"Is this a new dawn for accessibility?" A qualitative interview study assessing teleworking experiences in adults with physical disabilities post COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: While employers plan how to restructure working practices after the initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential that the disability community are represented in research addressing telework; their expertise is invaluable for ensuring equity from the outset. OBJECTIVE: The current study qualitatively investigated how people with physical disabilities negotiate telework in a post-COVID era. METHODS: Ten participants with a range of physical disabilities were recruited and interviewed. Themes were generated from the data utilising an established method of reflexive inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Increased flexibility as well as control over work schedules and the environment facilitated by teleworking, improved participants' disability management, health, work performance, and personal opportunities. However, the importance of choice to work in-office, of implementing additional physical and virtual work adjustments, and of flexible work patterns to remove barriers to accessibility when homeworking was emphasised. Active efforts by employers to create an inclusive and flexible work culture were identified as crucial to ensure that integration and professional development of employees with disabilities, understanding of disability experience, and normalisation of accessibility needs are not diminished by the decreased visibility incurred by teleworking. CONCLUSION: Teleworking is not a panacea for resolving the disability employment disadvantage. Rather, teleworking could be a springboard upon which further flexibility and choice can be built to shift organisational practices to better accommodate individual employees, with and without disabilities, post-COVID. It is imperative to act on such insights to create accessible workplaces to facilitate more inclusive workforces.

The impact of presentation modality on cognitive test performance for adults with hearing loss.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing body of evidence demonstrating hearing loss in middle-aged and older adults is independently associated with an increased risk of developing cognitive-decline and dementia. Verbal memory is one of the most common functions to decline early in Alzheimer's disease, the most common form of dementia Whilst the exact mechanisms underlying this association remain unclear, poorer test performance may reflect an overarching sensory deficit, as, for instance, most verbal memory tests are predominantly delivered auditorily. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate whether different modes of presentation (i.e., visual, or auditory) influence verbal memory screening test performance in those who failed a hearing screener. METHOD: The study was conducted via online video-conferencing due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants (N= 63) completed a validated hearing screener, which was a digit-in-noise test delivered via the hearWHO smartphone application. Three cognitive tests were also administered: (1) the Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS-M), presented auditorily; (2) the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT), presented visually; and (3) a verbal fluency task as a control. All tests have been used as dementia screening tests. RESULT: Separate ANCOVAs revealed that, when controlling for age, gender, and education level, adults who failed the hearing screener performed more poorly on the TICS-M compared to individuals who passed (p<.001). No differences between hearing groups were found for the other cognitive tests administered (p≥ .132). CONCLUSION: This study provides support for the notion that the presentation mode of cognitive tests may account for some of the deficits observed in older adults with hearing loss. As such, researchers and clinicians should be mindful of the sensory deficits experienced by individuals when interpreting cognitive test performance, to avoid the overestimation of cognitive deficits and dementia in adults with hearing loss.

Investigating tinnitus subgroups based on hearing-related difficulties.

PURPOSE: Meaningfully grouping individuals with tinnitus who share a common characteristics (ie, subgrouping, phenotyping) may help tailor interventions to certain tinnitus subgroups and hence reduce outcome variability. The purpose of this study was to test if the presence of tinnitus subgroups are discernible based on hearing-related comorbidities, and to identify predictors of tinnitus severity for each subgroup identified. METHODS: An exploratory cross-sectional study was used. The study was nested within an online survey distributed worldwide to investigate tinnitus experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. The main outcome measure was the tinnitus Handicap Inventory- Screening Version. RESULTS: From the 3400 respondents, 2980 were eligible adults with tinnitus with an average age of 58 years (SD = 14.7) and 49% (n = 1457) being female. A three-cluster solution identified distinct subgroups, namely, those with tinnitus-only (n = 1306; 44%), those presenting with tinnitus, hyperacusis, hearing loss and/or misophonia (n = 795; 27%), and those with tinnitus and hearing loss (n = 879; 29%). Those with tinnitus and hyperacusis reported the highest tinnitus severity (M = 20.3; SD = 10.5) and those with tinnitus and no hearing loss had the lowest tinnitus severity (M = 15.7; SD = 10.4). Younger age and the presence of mental health problems predicted greater tinnitus severity for all groups (ß ≤ -0.1, P ≤ .016). CONCLUSION: Further exploration of these potential subtypes are needed in both further research and clinical practice by initially triaging tinnitus patients prior to their clinical appointments based on the presence of hearing-related comorbidities. Unique management pathways and interventions could be tailored for each tinnitus subgroup.

Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: Smartphone-Connected Listening Devices.

In this article, we review the current literature assessing the application and benefits of connected hearing technologies, as well as their potential to improve accessibility to and affordability of hearing healthcare. Over the past decade, there has been a proliferation of hearing devices that connect wirelessly to smartphone technologies via Bluetooth. These devices include (1) smartphone-connected hearing aids that must be obtained from a licensed audiologist or hearing aid dispenser; (2) direct-to-consumer devices, such as personal sound amplification products; and (3) smartphone-based hearing aid applications (or apps). Common to all these connected devices is that they permit the user to self-adjust and customize their device programs via an accompanying smartphone app. There has been a growing body of literature assessing connected hearing devices in adults living with hearing loss. Overall, the evidence to date supports the notion that all connected hearing devices can improve accessibility to and affordability of amplification. It is unclear, however, whether connected technologies are a clinically effective alternative to traditional hearing aids. Even so, the impact of connectivity is especially pertinent given the sudden disruption caused by the recent global COVID-19 pandemic, whereby connected technologies enable patients to receive treatment through mobile-based, tele-audiology platforms.