-term complications, notably skin-related, in patients with percutaneous abutments. The active transcutaneous BCI Bonebridge system can help avoid some of these pitfalls but is often considered a second-line option due to various factors including perceived increased overall costs. DESIGN: Longitudinal economic analysis of Bonebridge BCI 601 versus pBAHD over a 5-year follow-up period. SETTING: A specialist hearing implant centre. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients (≥16 years) with conductive hearing loss, mixed hearing loss or single-sided deafness, who received a Bonebridge or pBAHD implant between 1/7/2013 and 1/12/2018 with a minimum 12-month follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We compared the mean costs per implanted patient for both implants at 1, 3 and 5 years postoperative time points. Clinical effectiveness was evaluated using objective and patient-reported outcome measures. RESULTS: The mean total cost per patient of Bonebridge was significantly higher than pBAHD at 1-year post-implantation (£8512 standard deviation [SD] £715 vs £5590 SD £1394, P < .001); however, by 5-years post-implantation this difference was no longer statistically significant (£12 453 SD £2159 vs £12 575 SD £3854, P > .05). The overall cost convergence was mainly accounted for by the increased long-term complications, revision surgery rates and higher cost of the pBAHD external processor compared to Bonebridge. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term costs of Bonebridge to healthcare providers are comparable to pBAHDs, whilst offering lower complication rates, comparable audiological benefit and patient satisfaction. Bonebridge should be considered as a first-line BCI option in appropriate cases.

Health Literacy and Hearing Healthcare Use.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether health literacy is associated with: 1) degree of hearing loss at initial presentation for audiogram and 2) hearing aid adoption for hearing aid candidates. METHODS: We identified 1376 patients who underwent audiometric testing and completed a brief health literacy questionnaire at our institution. The association between health literacy and degree of hearing loss at initial presentation was examined using linear regression, adjusted for age, gender, marital status, education level, race, language, employment status, and insurance coverage. The association between health literacy and hearing aid adoption was examined in the subset of patients identified as hearing aid candidates using logistic regression, adjusted for demographic factors and insurance coverage. RESULTS: Patients with inadequate health literacy were more likely to present with more severe hearing loss (adjusted mean pure-tone average [PTA] difference, 5.38 dB, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.75 to 8.01). For hearing aid candidates (n = 472 [41.6%]), health literacy was not associated with hearing aid adoption rate (odds ratio [OR] 0.85, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.76). Hearing aid coverage through Medicaid (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.13 to 4.37), and moderate (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.69) or moderate-severe (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.19 to 4.16) hearing loss were associated with hearing aid adoption. CONCLUSIONS: In our population, patients with low health literacy are more likely to present with higher degrees of hearing loss, but no less likely to obtain hearing aids compared with patients with adequate health literacy. Hearing loss severity and hearing aid coverage by insurance appear to be the main drivers of hearing aid adoption. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 131:E1688-E1694, 2021.

Cost-utility analysis of hearing aid device for older adults in the community: a delayed start study.

BACKGROUND: Hearing aids (HA) is the primary medical intervention aimed to reduce hearing handicap. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of HA for older adults who were volunteered to be screened for hearing loss in a community-based mobile hearing clinic (MHC). METHODS: Participants with (1) at least moderate hearing loss (≥40 dB HL) in at least one ear, (2) no prior usage of HA, (3) no ear related medical complications, and (4) had a Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥ 18 were eligible for this study. Using a delayed-start study design, participants were randomized into the immediate-start (Fitted) group where HA was fitted immediately or the delayed-start (Not Fitted) group where HA fitting was delayed for three months. Cost utility analysis was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of being fitted with HA combined with short-term, aural rehabilitation with the routine care group who were not fitted with HA. Incremental cost effectiveness ration (ICER) was computed. Health Utility Index (HUI-3) was used to measure utility gain, a component required to derive the quality adjusted life years (QALY). Total costs included direct healthcare costs, direct non-healthcare costs and indirect costs (productivity loss of participant and caregiver). Demographic data was collected during the index visit to MHC. Cost and utility data were collected three months after index visit and projected to five years. RESULTS: There were 264 participants in the Fitted group and 163 participants in the Not Fitted group. No between-group differences in age, gender, ethnicity, housing type and degree of hearing loss were observed at baseline. At 3 months, HA fitting led to a mean utility increase of 0.12 and an ICER gain of S$42,790/QALY (95% CI: S$32, 793/QALY to S$62,221/QALY). At five years, the ICER was estimated to be at S$11,964/QALY (95% CI: S$8996/QALY to S$17,080/QALY) assuming 70% of the participants continued using the HA. As fewer individuals continued using their fitted HA, the ICER increased. CONCLUSIONS: HA fitting can be cost-effective and could improve the quality of life of hearing-impaired older individuals within a brief period of device fitting. Long term cost-effectiveness of HA fitting is dependent on its continued usage.

Hearing Loss in Children: A Review.

IMPORTANCE: Hearing loss in children is common and by age 18 years, affects nearly 1 of every 5 children. Without hearing rehabilitation, hearing loss can cause detrimental effects on speech, language, developmental, educational, and cognitive outcomes in children. OBSERVATIONS: Consequences of hearing loss in children include worse outcomes in speech, language, education, social functioning, cognitive abilities, and quality of life. Hearing loss can be congenital, delayed onset, or acquired with possible etiologies including congenital infections, genetic causes including syndromic and nonsyndromic etiologies, and trauma, among others. Evaluation of hearing loss must be based on suspected diagnosis, type, laterality and degree of hearing loss, age of onset, and additional variables such as exposure to cranial irradiation. Hearing rehabilitation for children with hearing loss may include use of hearing aids, cochlear implants, bone anchored devices, or use of assistive devices such as frequency modulating systems. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Hearing loss in children is common, and there has been substantial progress in diagnosis and management of these cases. Early identification of hearing loss and understanding its etiology can assist with prognosis and counseling of families. In addition, awareness of treatment strategies including the many hearing device options, cochlear implant, and assistive devices can help direct management of the patient to optimize outcomes.

LoCHAid: An ultra-low-cost hearing aid for age-related hearing loss.

Hearing aids are the primary tool in non-medical rehabilitation for individuals with hearing loss. While the costs of the electronic components have reduced substantially, the cost of a hearing aid has risen steadily to the point that it has become unaffordable for the majority of the population with Age-Related Hearing Loss (ARHL) especially for those residing in low- and middle-income countries. Here, we present an ultra-low-cost, affordable and accessible hearing aid device ('LoCHAid'), specifically targeted towards treating ARHL in elderly patients. The LoCHAid components cost 98 cents (< $1) when purchased in bulk for 10,000 units and can be personalized for each user through a 3D-printable case. It is designed to be an over-the-counter (OTC) self-serviceable solution for elderly individuals with ARHL. Electroacoustic measurements show that the device meets most of the targets set out by the WHO Preferred Product Profile and Consumer Technology Association for hearing aids. The frequency response of the hearing aid shows selectable gain in the range of 4-8 kHz, and mild to moderate gain between 200-1000 Hz, and shows very limited total distortion (1%). Simulated gain measurements show that the LoCHAid is well fitted to a range of ARHL profiles for males and females between the ages of 60-79 years. Overall, the measurements show that the device offers the potential to benefit individuals with ARHL. Thus, our proposed design has the potential to address the challenge of affordable and accessible hearing technology for hearing impaired elderly individuals especially in low- and middle-income countries.

Hearing Health Care Belongs to Primary Care.

Like many areas of health care, hearing loss is best managed when hearing professionals collaborate closely with physicians. Primary care physicians (PCPs) are uniquely suited to manage hearing loss because 1) patients trust their PCP; 2) PCPs have insight into the overall health and well-being of their patients; and 3) the PCP workforce is large enough to make a meaningful impact. Accountable care organizations, clinically integrated networks, and patient-centered medical homes are perfectly suited to be a positive force in the hearing health of their patients.

An advanced prosthetic manufacturing framework for economic personalised ear prostheses.

Craniofacial prostheses are commonly used to restore aesthetics for those suffering from malformed, damaged, or missing tissue. Traditional fabrication is costly, uncomfortable for the patient, and laborious; involving several hours of hand-crafting by a prosthetist, with the results highly dependent on their skill level. In this paper, we present an advanced manufacturing framework employing three-dimensional scanning, computer-aided design, and computer-aided manufacturing to efficiently fabricate patient-specific ear prostheses. Three-dimensional scans were taken of ears of six participants using a structured light scanner. These were processed using software to model the prostheses and 3-part negative moulds, which were fabricated on a low-cost desktop 3D printer, and cast with silicone to produce ear prostheses. The average cost was approximately $3 for consumables and $116 for 2 h of labour. An injection method with smoothed 3D printed ABS moulds was also developed at a cost of approximately $155 for consumables and labour. This contrasts with traditional hand-crafted prostheses which range from $2,000 to $7,000 and take around 14 to 15 h of labour. This advanced manufacturing framework provides potential for non-invasive, low cost, and high-accuracy alternative to current techniques, is easily translatable to other prostheses, and has potential for further cost reduction.

Long-Term Incidence and Predictors of Significant Hearing Loss Requiring Hearing Assistive Devices Among Childhood Cancer Survivors: A Population-Based Study.

PURPOSE: Hearing loss is a significant late effect among childhood cancer survivors. Recent guidelines note insufficient evidence to quantify its natural history or risk associated with specific exposures. We examined the long-term incidence and predictors of hearing loss requiring hearing amplification devices (HADs) using population-based health care data. METHODS: In Ontario, Canada, HAD costs are subsidized by the Assistive Devices Program (ADP). Ontario children < 18 years of age at cancer diagnosis between 1987 and 2016 were identified and linked to ADP claims. Cumulative HAD incidence was compared between cases and matched controls. Patient, disease, and treatment predictors of HAD were examined. RESULTS: We identified 11,842 cases and 59,210 controls. Cases were at higher risk for HAD (hazard ratio [HR], 12.8; 95% CI, 9.8 to 16.7; P < .001). The cumulative incidence of HAD among survivors was 2.1% (95% CI, 1.7% to 2.5%) at 20 years and 6.4% (95% CI, 2.8% to 12.1%) at 30 years post-diagnosis. The 30-year incidence was highest in neuroblastoma (10.7%; 95% CI, 3.8% to 21.7%) and hepatoblastoma (16.2%; 95% CI, 8.6% to 26.0%) survivors. Predictors of HAD in multivariable analyses included age 0-4 years at diagnosis (v 5-9 years; HR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4-3.3; P < .001). Relative to no cisplatin exposure, patients receiving < 200 mg/m2 were not at greater risk, unlike those receiving higher cumulative doses. Relative to no cranial or facial radiation, those who had received ≤ 32.00 Gy were at no higher risk, unlike those who had received > 32.00 Gy. Carboplatin exposure was not associated with HAD. CONCLUSION: Childhood cancer survivors are at elevated risk for requiring HAD, which continues to increase between 20 and 30 years after diagnosis. Thresholds of cisplatin and radiation exposure exist, above which risk substantially increases. Prolonged monitoring and trials of otoprotective agents are warranted in high-risk populations.

Patient safety and the annulment of medical clearance exams for hearing aids: Are we "closing the book" too soon?

PURPOSE: To determine the utility of medical clearance exams by otolaryngologists prior to the distribution of hearing aids to patients with hearing loss. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Medical records of 313 consecutive hearing-impaired individuals seeking financial assistance for hearing aids from the Lions Hearing Center of Michigan and who presented for medical clearance exams between January 2014 and May 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Separate determinations were made for each patient about (1) benefit from the exam and (2) avoidance of significant harm. RESULTS: Majority (64.2%; n = 201) of patients benefited from medical clearance exams. Furthermore, 5.4% of patients (n = 17) were found to have avoided significant harm due to administration of the medical clearance exam. Finally, 14.4% (n = 45) were offered alternative interventions over conventional hearing aids. CONCLUSIONS: Medical clearance exams are beneficial to a majority of patients with hearing loss prior to receiving hearing aids. With the impending arrival of over-the-counter hearing aids in the United States, special consideration should be placed on educating the general public about the importance of the medical evaluation prior to purchasing any type of hearing aid.

Access to adults' hearing aids: policies and technologies used in eight countries.

As the proportion of older adults in the world's total population continues to grow, the adverse health outcomes of age-related hearing loss are becoming increasingly recognized. While research has shown that age-related hearing loss is the single greatest modifiable risk factor for dementia, use of hearing aids remains low worldwide, even in many middle- and high-income countries. Reasons for poor uptake of hearing aids are likely to involve a combination of factors, ranging from increasing costs of hearing aid technology to a widespread lack of insurance coverage. This article aims to identify the current state of access to hearing aids, focusing on eight middle- and high-income countries. We discuss how to facilitate greater access to hearing aids for patients by addressing changes in how devices are regulated, technological advancements in hearing devices, the need to adjust reimbursement schemes and the importance of adaptation among the community workforce for hearing-care.

Alors que la proportion de personnes âgées au sein de la population mondiale totale continue à croître, les effets néfastes sur la santé de la perte de l'acuité auditive liée à l'âge sont de plus en plus reconnus. Bien que la recherche ait démontré que la perte de l'acuité auditive liée à l'âge est le principal facteur de risque modifiable de la démence, l'utilisation de prothèses auditives reste limitée à l'échelle mondiale, y compris dans de nombreux pays à revenu intermédiaire et élevé. Les raisons de ce recours limité aux prothèses auditives tiennent probablement à une combinaison de facteurs qui vont des coûts croissants de la technologie des appareils auditifs à un manque généralisé de couverture médicale. Cet article vise à déterminer l'état actuel de l'accès aux prothèses auditives en se concentrant sur huit pays à revenu intermédiaire et élevé. Nous étudions comment permettre aux patients d'accéder plus facilement aux prothèses auditives en tenant compte de la réglementation applicable aux appareils, des progrès technologiques relatifs aux appareils auditifs, de la nécessité d'ajuster les systèmes de remboursement et de l'importance de l'adaptation au sein de la main-d'œuvre locale pour les soins auditifs.

A medida que la proporción de adultos mayores en la población total del mundo continúa creciendo, los resultados adversos para la salud de la pérdida de audición relacionada con la edad son cada vez más reconocidos. Aunque las investigaciones han demostrado que la pérdida de audición relacionada con la edad es el mayor factor de riesgo modificable para la demencia, el uso de audífonos sigue siendo bajo en todo el mundo, incluso en muchos países de ingresos medios y altos. Las causas de la escasa aceptación de los audífonos pueden ser una combinación de factores, que van desde el aumento de los costes de la tecnología de los audífonos hasta la falta generalizada de cobertura de seguro. Este artículo pretende identificar el estado actual del acceso a los audífonos, centrándose en ocho países de ingresos medios y altos. Discutimos cómo facilitar un mayor acceso a los audífonos para los pacientes abordando los cambios en cómo se regulan los dispositivos, los avances tecnológicos en los audífonos, la necesidad de ajustar los esquemas de reembolso y la importancia de la adaptación entre los trabajadores de la comunidad para el cuidado de la audición.

Effects of auditory and socio-demographic variables on discontinuation of hearing aid use among older adults with hearing loss fitted in the Chilean public health sector.

BACKGROUND: The percentage of older adults with hearing loss who stop using their hearing aids and the variables associated with this phenomenon have not been systematically investigated in South America. This problem is relevant to the region since countries such as Colombia, Brazil and Chile have public programmes that provide hearing aids to older adults. The aims of this study were to determine the percentage of older adults fitted with a hearing aid at a public hospital in Chile who subsequently stop using it and the auditory and socio-demographic variables associated with the hazard of discontinuing hearing aid use. METHODS: A group that included 355 older adults who had been fitted with a hearing aid was studied retrospectively. In a structured interview, participants were asked about socio-demographic variables and answered part of the Chilean National Survey on Health, evaluating self-perceived hearing loss and responding to questions about discontinuation of hearing aid use and their satisfaction with the device. Survival models were applied to determine the hazard of stopping hearing aid use in relation to the variables of interest. RESULTS: The rate of discontinuation of hearing aid use reached 21.7%. Older adults stopped using their hearing aids mainly during the first 5-6 months post-fitting, and then this number steadily increased. The income fifth quintile was 2.56 times less likely to stop using the hearing aid compared to the first. Those who self-reported that they could not hear correctly without the hearing aid were 2.62 times less likely to stop using it compared to those who reported normal hearing. The group that was very dissatisfied with the hearing aid was 20.86 times more likely to discontinue use than those who reported satisfaction with the device. CONCLUSIONS: Socio-demographic variables such as economic income and auditory factors such as self-perceived hearing loss and satisfaction with the device were significantly associated with the hazard of stopping hearing aid use. Self-perceived hearing loss should be considered part of the candidacy criteria for hearing aids in older adults in Chile and other (developing) countries.

Using a Bone-Conduction Headset to Improve Speech Discrimination in Children With Otitis Media With Effusion.

The recommended management for children with otitis media with effusion (OME) is 'watchful waiting' before considering grommet surgery. During this time speech and language, listening skills, quality of life, social skills, and outcomes of education can be jeopardized. Air-conduction (AC) hearing aids are problematic due to fluctuating AC hearing loss. Bone-conduction (BC) hearing is stable, but BC hearing aids can be uncomfortable. Both types of hearing aids are costly. Given the high prevalence of OME and the transitory nature of the accompanying hearing loss, cost-effective solutions are needed. The leisure industry has developed relatively inexpensive, comfortable, high-quality BC headsets for transmission of speech or music. This study assessed whether these headsets, paired with a remote microphone, improve speech discrimination for children with OME. Nineteen children aged 3 to 6 years receiving recommended management in the United Kingdom for children with OME participated. Word-discrimination thresholds were measured in a sound-treated room in quiet and with 65 dB(A) speech-shaped noise, with and without a headset. The median threshold in quiet (N = 17) was 39 dB(A) (range: 23-59) without a headset and 23 dB(A) (range: 9-35) with a headset (Z = -3.519, p < .001). The median threshold in noise (N = 19) was 59 dB(A) (range: 50-63) without a headset and 45 dB(A) (range: 32-50) with a headset (Z = -3.825, p < .001). Thus, the use of a BC headset paired with a remote microphone significantly improved speech discrimination in quiet and in noise for children with OME.

Direct-to-Consumer Hearing Devices: Capabilities, Costs, and Cosmetics.

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) hearing devices can be purchased without consulting a hearing health professional. This project aims to compare 28 DTC devices with the most popular hearing aid supplied by the U.K. National Health Service (NHS). The comparison was based on technical performance, cosmetic acceptability, and the ability to match commonly used gain and slope targets. Electroacoustic performance was evaluated in a 2-cc coupler. Match to prescription target for both gain and slope was measured on a Knowles Electronic Manikin for Acoustic Research using a mild and also a moderate sloping hearing loss. Using an online blinded paired comparison of each DTC and the NHS reference device, 126 participants (50 were hearing aid users and 76 were nonhearing aid users) assessed the cosmetic appearance and rated their willingness-to-wear the DTC devices. The results revealed that higher purchase prices were generally associated with a better match to prescribed gain-frequency response shapes, lower distortion, wider bandwidth, better cosmetic acceptability, and higher willingness-to-wear. On every parameter measured, there were devices that performed worse than the NHS device. Most of the devices were rated lower in terms of aesthetic design than the NHS device and provided gain-frequency responses and maximum output levels that were markedly different from those prescribed for commonly encountered audiograms. Because of the absence or inflexibility of most of the devices, they have the potential to deliver poor sound quality and uncomfortably loud sounds. The challenge for manufacturers is to develop low-cost products with cosmetic appeal and appropriate electroacoustic characteristics.

Cultural Adaptation of a Community-Based Hearing Health Intervention for Korean American Older Adults with Hearing Loss.

Although hearing loss is known to be associated with many adverse health outcomes in older adults, current hearing healthcare remains expensive and inaccessible to most ethnic minorities in the US. We aim to adapt an affordable, community-based hearing intervention to older Korean Americans (KAs), describe the cultural adaption process, and report pilot trial outcomes. We undertook the first four stages of Barrera & Castro's cultural adaptation framework: information gathering, preliminary adaptation design, adaptation test, and adaptation refinement in 15 older KAs with hearing loss and 15 of their communication partners. We developed a culturally adapted intervention consisting of provision of an affordable listening device and aural rehabilitative training. Six weeks post-intervention, participants' mean hearing handicap score (range: 0-40) reduced from 15.7 to 6.4. Communication partners demonstrated improved social-emotional function. Post-intervention focus group revealed increased hearing benefit, confidence in hearing health navigation, and awareness in hearing health among study participants. The adapted intervention was well-accepted and feasible among older KAs. This study is the first to report the cultural adaptation process of a hearing care model into older KAs and its methodology may be applied to other minority groups.

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Hearing Care Services: What Is It Worth to Medicare?

OBJECTIVE: Hearing care services for older adults with hearing aids are underutilized and are not covered by the Medicare program. Little information exists to the value of hearing care services for older adults with hearing aids. The objective of this analysis is to estimate the potential costs and benefits to the Medicare program of covering hearing care services. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis using propensity score matching methods to create balanced and comparable groups. We conducted a 1:1 match of older Medicare beneficiaries with hearing aids who self-reported use of hearing care services in the previous 12 months to those with hearing aids who did not use hearing care services. Groups were balanced on demographic and socioeconomic characteristics as well as health status, functional impairment, and trouble hearing. We compared average total Medicare spending per person between matched groups, as well as by service type. SETTING: Nationally representative survey of Medicare beneficiaries in the United States (Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey) 2013. PARTICIPANTS: Study participants were limited to those in the survey who reported using hearing aids in 2013 (n = 1120). RESULTS: Average annual Medicare spending was $8196 (95% confidence interval [CI] = $6670-$9723) among Medicare beneficiaries who used hearing care services and $10,709 (95% CI = $8878-$12,541) among matched controls who did not use hearing care services. Total spending per person was $2513 (95% CI = $150-$4876) higher among those who did not use hearing care services, with spending differences driven mostly by higher-skilled nursing facility (difference = $825; 95% CI = $193-$1455) and home health (difference = $287; 95% CI = $7-$568) spending among matched controls. CONCLUSION: Utilization of hearing care services among older adults with hearing aids is associated with reduced Medicare spending. Increasing access to hearing care services among Medicare beneficiaries with hearing aids may provide value to the healthcare system and net savings to the Medicare program. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:784-789, 2019.