The effect of age on the hearing-related quality of life in normal-hearing adults.

INTRODUCTION: Recently, a new holistic Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) to assess hearing-related quality of life was developed, named the hearing-related quality of life questionnaire for Auditory-VIsual, COgnitive and Psychosocial functioning (hAVICOP). The purpose of the current study was to evaluate if the hAVICOP is sufficiently sensitive to detect an age effect in the hearing-related quality of life. METHODS: One-hundred thirteen normal-hearing participants (mean age: 42.13; range: 19 to 69 years) filled in the entire hAVICOP questionnaire online through the Research Electronic Data Capture surface. The hAVICOP consists of 27 statements, across three major subdomains (auditory-visual, cognitive, and psychosocial functioning), which have to be rated on a visual analogue scale ranging from 0 (rarely to never) to 100 (almost always). Mean scores were calculated for each subdomain separately as well as combined within a total score; the worse one's hearing-related quality of life, the lower the score. Linear regression models were run to predict the hAVICOP total as well as the three subdomain scores from age and sex. RESULTS: A significant main effect of age was observed for the total hAVICOP and all three subdomain scores, indicating a decrease in hearing-related quality of life with increasing age. For none of the analyses, a significant sex effect was found. CONCLUSION: The hAVICOP is sufficiently sensitive to detect an age effect in the hearing-related quality of life within a large group of normal-hearing adults, emphasizing its clinical utility. This age effect on the hearing-related quality of life might be related to the interplay of age-related changes in the bottom-up and top-down processes involved during speech processing.

Development of the hearing-related quality of life questionnaire for auditory-visual, cognitive and psychosocial functioning (hAVICOP).

INTRODUCTION: There is a need for a validated and standardized self-assessment instrument to assess the subjective effect of hearing aid (HA) use and/or cochlear implantation (CI) on different aspects of functioning in daily life. The aim of this study was to develop a new holistic Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) to assess hearing-related quality of life. The new PROM is titled the hearing-related quality of life questionnaire for Auditory-VIsual, COgnitive and Psychosocial functioning (hAVICOP). METHODS: A conceptual framework was set up and test items were prepared per domain. Preliminary testing involved a semi-structured interview-based assessment in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired adults and an expert panel. For the further psychometric evaluation, a new sample of 15 adult HA users, 20 adult CI users and 20 normal-hearing adults filled in the refined version of the hAVICOP, the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale, the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire and the TNO-AZL Questionnaire for Adult's Health-Related Quality of Life. Based on these results, a factor analysis was conducted and internal consistency, discriminant validity and concurrent construct validity were determined. RESULTS: The final version of the hAVICOP consists of three domains for hearing-related quality of life: (1) auditory-visual functioning, (2) cognitive functioning, and (3) psychosocial functioning. A sufficient internal consistency was found, and discriminant validity and concurrent construct validity were good. CONCLUSIONS: A new PROM to assess hearing-related quality of life was developed, named the hAVICOP. In the future the validity and reliability should be examined further.

Short-Term Test-Retest Reliability of Contralateral Suppression of Click-Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions in Normal-Hearing Subjects.

Purpose The objective of the current study was to investigate the short-term test-retest reliability of contralateral suppression (CS) of click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (CEOAEs) using commercially available otoacoustic emission equipment. Method Twenty-three young normal-hearing subjects were tested. An otoscopic evaluation, admittance measures, pure-tone audiometry, measurements of CEOAEs without and with contralateral acoustic stimulation (CAS) to determine CS were performed at baseline (n = 23), an immediate retest without and with refitting of the probe (only CS of CEOAEs; n = 11), and a retest after 1 week (n = 23) were performed. Test-retest reliability parameters were determined on CEOAE response amplitudes without and with CAS, and on raw and normalized CS indices between baseline and the other test moments. Results Repeated-measures analysis of variance indicated no random or systematic changes in CEOAE response amplitudes without and with CAS, and in raw and normalized CS indices between the test moments. Moderate-to-high intraclass correlation coefficients with mostly high significant between-subjects variability between baseline and each consecutive test moment were found for CEOAE response amplitude without and with CAS, and for the raw and normalized CS indices. Other reliability parameters deteriorated between CEOAE response amplitudes with CAS as compared to without CAS, between baseline and retest with probe refitting, and after 1 week, as well as for frequency-specific raw and normalized CS indices as compared to global CS indices. Conclusions There was considerable variability in raw and normalized CS indices as measured using CEOAEs with CAS using commercially available otoacoustic emission equipment. More research is needed to optimize the measurement of CS of CEOAEs and to reduce influencing factors, as well as to make generalization of test-retest reliability data possible.

Analysis of probe fitting stimulus properties on transient evoked otoacoustic emissions.

Objective: The objectives of the current study are first, to evaluate the subjective evaluation of probe fitting stimulus properties, and second, to analyse the effects of different probe fittings on transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) response and noise amplitudes in subjects.Design: The Q methodology was used to sort 48 probe fittings differing in stimulus properties in seven categories from totally unacceptable to certainly acceptable. Further, TEOAE response and noise amplitudes were measured in one baseline condition with optimal probe fitting and eight experimental conditions with less than optimal probe fittings.Study sample: The probe fittings were ranked by 18 participants, while the repeated measures design was performed in 34 ear.Results: First, it was found that only 19.61% of all distributions of the probe fittings by the participants had a mutual correlation of at least 70.00%. Almost 60% of the variance of distributions was explained by 83.33% of the participants, although most probe fittings significantly differed from other fittings based on spectral broadness. Second, significant differences in TEOAE response and especially noise amplitudes between conditions were found. Further, TEOAE response and noise amplitudes between the baseline and experimental conditions were significantly different depending on ringing and spectral flatness of the stimulus.Conclusion: A substantial amount of subjectivity during TEOAE measurements is involved with regard to the evaluation of probe fitting stimulus properties. TEOAE response but especially noise amplitudes are influenced by varying stimulus parameters which stresses the importance of inspecting these parameters prior to or during EOAE measurements. Although more research is needed, some guidelines regarding these parameters are given which could improve the accuracy of TEOAEs in practice.