Can real-ear insertion gain deviations from generic fitting prescriptions predict self-reported outcomes?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether the differences in insertion gains from the first fit to generic prescriptions of hearing aids can predict the self-reported hearing aid (HA) outcomes for first-time and experienced HA users. DESIGN: This was a prospective observational study. STUDY SAMPLE: The study included 885 first-time and 330 experienced HA users with a valid real-ear measurement on both ears and answers to the abbreviated version of the Speech, Spatial, and Quality of Hearing (SSQ12) and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) questionnaires. RESULTS: K-means clustering of gain differences between individual real-ear insertion gain to three generic gain prescriptions (NAL-NL2, NAL-RP, and one-third gain rules) was performed. The gain difference at higher frequencies generally differentiated the clusters. The experienced users in the cluster with fittings closest to NAL-NL2 and NAL-RP prescription were found to exhibit a higher IOI-HA Factor 1 score (representing the overall benefit of the hearing aid use). The gain differences to generic prescription did not affect other self-reported outcomes for first-time and experienced HA users. CONCLUSION: The experienced HA users with minimal gain deviations from generic prescriptions reported better self-perceived benefits than users with larger deviations. However, this was not apparent in first-time users.

The effect of hearing aid treatment on health-related quality of life in older adults with hearing loss.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of hearing aid (HA) intervention on long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL) changes in first-time and experienced HA users using the 15D questionnaire. Secondly, the study explored the relationship between clinical parameters and changes in 15D scores. DESIGN: A prospective observational study. STUDY SAMPLE: The study population included 1562 patients (1113 first-time and 449 experienced HA users) referred for HA rehabilitation. All patients responded to the 15D at baseline, two months after HA fitting, and at long-term follow-up (698 ± 298 d). RESULTS: Among both first-time and experienced HA users, significant improvements in hearing-dimension (15D-3) score were observed at two-month follow-up which sustained at long-term follow-up. 15D total scores significantly decreased at long-term follow-up. Self-reported hearing abilities, word recognition scores, and HA use time were significantly and positively correlated to increased 15D. CONCLUSIONS: Both groups of HA users reported improved hearing-related QoL after HA treatment which sustained at long-term follow-up but the improvement in total 15D total score did not sustain for either group. The results suggest that HA intervention positively affects hearing-related QoL among older adults with hearing loss, and the findings support the use of 15D as a tool for the evaluation of HA treatment effects.

Difference in SII provided by initial fit and NAL-NL2 and its relation to self-reported hearing aid outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The speech intelligibility index (SII) is used to quantify the audibility of the speech. This study examined the relationship between self-reported hearing aid (HA) outcomes and the difference in aided SII (SIIA) calculated from the initial fit (IF) gain and that prescribed as per the second generation of National Acoustic Laboratory Non-Linear (NAL-NL2). DESIGN: A prospective observational study. STUDY SAMPLE: The study included 718 first-time and 253 experienced HA users. All users had a valid real-ear measurement (REM) at three input levels (55, 65 and 80 dB SPL). RESULTS: The gain provided by IF was lower than NAL-NL2 at 55 and 65 dB SPL. IF gain exhibited reduced compression than NAL-NL2 as input levels increased from 55 to 80 dB SPL. On average, the SIIA provided by IF was significantly lower than that for NAL-NL2 at all input levels. The difference in SIIA between IF and NAL-NL2 at 80 dB SPL input level with 0 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) turned out to be a predictor for self-reported outcome for first-time HA users. CONCLUSION: The study suggests that an SIIA close to that provided by NAL-NL2 at high input levels would be preferred to obtain a better self-reported outcome. .

A history of occupational noise exposure is associated with steep-slope audiograms and poorer self-reported hearing-aid outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of previous occupational noise exposure in older adults with hearing loss on (1) audiometric configuration and acoustic reflex (AR) thresholds and (2) self-reported hearing abilities and hearing aid (HA) effectiveness. DESIGN: A prospective observational study. STUDY SAMPLE: The study included 1176 adults (≥60 years) with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Pure-tone audiometry, AR thresholds, and responses to the abbreviated version of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12) and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) questionnaire were obtained, along with information about previous occupational noise exposure. RESULTS: Greater occupational noise exposure was associated with a higher prevalence of steeply sloping audiograms in men and women and a 0.32 (95% CI: -0.57; -0.06) scale points lower mean SSQ12 total score among noise-exposed men. AR thresholds did not show a significant relation to noise-exposure status, but hearing thresholds at a given frequency were related to elevated AR thresholds at the same frequency. CONCLUSIONS: A noise exposure history is linked to steeper audiograms in older adults with hearing loss as well as to poorer self-reported hearing abilities in noise-exposed men. More attention to older adults with previous noise exposure is warranted in hearing rehabilitation.

Impact of hearing aid technology level at first-fit on self-reported outcomes in patients with presbycusis: a randomized controlled trial.

To provide clinical guidance in hearing aid prescription for older adults with presbycusis, we investigated differences in self-reported hearing abilities and hearing aid effectiveness for premium or basic hearing aid users. Secondly, as an explorative analysis, we investigated if differences in gain prescription verified with real-ear measurements explain differences in self-reported outcomes. The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial in which the patients were blinded towards the purpose of the study. In total, 190 first-time hearing aid users (>60 years of age) with symmetric bilateral presbycusis were fitted with either a premium or basic hearing aid. The randomization was stratified on age, sex, and word recognition score. Two outcome questionnaires were distributed: the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) and the short form of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ-12). In addition, insertion gains were calculated from real-ear measurements at first-fit for all fitted hearing aids. Premium hearing aid users reported 0.7 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.1) scale points higher total SSQ-12 score per item and 0.8 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.4) scale points higher speech score per item, as well as 0.6 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.1) scale points higher qualities score compared to basic-feature hearing aid users. No significant differences in reported hearing aid effectiveness were found using the IOI-HA. Differences in the prescribed gain at 1 and 2 kHz were observed between premium and basic hearing aids within each company. Premium-feature devices yielded slightly better self-reported hearing abilities than basic-feature devices, but a statistically significant difference was only found in three out of seven outcome variables, and the effect was small. The generalizability of the study is limited to community-dwelling older adults with presbycusis. Thus, further research is needed for understanding the potential effects of hearing aid technology for other populations. Hearing care providers should continue to insist on research to support the choice of more costly premium technologies when prescribing hearing aids for older adults with presbycusis. Clinical Trial Registration: https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT04539847.

Value Propositions of Public Adult Hearing Rehabilitation in Denmark.

Objective: To obtain and evaluate detailed descriptions of potential value propositions as seen by adults undergoing hearing rehabilitation with hearing aids. Design: Semi-structured interviews with patients and audiologists, a literature search, and the inclusion of domain knowledge from experts and scientists were used to derive value propositions. A two-alternative forced-choice paradigm and probabilistic choice models were used to investigate hearing aid users' preferences for the value propositions through an online platform. Study sample: Twelve hearing aid users (mean age 70, range 59-70) and eleven clinicians were interviewed. A total of 173 experienced hearing aid users evaluated the value propositions. Results: Twenty-nine value propositions as described by patients, clinicians, and hearing care experts where identified, from which twenty-one value propositions were evaluated. Results of the pair-wise evaluation method show that the value propositions judged to be the most important for the hearing aid users were: "13. To solve the hearing problem you have", "09. Thorough diagnosis of the hearing", and "16. The hearing aid solution is adapted to individual needs", which are related to finding the correct hearing solution and to be considered in the process. The value propositions judged to be least important were: "04 Next of kin and others involved in the process", "26. To be in the same room as the practitioner", and "29. The practitioner's human characteristics", related to the involvement of others in the process and the proximity and personal manner of the practitioners.