Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Int J Audiol ; : 1-12, 2023 Nov 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37991050

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the main reasons for hearing aid uptake from a user perspective and recommendations to others with hearing difficulties. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey design was used. Responses to a single open-ended question were analysed using qualitative content analysis. STUDY SAMPLE: Participants (n = 642) included adult hearing aid users sampled from the Hearing Tracker website community and Lexie Hearing user databases in the United States. RESULTS: Participants had a mean age of 65.4 years (13.7 SD) and included 61.8% males, 37.7% females, 0.3% non-binary, and 0.2% preferred not to say. Reasons for hearing aid uptake were categorised into three domains (personal impact, social difficulties, and auditory difficulties), containing 11 main categories and 48 sub-categories. User recommendations to others with hearing difficulties constituted eight main categories (timely help, trial period, support, affordability, technology, direct-to-consumer hearing aids, adjustments, and advocacy) and 32 sub-categories. CONCLUSIONS: The decision to take up hearing aids included intrinsic factors like readiness to change and extrinsic factors such as the availability of finances. The most frequent recommendation to others was not to delay seeking hearing help and to get hearing aids. Our findings may support strategies to facilitate behaviour change for improved hearing aid uptake.

2.
Int J Audiol ; : 1-14, 2023 Nov 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37962300

ABSTRACT

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.

3.
Trends Hear ; 27: 23312165231157255, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36798964

ABSTRACT

This systematic review examined the audiological and nonaudiological factors that influence hearing help-seeking and hearing aid uptake in adults with hearing loss based on the literature published during the last decade. Peer-reviewed articles published between January 2011 and February 2022 were identified through systematic searches in electronic databases CINAHL, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE. The review was conducted and reported according to the PRISMA protocol. Forty-two articles met the inclusion criteria. Seventy (42 audiological and 28 nonaudiological) hearing help-seeking factors and 159 (93 audiological and 66 nonaudiological) hearing aid uptake factors were investigated with many factors reported only once (10/70 and 62/159, respectively). Hearing aid uptake had some strong predictors (e.g., hearing sensitivity) with others showing conflicting results (e.g., self-reported health). Hearing help-seeking had clear nonpredictive factors (e.g., education) and conflicting factors (e.g., self-reported health). New factors included cognitive anxiety associated with increased help-seeking and hearing aid uptake and urban residency and access to financial support with hearing aid uptake. Most studies were rated as having a low level of evidence (67%) and fair quality (86%). Effective promotion of hearing help-seeking requires more research evidence. Investigating factors with conflicting results and limited evidence is important to clarify what factors support help-seeking and hearing aid uptake in adults with hearing loss. These findings can inform future research and hearing health promotion and rehabilitation practices.


Subject(s)
Deafness , Hearing Aids , Hearing Loss , Humans , Adult , Hearing Aids/psychology , Hearing , Hearing Loss/diagnosis , Hearing Loss/therapy , Hearing Loss/psychology
4.
Ear Hear ; 42(5): 1173-1182, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33974781

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: More than a billion adolescents and youngsters are estimated to be at risk of acquiring recreational noise-induced hearing loss (RNIHL) due to the unsafe use of personal audio systems. RNIHL is preventable; therefore, the present study aimed to determine (i) the accuracy and reliability of dbTrack (Westone) sound-level monitoring earphones and (ii) the effect of sound-level monitoring earphones with smartphone feedback and hearing-health information as an intervention to promote healthy listening behaviors in young adults. DESIGN: The study consisted of two phases: the first phase investigated the accuracy and reliability of dbTrack sound-level monitoring earphones. Accuracy was determined by comparing earphone measurements to sound level meter measurements. Intradevice reliability was determined by comparing earphone measurements during test-retest conditions. Nineteen participants were recruited through convenience sampling to determine within-subject reliability by comparing in-ear sound levels measured by the earphones during test-retest conditions. For the second phase of the study, a single-group pretest-posttest design was utilized. Forty participants, recruited through snowball sampling, utilized the sound-level monitoring earphones with the accompanying dbTrack smartphone application for 4 weeks. The application's smartphone feedback was disabled during the first 2 weeks (pretest condition) and enabled during the last 2 weeks (posttest condition). Average daily intensities, durations, and sound dosages measured during pre- and posttest conditions were compared. RESULTS: Phase 1 dbTrack earphone measurements were within 1 dB when compared with sound level meter measurements. Earphones were also within 1 dB in repeated measures across earphones and across participants. Phase 2 posttest average daily intensity decreased by 8.7 dB (18.3 SD), duration decreased by 7.6 minutes (46.6 SD), and sound dose decreased by 4128.4% (24965.5% SD). Differences in intensity and sound dose were significantly lower with a small and medium effect size, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study's preliminary data indicate that dbTrack (Westone) sound-level monitoring earphones with a calibrated in-ear microphone can reliably and accurately measure personal audio systems sound exposure. Preliminary results also suggest that feedback on sound exposure using the accurate sound-level monitoring earphones with the accompanying dbTrack application can potentially promote safe listening behavior in young adults and reduce the risk of acquiring an RNIHL.


Subject(s)
Auditory Perception , Smartphone , Adolescent , Feedback , Hearing , Humans , Reproducibility of Results , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...