Evaluation of the I-PLAN Intervention to Promote Hearing Aid Use in New Adult Users: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Provision of information is already part of standard care and may not be sufficient to promote hearing aid use. The I-PLAN is a behavior change intervention that is designed to promote hearing aid use in adults. It consists of a prompt, an action plan and provision of information. The objective was to test the effectiveness of the I-PLAN prompt and plan components in promoting hearing aid use and benefit. Hypotheses were: there would be greater hearing aid use, benefit, self-regulation, and hearing aid use habit among participants who received the prompt or plan component, compared with no prompt or no plan component, and the effect would be the greatest in participants who received both prompt and plan; and self-regulation and habit would mediate the effect of prompt and/or plan components on hearing aid use and benefit. DESIGN: A 2 x 2 factorial randomized controlled trial design. Two hundred forty new adult patients (60 in each group) were randomized to: information (info) only; info + prompt; info + plan; or info + prompt + plan. All participants received treatment as usual in addition to I-PLAN components, which were provided in a sealed envelope at the end of the hearing aid fitting consultation. Participants in the prompt group were instructed to use their hearing aid box as a physical prompt to remind them to use the device. Participants in the plan group were instructed to write an action plan to encourage them to turn their intentions into action. Participants, audiologists, and researchers were blinded to group allocation. The primary outcome was self-reported proportion of time hearing aids were used in situations where they had listening difficulties. Secondary outcomes were hearing aid use derived from data logging, self-reported hearing aid benefit, self-reported self-regulation, and habit. Outcomes were measured at 6-week post-fitting. RESULTS: Contrary to predictions, participants who received the prompt component reported using their hearing aid less than participants without the prompt (p = 0.03; d = 0.24). The mean proportion of time hearing aid were used was 73.4% of the time in the prompt group compared with 79.9% of the time in the no prompt group. Participants who received the plan component reported using their hearing aids more frequently than those who did not receive the plan (Meanplan = 81.0% vs Meannoplan = 71.8% of the time; p = 0.01; d = 0.34). Receiving both prompt and plan components did not change self-reported proportion of time hearing aids were used but data-logging use was significantly reduced. The prompt reduced self-regulation of hearing aid use compared with the no prompt (p = 0.04; d = 0.28), while the plan promoted stronger hearing aid use habits than the no plan group (p = 0.02; d = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: Audiologists should consider using action plans to promote hearing aid use. Despite the decrease in hearing aid use when using the hearing aid box as a physical prompt, hearing aid use was still high (≈70% of the time). The hearing aid box may have slightly reduced hearing aid use by undermining self-regulation. Participants may have delegated responsibility for hearing aid use to the prompt. Subsequent studies should evaluate different prompts and test the long-term benefit of the plan on hearing aid use via habit formation.

Biopsychosocial Classification of Hearing Health Seeking in Adults Aged Over 50 Years in England.

OBJECTIVES: Approximately 10 to 35% of people with a hearing impairment own a hearing aid. The present study aims to identify barriers to obtaining a hearing aid and inform future interventions by examining the biopsychosocial characteristics of adults aged 50+ according to 7 categories: (i) Did not report hearing difficulties, (ii) Reported hearing difficulties, (iii) Told a healthcare professional about experiencing hearing difficulties, (iv) Referred for a hearing assessment, (v) Offered a hearing aid, (vi) Accepted a hearing aid, and (vii) Reported using a hearing aid regularly. DESIGN: The research was conducted using the English Longitudinal Study of Aging wave 7 with data obtained from 9666 adults living in England from June 2014 to May 2015. Cross-sectional data were obtained from a subset of 2845 participants aged 50 to 89 years of age with a probable hearing impairment measured by hearing screening (indicating a hearing threshold of >20 dB HL at 1 kHz or >35 dB HL at 3 kHz in the better ear). Classification according to hearing health-seeking category was via participants' self-report. Participants in each category were compared with people in all subsequent categories to examine the associations between each category and biopsychosocial correlates (sex, age, ethnicity, educational level, wealth, audiometric hearing level, self-reported health status, cognitive performance, attitudes to aging, living alone, and engagement in social activities) using multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: The proportions of individuals (N = 2845) in categories i to vii were 40.0% (n = 1139), 14.0% (n = 396), 4.5% (n = 129), 4.0% (n = 114), 1.2% (n = 34), 7.7% (n = 220), and 28.6% (n = 813), respectively. Severity of hearing impairment was the only factor predictive of all the categories of hearing health-seeking that could be modeled. Other correlates predictive of at least one category of hearing health-seeking included sex, age, self-reported heath, participation in social activities, and cognitive function. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time, it was shown that 40.0% of people with an audiometrically identified probable hearing impairment did not report hearing difficulties. Each of the five categories of hearing health-seeking that could be modeled had different drivers and consequently, interventions likely should vary depending on the category of hearing health-seeking.

Correlates of Hearing Aid Use in UK Adults: Self-Reported Hearing Difficulties, Social Participation, Living Situation, Health, and Demographics.

OBJECTIVES: Hearing impairment is ranked fifth globally for years lived with disability, yet hearing aid use is low among individuals with a hearing impairment. Identifying correlates of hearing aid use would be helpful in developing interventions to promote use. To date, however, no studies have investigated a wide range of variables, this has limited intervention development. The aim of the present study was to identify correlates of hearing aid use in adults in the United Kingdom with a hearing impairment. To address limitations in previous studies, we used a cross-sectional analysis to model a wide range of potential correlates simultaneously to provide better evidence to aid intervention development. DESIGN: The research was conducted using the UK Biobank Resource. A cross-sectional analysis of hearing aid use was conducted on 18,730 participants aged 40 to 69 years old with poor hearing, based on performance on the Digit Triplet test. RESULTS: Nine percent of adults with poor hearing in the cross-sectional sample reported using a hearing aid. The strongest correlate of hearing aid use was self-reported hearing difficulties (odds ratio [OR] = 110.69 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 65.12 to 188.16]). Individuals who were older were more likely to use a hearing aid: for each additional year of age, individuals were 5% more likely to use a hearing aid (95% CI = 1.04 to 1.06). People with tinnitus (OR = 1.43 [95% CI = 1.26 to 1.63]) and people with a chronic illness (OR = 1.97 [95% CI = 1.71 to 2.28]) were more likely to use a hearing aid. Those who reported an ethnic minority background (OR = 0.53 [95% CI = 0.39 to 0.72]) and those who lived alone (OR = 0.80 [95% CI = 0.68 to 0.94]) were less likely to use a hearing aid. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to promote hearing aid use need to focus on addressing reasons for the perception of hearing difficulties and how to promote hearing aid use. Interventions to promote hearing aid use may need to target demographic groups that are particularly unlikely to use hearing aids, including younger adults, those who live alone and those from ethnic minority backgrounds.

What do hearing healthcare professionals do to promote hearing aid use and benefit among adults? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the evidence in relation to what hearing healthcare professionals do during hearing aid consultations and identifying which behaviours promote hearing aid use and benefit among adult patients. DESIGN: Searches were performed in electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Web of Science, PubMed and Google Scholar. The Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool and Melnyk Levels of Evidence were used to assess quality and level of evidence of eligible studies. Behaviours of hearing healthcare professionals were summarised descriptively. STUDY SAMPLE: 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Twelve studies described behaviours of audiologists and five studies were intervention studies. Audiologists were typically task- or technically-oriented and/or dominated the interaction during hearing aid consultations. Two intervention studies suggested that use of motivational interviewing techniques by audiologists may increase hearing aid use in patients. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies of clinicians' behaviours were descriptive, with very little research linking clinician behaviour to patient outcomes. The present review sets the research agenda for better-controlled intervention studies to identify which clinician behaviours better promote patient hearing aid outcomes and develop an evidence base for best clinical practice.

Investigating the association between tinnitus severity and symptoms of depression and anxiety, while controlling for neuroticism, in a large middle-aged UK population.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical studies indicate increased risk for depression and anxiety among tinnitus patients. However population data are scarce, and no studies have controlled for neuroticism. We examined associations between tinnitus and symptoms of depression and anxiety in a large UK population, controlling for neuroticism, to explore whether neuroticism, as previously reported, fully explains the association between symptoms of depression and anxiety, and tinnitus. DESIGN: We used the UK Biobank resource. STUDY SAMPLE: 171 728 participants answered hearing questions. RESULTS: Using generalized linear modelling, we examined associations between tinnitus (mild to severe) and symptoms of depression and anxiety. Controlling for neuroticism, patients with severe tinnitus were at increased risk of depression (odds ratio (OR) = 1.27) and anxiety (OR = 1.11) symptoms, compared to those without tinnitus. CONCLUSIONS: Although it is not possible to determine whether tinnitus is a predisposing factor to depression, these results suggest an association. We suggest further exploration to determine the clinical significance of this association. Early psychosocial intervention aimed at reducing anxiety and depression in patients at increased risk might influence the extent to which tinnitus is experienced as troubling, and therefore psychological distress associated with it. Likewise, with tinnitus patients, assessment for anxiety/depression should be considered.

A Quasi-Randomized Controlled Trial of the I-PLAN Intervention to Promote Hearing Aid Use Among First-Time Adult Hearing Aid Users.

Suboptimal hearing aid use negatively impacts health and well-being. The aim of this study was to conduct a controlled trial of a behavior change intervention to promote hearing aid use. This study was a quasi-randomized controlled trial with two arms. A total of 160 first-time hearing aid users were recruited at their hearing aid fitting appointments. The control arm received standard care. In addition to standard care, the intervention arm received I-PLAN, which comprised (a) information about the consequences of hearing aid use/nonuse, (b) reminder prompt to use the hearing aids, and (c) an action plan. The primary outcome, measured at 6 weeks, was self-reported proportion of time the hearing aid was used in situations that caused hearing difficulty. Secondary outcomes were data-logged hearing aid use, self-reported hearing aid benefit, self-regulation, and habit formation. The results showed that the proportion of time the hearing aids were used in situations that caused hearing difficulty was similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in any outcome measure including data-logged hearing aid use. The relatively high levels of hearing aid use across research participants may have limited the potential for the intervention to impact on hearing aid use. Although the intervention materials proved acceptable and deliverable, future intervention trials should target suboptimal hearing aid users.