Focusing on Positive Listening Experiences Improves Speech Intelligibility in Experienced Hearing Aid Users.

Negativity bias is a cognitive bias that results in negative events being perceptually more salient than positive ones. For hearing care, this means that hearing aid benefits can potentially be overshadowed by adverse experiences. Research has shown that sustaining focus on positive experiences has the potential to mitigate negativity bias. The purpose of the current study was to investigate whether a positive focus (PF) intervention can improve speech-in-noise abilities for experienced hearing aid users. Thirty participants were randomly allocated to a control or PF group (N = 2 × 15). Prior to hearing aid fitting, all participants filled out the short form of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale (SSQ12) based on their own hearing aids. At the first visit, they were fitted with study hearing aids, and speech-in-noise testing was performed. Both groups then wore the study hearing aids for two weeks and sent daily text messages reporting hours of hearing aid use to an experimenter. In addition, the PF group was instructed to focus on positive listening experiences and to also report them in the daily text messages. After the 2-week trial, all participants filled out the SSQ12 questionnaire based on the study hearing aids and completed the speech-in-noise testing again. Speech-in-noise performance and SSQ12 Qualities score were improved for the PF group but not for the control group. This finding indicates that the PF intervention can improve subjective and objective hearing aid benefits.

Effects of remote ear-nose-and-throat specialist assessment screening on self-reported hearing aid benefit and satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of remote versus in-person ear-nose-and-throat (ENT) specialist screening before hearing treatment on self-reported hearing aid (HA) benefit and satisfaction among adult first-time HA users. DESIGN: Participants were randomised to either remote or in-person ENT assessment before treatment initiation. Hearing ability, hearing quality, and treatment satisfaction were assessed pre- and post-HA treatment using the SSQ12, IOI-HA, and selected items from the 2021 Danish national Patient-Reported Experience Measures. Average daily HA usage was also recorded. STUDY SAMPLE: 751 adult potential first-time HA users with self-reported hearing impairment were included; 501 participants were remotely assessed in private or public audiological clinics, and 250 control group participants were assessed in-person by private ENT specialists. Of the 658 participants who completed the entire trial, 454 received HAs. RESULTS: No significant post-treatment HA benefit differences were found between groups. Remotely assessed HA recipients in private clinics expressed slightly higher staff and waiting time satisfaction. Participants with normal hearing and mild/moderate hearing loss reported higher pre-treatment hearing ability and quality. No significant difference in average daily HA usage was observed between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that remote screening does not compromise patient-reported HA benefit and satisfaction when compared to in-person screening.

Factors influencing hearing aid use, benefit and satisfaction in adults: a systematic review of the past decade.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review examined the audiological and non-audiological factors that influence hearing aid use, benefit and satisfaction in adults based on studies published during the last decade (2010 and 2023). DESIGN: Studies were identified by using PRISMA guidelines for systematic searches on five platforms (Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, EBSCOhost including CINAHL and Academic Search Complete). The National Institute of Health Quality assessment tool and the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine tool were used for quality assessment and grading of level of evidence. RESULTS: Forty-six articles were included in the review. A total of 101 significant factors influencing hearing aid use (n = 47), benefit (n = 17) and satisfaction (n = 37) were identified. Clear determinants of hearing aid use, benefit and satisfaction included hearing sensitivity, self-reported hearing difficulty, speech perception, attitude and beliefs. 34 cross-sectional studies in this review were graded level 4, 9 cohort studies rated level 3, and 3 randomised control trials rated level 2. CONCLUSION: Factors associated with hearing aid outcomes identified in the past decade support previous evidence. New factors like social networks and service-delivery models, have also been identified. These factors require further investigations through high quality studies to further strengthen existing evidence.

Neural envelope tracking predicts speech intelligibility and hearing aid benefit in children with hearing loss.

Early assessment of hearing aid benefit is crucial, as the extent to which hearing aids provide audible speech information predicts speech and language outcomes. A growing body of research has proposed neural envelope tracking as an objective measure of speech intelligibility, particularly for individuals unable to provide reliable behavioral feedback. However, its potential for evaluating speech intelligibility and hearing aid benefit in children with hearing loss remains unexplored. In this study, we investigated neural envelope tracking in children with permanent hearing loss through two separate experiments. EEG data were recorded while children listened to age-appropriate stories (Experiment 1) or an animated movie (Experiment 2) under aided and unaided conditions (using personal hearing aids) at multiple stimulus intensities. Neural envelope tracking was evaluated using a linear decoder reconstructing the speech envelope from the EEG in the delta band (0.5-4 Hz). Additionally, we calculated temporal response functions (TRFs) to investigate the spatio-temporal dynamics of the response. In both experiments, neural tracking increased with increasing stimulus intensity, but only in the unaided condition. In the aided condition, neural tracking remained stable across a wide range of intensities, as long as speech intelligibility was maintained. Similarly, TRF amplitudes increased with increasing stimulus intensity in the unaided condition, while in the aided condition significant differences were found in TRF latency rather than TRF amplitude. This suggests that decreasing stimulus intensity does not necessarily impact neural tracking. Furthermore, the use of personal hearing aids significantly enhanced neural envelope tracking, particularly in challenging speech conditions that would be inaudible when unaided. Finally, we found a strong correlation between neural envelope tracking and behaviorally measured speech intelligibility for both narrated stories (Experiment 1) and movie stimuli (Experiment 2). Altogether, these findings indicate that neural envelope tracking could be a valuable tool for predicting speech intelligibility benefits derived from personal hearing aids in hearing-impaired children. Incorporating narrated stories or engaging movies expands the accessibility of these methods even in clinical settings, offering new avenues for using objective speech measures to guide pediatric audiology decision-making.

Focusing on positive listening experiences improves hearing aid outcomes in experienced hearing aid users.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether focusing on positive listening experiences improves hearing aid outcomes in experienced hearing aid users. DESIGN: The participants were randomised into a control or positive focus (PF) group. At the first laboratory visit, the Client-Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) questionnaire was administered followed by hearing aid fitting. The participants wore the hearing aids for three weeks. The PF group was asked to report their positive listening experiences via an app. During the third week, all the participants answered questionnaires related to hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. This was followed by the second laboratory visit where the COSI follow-up questionnaire was administered. STUDY SAMPLE: Ten participants were included in the control and eleven in the PF group. RESULTS: Hearing aid outcome ratings were significantly better in the PF group in comparison to the control group. Further, COSI degree of change and the number of positive reports were positively correlated. CONCLUSIONS: These results point to the importance of asking hearing aid users to focus on positive listening experiences and talk about them. The potential outcome is increased hearing aid benefit and satisfaction which could lead to more consistent use of the devices.

A validation study of the Swedish version of the Glasgow hearing aid benefit profile evaluated in otosclerosis subjects.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to translate the Glasgow Benefit Hearing Aid Profile (GHABP) to Swedish, and to analyze its validity and reliability in patients undergoing rehabilitation with surgery or hearing aids. Methods: The GHABP was translated to Swedish following published guidelines. One version of the questionnaire was adapted to fit the surgical intervention. A modification was made to the questionnaire by removing the answer option "not applicable" (N/A) since it was found confusing by the subjects. A prospective multicenter cohort study was performed to validate the questionnaire. One hundred and twenty-three individuals diagnosed with otosclerosis were included in the study prior to the intervention. The individuals were divided into three groups based on the intervention and previous hearing aid experience. Pure tone audiometry was performed 1 month prior and 1 year after the intervention. The Swedish version of the GHABP was completed by the individuals prior to the intervention, as well as 6 and 12 months after the intervention. Validity and reliability were assessed. Results: The Swedish versions of the GHABP were well accepted by the included individuals. The questionnaires showed good psychometric properties, with comparable results for the two different interventions and three separate intervention groups. Initial disability was more pronounced in more challenging listening situations. Disability was reduced after the intervention. The "Use," "Benefit," and "Satisfaction" domains demonstrated beneficial results; however, a ceiling effect was noted in the same domains. The reliability was overall very high. Conclusion: The Swedish version of the GHABP had good psychometric properties, with high validity and reliability. The same outcomes were found for the hearing aid and surgery groups. A ceiling effect was observed that can affect the questionnaire's ability to distinguish between subjects and measures over time. Level of evidence: 2c.

Measuring Speech Intelligibility and Hearing-Aid Benefit Using Everyday Conversational Sentences in Real-World Environments.

Laboratory and clinical-based assessments of speech intelligibility must evolve to better predict real-world speech intelligibility. One way of approaching this goal is to develop speech intelligibility tasks that are more representative of everyday speech communication outside the laboratory. Here, we evaluate speech intelligibility using both a standard sentence recall task based on clear, read speech (BKB sentences), and a sentence recall task consisting of spontaneously produced speech excised from conversations which took place in realistic background noises (ECO-SiN sentences). The sentences were embedded at natural speaking levels in six realistic background noises that differed in their overall level, which resulted in a range of fixed signal-to-noise ratios. Ten young, normal hearing participants took part in the study, along with 20 older participants with a range of levels of hearing loss who were tested with and without hearing-aid amplification. We found that scores were driven by hearing loss and the characteristics of the background noise, as expected, but also strongly by the speech materials. Scores obtained with the more realistic sentences were generally lower than those obtained with the standard sentences, which reduced ceiling effects for the majority of environments/listeners (but introduced floor effects in some cases). Because ceiling and floor effects limit the potential for observing changes in performance, benefits of amplification were highly dependent on the speech materials for a given background noise and participant group. Overall, the more realistic speech task offered a better dynamic range for capturing individual performance and hearing-aid benefit across the range of real-world environments we examined.

Corrigendum: Supplementary Effect of Choline Alfoscerate on Speech Recognition in Patients With Age-Related Hearing Loss: A Prospective Study in 34 Patients (57 Ears).

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2021.684519.].

Supplementary Effect of Choline Alfoscerate on Speech Recognition in Patients With Age-Related Hearing Loss: A Prospective Study in 34 Patients (57 Ears).

To investigate the effect of choline alfoscerate (CA) on hearing amplification in patients with age related hearing loss, we performed a prospective case-control observational study from March 2016 to September 2020. We assessed patients with bilateral word recognition score (WRS) <50% using monosyllabic words. The patients were 65-85 years old, without any history of dementia, Alzheimer's disease, parkinsonism, or depression. After enrollment, all patients started using hearing aids (HA). The CA group received a daily dose of 800 mg CA for 11 months. We performed between-group comparisons of audiological data, including pure tone audiometry, WRS, HA fitting data obtained using real-ear measurement (REM), and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid benefit scores after treatment. After CA administration, the WRS improved significantly in the CA group (4.2 ± 8.3%), but deteriorated in the control group (-0.6 ± 8.1%, p = 0.035). However, there was no significant between-group difference in the change in pure tone thresholds and aided speech intelligibility index calculated from REM. These findings suggest that the difference in WRS was relevant to central speech understanding rather than peripheral audibility. Therefore, administering oral CA could effectively enrich listening comprehension in older HA users.

Psychometric properties of the Kannada version of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA).

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to validate the translated Kannada version of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) questionnaire for hearing aid users. DESIGN: The original (English) and the translated versions of the IOI-HA questionnaire along with the Self-Assessment of Communication (SAC) were self-administered by hearing aid users. To examine test-retest reliability, 50% of the study participants completed the Kannada IOI-HA for a second time approximately 15 days later. The data analyses examined various psychometric properties using a predetermined quality criterion. STUDY SAMPLE: 105 Kannada-English bilingual adults using hearing aids. RESULTS: Factor analysis indicated a two-factor structure that explained a 61.8% variance in the IOI-HA. A Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.7 indicated acceptable internal consistency. Good test-retest reliability (Interclass Correlation Coefficient > 0.9) was obtained for both conditions (i.e. between the original English and translated Kannada versions and also between two different administrations of the Kannada IOI-HA questionnaire). Divergent validity test results were acceptable, and no ceiling or floor effects were noted. Convergent validity testing of the SAC, however, was poor with small correlation, although the direction of correlation (i.e. negative) was as expected. CONCLUSION: Results suggest acceptable psychometric properties of the Kannada version of the IOI-HA questionnaire.

The effects of task difficulty, background noise and noise reduction on recall.

OBJECTIVE: In the present study, we investigated whether varying the task difficulty of the Sentence-Final Word Identification and Recall (SWIR) Test has an effect on the benefit of noise reduction, as well as whether task difficulty predictability affects recall. The relationship between working memory and recall was examined. DESIGN: Task difficulty was manipulated by varying the list length with noise reduction on and off in competing speech and speech-shaped noise. Half of the participants were informed about list length in advance. Working memory capacity was measured using the Reading Span. STUDY SAMPLE: Thirty-two experienced hearing aid users with moderate sensorineural hearing loss. RESULTS: Task difficulty did not affect the noise reduction benefit and task difficulty predictability did not affect recall. Participants may have employed a different recall strategy when task difficulty was unpredictable and noise reduction off. Reading Span scores positively correlated with the SWIR test. Noise reduction improved recall in competing speech. CONCLUSIONS: The SWIR test with varying list length is suitable for detecting the benefit of noise reduction. The correlation with working memory suggests that the SWIR test could be modified to be adaptive to individual cognitive capacity. The results on noise and noise reduction replicate previous findings.

Assessment of Hearing Aid Benefit Using Patient-Reported Outcomes and Audiologic Measures.

PURPOSE: To determine the contributions to hearing aid benefit of patient-reported outcomes and audiologic measures. METHODS: Independent review was conducted on audiologic and patient-reported outcomes of hearing aid benefit collected in the course of a middle ear implant FDA clinical trial. Unaided and aided data were extracted from the preoperative profiles of 95 experienced hearing aid users, and the relationships between a patient-reported outcome and audiologic measures were assessed. The following data were extracted: unaided and aided pure-tone or warble-tone thresholds (PTA), word recognition in quiet (NU-6), Speech Perception in Noise (low-/high-context SPIN), and patient-reported benefit (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, APHAB). Hearing aid benefit was defined as the difference in thresholds or scores between unaided and aided conditions, as measured in the sound field. Correlations were computed among audiologic measures and global APHAB and subscale scores of hearing aid benefit. RESULTS: Significant improvements in all audiologic measures and APHAB scores were observed comparing unaided to aided listening (all p < 0.001). However, correlations between audiologic and patient-reported measures of aided performance or hearing aid benefit were low-to-weak or absent. No significant correlations were found between aided audiologic measures (PTA, NU-6, SPIN) and any aided APHAB scores (all p > 0.0125), and significant relationships for hearing aid benefit were absent with only few exceptions. Hearing aid benefit defined by global APHAB using NU-6 and SPIN scores showed significant but weak positive correlations (r = 0.37, p < 0.001; r = 0.28, p = 0.005, respectively) and ease of communication APHAB subscale scores (r = 0.32, p < 0.001; r = 0.33, p = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Hearing aid benefit assessed with audiologic measures were poor predictors of patient-reported benefit. Thus, patient-reported outcomes may provide a unique assessment of patient-perceived benefit from hearing aids, which can be used to direct hearing aid programming, training, or recommendations of alternative hearing services.

Validation of a Self-Fitting Method for Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids.

In common practice, hearing aids are fitted by a clinician who measures an audiogram and uses it to generate prescriptive gain and output targets. This report describes an alternative method where users select their own signal processing parameters using an interface consisting of two wheels that optimally map to simultaneous control of gain and compression in each frequency band. The real-world performance of this approach was evaluated via a take-home field trial. Participants with hearing loss were fitted using clinical best practices (audiogram, fit to target, real-ear verification, and subsequent fine tuning). Then, in their everyday lives over the course of a month, participants either selected their own parameters using this new interface (Self group; n = 38) or used the parameters selected by the clinician with limited control (Audiologist Best Practices Group; n = 37). On average, the gain selected by the Self group was within 1.8 dB overall and 5.6 dB per band of that selected by the audiologist. Participants in the Self group reported better sound quality than did those in the Audiologist Best Practices group. In blind sound quality comparisons conducted in the field, participants in the Self group slightly preferred the parameters they selected over those selected by the clinician. Finally, there were no differences between groups in terms of standard clinical measures of hearing aid benefit or speech perception in noise. Overall, the results indicate that it is possible for users to select effective amplification parameters by themselves using a simple interface that maps to key hearing aid signal processing parameters.

Randomised controlled feasibility trial of the Active Communication Education programme plus hearing aid provision versus hearing aid provision alone (ACE to HEAR): a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Up to 30% of hearing aids fitted to new adult clients are reported to be of low benefit and used intermittently or not at all. Evidence suggests that additional interventions paired with service-delivery redesign may help improve hearing aid use and benefit. The range of interventions available is limited. In particular, the efficacy of interventions like the Active Communication Education (ACE) programme that focus on improving communication success with hearing-impaired people and significant others, has not previously been assessed. We propose that improved communication outcomes associated with the ACE intervention, lead to an increased perception of hearing aid value and more realistic expectations associated with hearing aid use and ownership, which are reported to be key barriers and facilitators for successful hearing aid use. This study will assess the feasibility of delivering ACE and undertaking a definitive randomised controlled trial to evaluate whether ACE would be a cost-effective and acceptable way of increasing quality of life through improving communication and hearing aid use in a public health service such as the National Health Service. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a randomised controlled, open feasibility trial with embedded economic and process evaluations delivered in audiology departments in two UK cities. We aim to recruit 84 patients (and up to 84 significant others) aged 18 years and over, who report moderate or less than moderate benefit from their new hearing aid. The feasibility of a large-scale study and the acceptability of the ACE intervention will be measured by recruitment rates, treatment retention, follow-up rates and qualitative interviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval granted by South East Coast-Surrey Research Ethics Committee (16/LO/2012). Dissemination of results will be via peer-reviewed research publications both online and in print, conference presentations, posters, patient forums and Trust bulletins. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN28090877.

Sensitivity and specificity of the abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB).

Subjective hearing loss in hearing-impaired patients can be assessed by inventory questionnaires. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB) measures subjective hearing loss in four typical hearing situations (subscales). It is used to fit hearing aids in patients with statutory insurance in Germany. In addition, the unaided APHAB (APHABu) can be used as a primary diagnostic instrument in audiology. There are no published data regarding the sensitivity and specificity of the unaided APHABu. Therefore, we investigated these parameters for detecting hearing loss of at least 25 dB at any frequency between 0.5 and 8.0 kHz. We used the APHABu to determine hearing loss in 245 subjects aged 50 years and older without any reported disease of the ears. Due to incomplete answering of the APHAB form, 55 subjects have been excluded. We also measured the pure-tone thresholds by air conduction for all octave frequencies between 0.5 and 8 kHz. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and the Youden Index were used to determine the diagnostic value of the APHABu, particularly sensitivity and specificity, in three different ways: (1) separately for ease of communication (ECu), background noise (BNu), and hearing with reverberation (RVu) subscales; (2) with the mean value of ECu, BNu, and RVu; and (3) with a logistic regression model. The area under the ROC curve was lower for BN only (0.83) and nearly equal for all other methods (0.87-0.89). Depending on how we performed the analyses, the sensitivity of the APHABu was 0.70-0.84 (single subscales), 0.76 (mean value of ECu, BNu, and RVu), or 0.85 (logistic regression model). The specificity was 0.79-0.95. The use of single APHABu subscales for determining the sensitivity and specificity of the APHABu due to confusing results. In comparison, the use of the mean value of ECu, BNu, and RVu and the use of the logistic regression model due to equal values in the ROC curves but a higher sensitivity in the logistic regression model. Therefore, we would recommend the last method for determining the sensitivity and specificity of the APHABu.

Considerations in the Development of a Sound Tolerance Interview and Questionnaire Instrument.

Most clinicians approach the objective fitting of hearing aids with three goals in mind: audibility, comfort, and tolerance. When these three amplification goals have been met, the hearing aid user is more likely to adapt to and perceive benefit from hearing aid use. However, problems related to the loudness of sounds and reduced sound tolerance, which may or may not be reported by the aided user, can adversely impact adaptation to amplification and the individual's quality of life. Although there are several standardized questionnaires available to evaluate hearing aid benefit and satisfaction, there is no standardized questionnaire or interview tool for evaluating reduced sound tolerance and the related impact on hearing aid use. We describe a 36-item tool, the Sound Tolerance Questionnaire (STQ), consisting of six sections, including experience with hearing aids, sound sensitivity/intolerance, medical and noise exposure histories, coexisting tinnitus problems, and a final question to differentiate the primary and secondary problems related to sound intolerance, tinnitus, and hearing loss. In its current format as a research tool, the STQ was sensitive in pinpointing vague sound tolerance complaints not reported by the study participants in eligibility screening by Formby et al. A refined version of the STQ, the Sound Tolerance Interview and Questionnaire Instrument (STIQI), structured as a two-part tool, is presented in the appendix for prospective clinical use. The STIQI has potential utility to delineate factors contributing to loudness complaints and/or reduced sound tolerance in individuals considering hearing aid use, as well as those who have been unsuccessful hearing aid users secondary to loudness complaints or sound intolerance. The STIQI, when validated and refined, also may hold promise for predicting hearing aid benefit and/or assessing treatment-related change over time of hearing aid use or interventions designed to remediate problems of loudness and/or sound intolerance among hearing aid candidates or users.

A Sound Therapy-Based Intervention to Expand the Auditory Dynamic Range for Loudness among Persons with Sensorineural Hearing Losses: Case Evidence Showcasing Treatment Efficacy.

Case evidence is presented that highlights the clinical relevance and significance of a novel sound therapy-based treatment. This intervention has been shown to be efficacious in a randomized controlled trial for promoting expansion of the dynamic range for loudness and increased sound tolerance among persons with sensorineural hearing losses. Prior to treatment, these individuals were unable to use aided sound effectively because of their limited dynamic ranges. These promising treatment effects are shown in this article to be functionally significant, giving rise to improved speech understanding and enhanced hearing aid benefit and satisfaction, and, in turn, to enhanced quality of life posttreatment. These posttreatment sound therapy effects also are shown to be sustained, in whole or part, with aided environmental sound and to be dependent on specialized counseling to maximize treatment benefit. Importantly, the treatment appears to be efficacious for hearing-impaired persons with primary hyperacusis (i.e., abnormally reduced loudness discomfort levels [LDLs]) and for persons with loudness recruitment (i.e., LDLs within the typical range), which suggests the intervention should generalize across most individuals with reduced dynamic ranges owing to sensorineural hearing loss. An exception presented in this article is for a person describing the perceptual experience of pronounced loudness adaptation, which apparently rendered the sound therapy inaudible and ineffectual for this individual. Ultimately, these case examples showcase the enormous potential of a surprisingly simple sound therapy intervention, which has utility for virtually all audiologists to master and empower the adaptive plasticity of the auditory system to achieve remarkable treatment benefits for large numbers of individuals with sensorineural hearing losses.

Patient satisfaction after auditory implant surgery: ten-year experience from a single implanting unit center.

CONCLUSIONS: The satisfaction rate of the subjects with an auditory implant appears strictly related to the resulting auditory improvement, and the surgical variables would play a prevailing role in respect to the esthetic factors. OBJECTIVES: To assess the rate of satisfaction in subjects who underwent the surgical application of an auditory device at a single Implanting Center Unit. METHOD: A series of validated questionnaires has been administered to subjects who underwent the surgical application of different auditory devices. The Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI), the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) have been used to compare the implanted situation with the hearing-aided one; a percutaneous bone conductive implant (pBCI) with an active middle ear implant (AMEI) on the round window in mixed hearing loss; and an invisible, fully-implantable device with a frankly and bulky semi-implantable device. RESULTS: The mean GBI scores were higher in Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB)® and Bonebridge® subjects, without significant differences among the various devices. The mean VAS score increased for all the devices in comparison with the conventional hearing aid. The mean APHAB score was similarly better in the implanted condition as total and partial scores.

An Exploratory Study Identifying a Possible Response Shift Phenomena of the Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile.

A then-test technique was used to investigate the possibility of a response shift in the Glasgow hearing aid benefit profile (GHABP). Following completion of part 1 of the GHABP, 16 adults were invited for hearing-aid follow up appointments. In accordance with then-test technique, participants were asked to think back to before they had their hearing-aids fitted and the GHABP part 1 was completed again to re-establish the disability and handicap scores. These scores were then compared with the initial GHABP part I scores. Paired T testing and Wilcoxon Rank tests were carried out to investigate the statistical significance of the response shift effect. Statistically significant differences were seen between initial and retrospective GHABP (disability) scores using t test. No significant differences could be seen between the initial and retrospective handicap scores. Results suggest participants may have demonstrated a possible response shift phenomenon with the disability construct of the GHABP questionnaire, related to a possible re-calibration effect or a denial of disability effect. This exploratory study suggests that the GHABP questionnaire may be subject to a response shift phenomena. We suggest that further more robust studies are completed to verify this and recommend that this could have psychological impact on participants when explaining the results of the outcome measure and may affect hearing aid use. There is also potential for this phenomenon to affect global GHABP scores specifically when demonstrating to stakeholders the overall success of an audiology service.

Audiological Profile of Adult Persons with Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorders.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The auditory profile of a large number of persons with late onset auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD) is recently described in the Indian context. The purpose of study was 1) to profile data on routine audiological parameters, cortical evoked potentials, and temporal processing, 2) to analyze the benefit from hearing aids for persons with ANSD, and 3) to understand the association between benefit from hearing aids and auditory profile. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight adults with late onset ANSD and a matched group of 40 normally hearing adults participated in the study. Basic audiological tests, recording of cortical evoked potentials, and temporal processing tests were carried out on both groups of participant while only persons with ANSD were fitted with hearing aid. RESULTS: Subjects in the two groups were significantly different on all the audiological parameters. ANSD group seemed to benefit from hearing aids variably. The mean amplitude of N2 was significantly different between normally-hearing participants and patients with ANSD. CONCLUSIONS: Residual temporal processing, particularly amplitude modulation detection seems to be associated with benefit from hearing aids in patients with ANSD.