Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Telemed J E Health ; 28(9): 1350-1358, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1619838

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Satisfaction with telemedicine is generally high; however, it can lead to communication problems for people with hearing loss (HL), especially when encounters are conducted by telephone, because of the inability to see the face and lips on which many people with HL rely. Despite acknowledgement that HL might affect telemedicine outcomes, no studies have directly examined this. The primary aims of this study were to determine whether and how HL impacts patient satisfaction and willingness to use telemedicine. Methods: Opinions about telemedicine were assessed in a survey of 383 members of the general public. Data regarding reported hearing ability, use of hearing assistive technology, and preferred form of communication (oral/aural vs. sign language) were also collected; people with HL were intentionally oversampled. Survey items included closed set and open-ended responses. Results: People with HL declined the offer of telemedicine appointments, rated telemedicine outcomes significantly less positively, and had stronger preferences for in person care than did people without HL. Explanations provided for this were directly associated with hearing-related difficulties or the indirect consequences of those difficulties. HL resulted in concerns about communication during the appointment, a lack of privacy when an intermediary helped with communication during the appointment, worries that critical information has been misheard/missed, and anxiety/stress. Conclusions: The needs of people with HL during telemedicine encounters must be addressed to ensure equitable access. Health care providers should take responsibility to communicate clearly with people with HL and individuals with HL should be willing to advocate for their needs and use special access tools during telemedicine appointments.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss , Telemedicine , Communication , Hearing Loss/therapy , Hearing Tests/methods , Humans , Patient Satisfaction
2.
Front Public Health ; 10: 815259, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1855457

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Face coverings and distancing as preventative measures against the spread of the Coronavirus disease 2019 may impact communication in several ways that may disproportionately affect people with hearing loss. A scoping review was conducted to examine existing literature on the impact of preventative measures on communication and to characterize the clinical implications. Method: A systematic search of three electronic databases (Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL) was conducted yielding 2,158 articles. After removing duplicates and screening to determine inclusion eligibility, key data were extracted from the 50 included articles. Findings are reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews, including the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Results: Studies fell into three categories: Studies addressing the impacts of personal protective equipment (PPE) and/or distancing on communication in healthcare contexts (n = 20); studies examining the impact of preventative measures on communication in everyday life (n = 13), and studies measuring the impact of face coverings on speech using acoustic and/or behavioral measures (n = 29). The review revealed that masks disrupt verbal and non-verbal communication, as well as emotional and social wellbeing and they impact people with hearing loss more than those without. These findings are presumably because opaque masks attenuate sound at frequencies above 1 kHz, and conceal the mouth and lips making lipreading impossible, and limit visibility of facial expressions. While surgical masks cause relatively little sound attenuation, transparent masks and face shields are highly attenuating. However, they are preferred by people with hearing loss because they give access to visual cues. Conclusion: Face coverings and social distancing has detrimental effects that extend well beyond verbal and non-verbal communication, by affecting wellbeing and quality of life. As these measures will likely be part of everyday life for the foreseeable future, we propose that it is necessary to support effective communication, especially in healthcare settings and for people with hearing loss.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communication , Humans , Masks , Quality of Life , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Frontiers in public health ; 10, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1782127

ABSTRACT

Introduction Face coverings and distancing as preventative measures against the spread of the Coronavirus disease 2019 may impact communication in several ways that may disproportionately affect people with hearing loss. A scoping review was conducted to examine existing literature on the impact of preventative measures on communication and to characterize the clinical implications. Method A systematic search of three electronic databases (Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL) was conducted yielding 2,158 articles. After removing duplicates and screening to determine inclusion eligibility, key data were extracted from the 50 included articles. Findings are reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews, including the PRISMA-ScR checklist. Results Studies fell into three categories: Studies addressing the impacts of personal protective equipment (PPE) and/or distancing on communication in healthcare contexts (n = 20);studies examining the impact of preventative measures on communication in everyday life (n = 13), and studies measuring the impact of face coverings on speech using acoustic and/or behavioral measures (n = 29). The review revealed that masks disrupt verbal and non-verbal communication, as well as emotional and social wellbeing and they impact people with hearing loss more than those without. These findings are presumably because opaque masks attenuate sound at frequencies above 1 kHz, and conceal the mouth and lips making lipreading impossible, and limit visibility of facial expressions. While surgical masks cause relatively little sound attenuation, transparent masks and face shields are highly attenuating. However, they are preferred by people with hearing loss because they give access to visual cues. Conclusion Face coverings and social distancing has detrimental effects that extend well beyond verbal and non-verbal communication, by affecting wellbeing and quality of life. As these measures will likely be part of everyday life for the foreseeable future, we propose that it is necessary to support effective communication, especially in healthcare settings and for people with hearing loss.

4.
Frontiers in public health ; 10, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1738395

ABSTRACT

There are reports of associations between SARS-CoV2, COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccines, and auditory symptoms (hearing difficulty, tinnitus). However, most studies have relied on self-report and lack baseline and/or non-COVID control groups. This makes it problematic to differentiate if symptoms are associated with SARS-CoV2, COVID-19, the vaccine, psychosocial factors or recall bias. In this study, we differentiate these by comparing hearing and tinnitus survey data collected pre- and during the pandemic. The survey conducted during the pandemic asked about the onset and change in three types of symptom. Type One—known association (loss of smell, memory/concentration issues, persistent fatigue), Type Two—indeterminate association (auditory symptoms), and Type Three—no established association with COVID-19 (toothache). We hypothesized that if auditory symptoms are directly associated with COVID-19, their onset and change would be similar to Type One symptoms, but if indirectly associated (reflecting psychosocial factors and/or recall bias) would be more similar to Type Three symptoms. Of the 6,881 individuals who responded, 6% reported confirmed COVID-19 (positive test), 11% probably had COVID-19, and 83% reported no COVID-19. Those with confirmed or probable COVID-19 more commonly reported new and/or worsened auditory symptoms than those not reporting COVID-19. However, this does not imply causality because: (1) new auditory symptoms coincided with COVID-19 illness among just 1/3 of those with confirmed or probable COVID-19, and another 1/3 said their symptoms started before the pandemic—despite reporting no symptoms in the pre-pandemic survey. (2) >60% of individuals who had COVID-19 said it had affected their Type 3 symptoms, despite a lack of evidence linking the two. (3) Those with confirmed COVID-19 reported more Type 1 symptoms, but reporting of Type 2 and Type 3 symptoms did not differ between those with confirmed COVID-19 and those without COVID-19, while those who probably had COVID-19 most commonly reported these symptom types. Despite more reports of auditory symptoms in confirmed or probable COVID-19, there is inconsistent reporting, recall bias, and possible nocebo effects. Studies that include appropriate control groups and use audiometric measures in addition to self-report to investigate change in auditory symptoms relative to pre-COVID-19 are urgently needed.

5.
Int J Audiol ; 60(7): 495-506, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-947618

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To understand the impact of face coverings on hearing and communication. DESIGN: An online survey consisting of closed-set and open-ended questions distributed within the UK to gain insights into experiences of interactions involving face coverings, and of the impact of face coverings on communication. SAMPLE: Four hundred and sixty members of the general public were recruited via snowball sampling. People with hearing loss were intentionally oversampled to more thoroughly assess the effect of face coverings in this group. RESULTS: With few exceptions, participants reported that face coverings negatively impacted hearing, understanding, engagement, and feelings of connection with the speaker. Impacts were greatest when communicating in medical situations. People with hearing loss were significantly more impacted than those without hearing loss. Face coverings impacted communication content, interpersonal connectedness, and willingness to engage in conversation; they increased anxiety and stress, and made communication fatiguing, frustrating and embarrassing - both as a speaker wearing a face covering, and when listening to someone else who is wearing one. CONCLUSIONS: Face coverings have far-reaching impacts on communication for everyone, but especially for people with hearing loss. These findings illustrate the need for communication-friendly face-coverings, and emphasise the need to be communication-aware when wearing a face covering.


Subject(s)
Auditory Perception , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communication Barriers , Hearing Disorders/psychology , Lipreading , Masks , Persons With Hearing Impairments/psychology , COVID-19/transmission , Cues , Facial Expression , Hearing , Hearing Disorders/diagnosis , Hearing Disorders/physiopathology , Humans , Social Behavior , Visual Perception
6.
Int J Audiol ; 60(4): 255-262, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-752313

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To document changes in audiology practice resulting from COVID-19 restrictions and to assess audiologists' opinions about teleaudiology. DESIGN: A survey consisting of closed-set and open-ended questions that assessed working practices during the COVID-19 restrictions and audiologists' attitudes towards teleaudiology. SAMPLE: About 120 audiologists in the UK recruited via snowball sampling through social media and emails. RESULTS: About 30% of respondents said they had used teleaudiology prior to COVID-19 restrictions; 98% had done at the time of survey completion, and 86% said they would continue to do so even when restrictions are lifted. Reasons for prior non-use of teleaudiology were associated with clinical limitations/needs, available infrastructure and patient preferences. Respondents believe teleaudiology will improve travel, convenience, flexibility and scheduling, that it will have little/no impact on satisfaction and quality of care, but that it will negatively impact personal interactions. Concerns about teleaudiology focussed on communication, inability to conduct some clinical procedures and technology. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents' experience with teleaudiology has generally been positive however improvements to infrastructure and training are necessary, and because many procedures must be conducted in-person, it will always be necessary to have hybrid-care pathways available.


Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Audiologists/psychology , Audiology/trends , COVID-19 , Telemedicine/trends , Adult , Female , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , United Kingdom
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL