Hearing help-seeking, hearing device uptake and hearing health outcomes in individuals with subclinical hearing loss: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to examine the current literature on help-seeking, hearing device uptake, and hearing health outcomes in individuals with subclinical hearing loss. DESIGN: Systematic review. STUDY SAMPLE: Searches of three databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE (PubMed), and Scopus) yielded nine studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The quality of the included studies was determined using the National Institute of Health quality assessment tool. The studies' level of evidence was determined according to the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. RESULTS: All included studies involved adult participants. Three studies examined help-seeking. Self-reported difficulty, poor speech-in-noise performance, and emotional responses to the hearing difficulty were identified as factors influencing help-seeking. Six studies examined the use of hearing devices as an intervention, including hearing aids (n = 4), hearables (n = 1), and FM systems (n = 1). Using hearing devices improved self-perceived hearing difficulty, speech-in-noise understanding, and motivation to address hearing difficulties. No studies focused on hearing device uptake. The quality assessment indicated limited methodological rigour across the studies, with varying levels of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence supports the use of hearing devices as an intervention for individuals with subclinical hearing loss. However, more research is essential, particularly focusing on help-seeking, diagnosis, treatment, and long-term outcomes using well-controlled study designs.

Reasons for hearing aid uptake in the United States: a qualitative analysis of open-text responses from a large-scale survey of user-perspectives.

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.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Hearing Aid Benefit and Satisfaction: Content Validity and Readability.

PURPOSE: Numerous patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are available to measure hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. It is unclear to what extent currently available PROMs on hearing aid outcomes, often developed decades ago, meet current guidelines for good content validity and readability. This study evaluated the content validity and readability of PROMs that focus on perceived hearing aid benefit and/or satisfaction. METHOD: A literature review was conducted to identify eligible instruments. Content validity evaluation included mapping extracted questionnaire items to the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework. In addition, study design in content validity methodology was evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments study design checklist for PROM instruments. Readability was estimated using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook measure. RESULTS: Thirteen questionnaires were identified and evaluated. Item content focused primarily on the components of environmental factors as well as activity limitations and participation restrictions with less emphasis on body functions and personal factors. The content validity methodology analysis revealed an underuse or lack of reporting of a qualitative methodology in assessing patient and professional perspectives. All the included questionnaires exceeded the recommended sixth-grade reading level. CONCLUSIONS: The categories covered by hearing aid PROMs vary considerably, with no single instrument comprehensively covering all the key ICF components. Future development of hearing aid outcome measures should consider a mixed methodology approach for improved content validity and ensure an appropriate reading level.

Dual-Task Paradigm Measures of Listening Effort: To Include or Not to Include Secondary Task Responses with Incorrect Primary Task Responses.

Response time-based dual-task paradigms are commonly adopted to measure behavioral listening effort. Most extant studies used an all-response approach that included secondary task responses under both correct and incorrect primary task responses during analysis. However, evidence supporting this strategy is limited. Therefore, the current study investigated the potential differences between including all responses versus only including correct responses. Data from two previous studies were reanalyzed. Experiment 1 included 16 listeners and used a dual-task paradigm to examine the effect of introducing background noise on listening effort. Experiment 2 included 19 participants and used a different dual-task paradigm to examine the effect of reverberation and loudspeaker-to-listener distance on listening effort. ANOVA results obtained using both analysis approaches were compared. The all-response and correct-only approaches revealed similar results. However, larger effect sizes and an additional main effect were found with the all-response approach. The current study supports the use of an all-response approach due to its greater sensitivity to changes in behavioral listening effort. However, a correct-only approach could be utilized to suit specific study purposes.

Real-life and real-time hearing aid experiences: Insights from self-initiated ecological momentary assessments and natural language analysis.

Introduction: Smartphone technology can provide an effective means to bring real-life and (near-)real-time feedback from hearing aid wearers into the clinic. Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) encourages listeners to report on their experiences during or shortly after they take place in order to minimize recall bias, e.g., guided by surveys in a mobile application. Allowing listeners to describe experiences in their own words, further, ensures that answers are independent of predefined jargon or of how survey questions are formulated. Through these means, one can obtain ecologically valid sets of data, for instance during a hearing aid trial, which can support clinicians to assess the needs of their clients, provide directions for fine-tuning, and counselling. At a larger scale, such datasets would facilitate training of machine learning algorithms that could help hearing technology to anticipate user needs. Methods: In this retrospective, exploratory analysis of a clinical data set, we performed a cluster analysis on 8,793 open-text statements, which were collected through self-initiated EMAs, provided by 2,301 hearing aid wearers as part of their hearing care. Our aim was to explore how listeners describe their daily life experiences with hearing technology in (near-)real-time, in their own words, by identifying emerging themes in the reports. We also explored whether identified themes correlated with the nature of the experiences, i.e., self-reported satisfaction ratings indicating a positive or negative experience. Results: Results showed that close to 60% of listeners' reports related to speech intelligibility in challenging situations and sound quality dimensions, and tended to be valued as positive experiences. In comparison, close to 40% of reports related to hearing aid management, and tended to be valued as negative experiences. Discussion: This first report of open-text statements, collected through self-initiated EMAs as part of clinical practice, shows that, while EMA can come with a participant burden, at least a subsample of motivated hearing aid wearers could use these novel tools to provide feedback to inform more responsive, personalized, and family-centered hearing care.

Comparing Hearing Aid Outcomes in Adults Using Over-the-Counter and Hearing Care Professional Service Delivery Models.

PURPOSE: More affordable hearing aids are now available due to over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aid regulations. Although laboratory studies have validated many OTC hearing technologies, there are limited real-world benefit studies. This study compared hearing aid outcomes reported by clients from OTC and conventional hearing care professional (HCP) service delivery models. METHOD: An ecological, cross-sectional survey design was employed. An online survey was sent to the Hearing Tracker user and OTC Lexie hearing aid user databases. Moreover, 656 hearing aid users completed the survey-406 through conventional HCP services (M age = 66.7 ± 13.0 years) and 250 through the OTC model (M age = 63.7 ± 12.2 years). Self-reported hearing aid benefit and satisfaction were measured with the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids outcome tool. RESULTS: No significant difference for overall hearing aid outcomes between HCP and OTC users was evident using regression analyses, controlling for age, gender, duration of hearing loss, duration before hearing aid purchase, self-reported hearing difficulty, and unilateral versus bilateral fitting. For the "daily use" domain, HCP clients reported significantly longer hours of daily use. For the "residual activity limitations" domain, OTC hearing aid users reported significantly less difficulty hearing in situations where they most wanted to hear better. CONCLUSIONS: OTC hearing aid outcomes could complement and provide similar satisfaction and benefit to HCP models for adults. Service delivery aspects such as self-fitting, acclimatization programs, remote support, behavioral incentivization, and payment options should be investigated for their potential role in OTC hearing aid outcomes. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.22134788.

Combined hearing and vision screening programs: A scoping review.

Background and aim: The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 1.5 billion and 2.2 billion people have hearing and vision impairment, respectively. The burden of these non-communicable diseases is highest in low- and middle-income countries due to a lack of services and health professionals. The WHO has recommended universal health coverage and integrated service delivery to improve ear and eye care services. This scoping review describes the evidence for combined hearing and vision screening programs. Method: A keyword search of three electronic databases, namely Scopus, MEDLINE (PubMed), and Web of Science, was conducted, resulting in 219 results. After removing duplicates and screening based on eligibility criteria, data were extracted from 19 included studies. The Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer Manual and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyzes (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews were followed. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Results: Most studies (63.2%) were from high-income countries, with 31.6% from middle-income and 5.2% from low-income countries. The majority of studies (78.9%) involved children and the four studies reporting on adults all included adults above 50 years of age. Vision screening was most commonly performed with the "Tumbling E" and "Snellen Chart," while hearing was typically screened using pure tone audiometry. Studies reported referral rates as the most common outcome with sensitivity and specificity rates not reported in any included articles. Reported benefits of combined vision and hearing screenings included earlier detection of vision and hearing difficulties to support functioning and quality of life as well as resource sharing for reduced costs. Challenges to combined screening included ineffective follow-up systems, management of test equipment, and monitoring of screening personnel. Conclusions: There is limited research evidence for combined hearing and vision screening programs. Although potential benefits are demonstrated, especially for mHealth-supported programs in communities, more feasibility and implementation research are required, particularly in low- and middle-income countries and across all age groups. Developing universal, standardized reporting guidelines for combined sensory screening programs is recommended to enhance the standardization and effectiveness of combined sensory screening programs.

Hearing aid Experiences of Adult Hearing aid Owners During and After Fitting: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.

There has been an increasing number of qualitative studies exploring the experiences and perceptions of adult hearing aid owners throughout their hearing aid journey. As these studies and reported experiences vary greatly, a systematic review was conducted to identify and synthesize the key concepts in adult hearing aid owners' experiences during and after fitting. A systematic search of three electronic databases was conducted, yielding 443 results. Articles were evaluated for inclusion based on pre-determined eligibility criteria, including conventional, smartphone-connected, and direct-to-consumer hearing devices. Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. The quality of the included articles was evaluated using the Rating of Qualitative Research scale. Guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) were followed. A narrative synthesis was conducted, and studies were grouped into three main domains, namely experiences of owners related to a) hearing aid adoption and fitting (n = 3), b) hearing aid use (n = 20), and c) hearing aid sub-optimal use (n = 25). Hearing aid owners mainly reported on how their attitude towards hearing aids affected experiences during the fitting stage. Improved psychosocial functioning was the most prevalent perceived benefit of hearing aid use. Owners described sub-optimal use in terms of hearing device-related and non-device-related concepts. The COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation-behavior) model is used to discuss specific service-delivery, hearing-device, and hearing-aid-owner related concepts and clinical implications, including behavior change techniques to enhance understanding of the concepts that hearing aid owners perceive as essential to improve hearing aid experiences.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Virus (COVID-19) Preventative Measures on Communication: A Scoping Review.

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.

Listening Effort in School-Age Children With Normal Hearing Compared to Children With Limited Useable Hearing Unilaterally.

Objectives Children with limited hearing unilaterally might experience more listening effort than children with normal hearing, yet previous studies have not confirmed this. This study compared listening effort in school-age children with normal hearing and children with limited hearing unilaterally using behavioral and subjective listening effort measures. Design Two groups of school-age children (aged 7-12 years) participated: 19 with limited hearing unilaterally and 18 with normal hearing bilaterally. Participants completed digit triplet recognition tasks in quiet and in noise (-12 dB SNR) in three loudspeaker conditions: midline, direct, and indirect. Verbal response times during the recognition task were interpreted as behavioral listening effort. Subjective ratings of "task difficulty" and "hard to think" were interpreted as subjective listening effort. Participant age was included as a covariate in analysis of behavioral data. Results Noise negatively affected digit triplet recognition for both groups in the midline loudspeaker condition and for participants with limited hearing unilaterally in the direct and indirect conditions. Relative to their peers with normal hearing, children with limited hearing unilaterally exhibited significantly longer response times and higher ratings of effort only in the noisy, indirect condition. Differences between groups were evident even when age differences were controlled for statistically. Conclusions Using behavioral and subjective indices of listening effort, children with limited unilateral hearing demonstrated significantly more listening effort relative to their peers with normal hearing during the difficult indirect listening condition. Implications include classroom accommodations to limit indirect listening situations for children with limited useable hearing unilaterally and consideration of intervention options.

Listening Effort in School-Aged Children With Limited Useable Hearing Unilaterally: Examining the Effects of a Personal, Digital Remote Microphone System and a Contralateral Routing of Signal System.

Technology options for children with limited hearing unilaterally that improve the signal-to-noise ratio are expected to improve speech recognition and also reduce listening effort in challenging listening situations, although previous studies have not confirmed this. Employing behavioral and subjective indices of listening effort, this study aimed to evaluate the effects of two intervention options, remote microphone system (RMS) and contralateral routing of signal (CROS) system, in school-aged children with limited hearing unilaterally. Nineteen children (aged 7-12 years) with limited hearing unilaterally completed a digit triplet recognition task in three loudspeaker conditions: midline, monaural direct, and monaural indirect with three intervention options: unaided, RMS, and CROS system. Verbal response times were interpreted as a behavioral measure of listening effort. Participants provided subjective ratings immediately following behavioral measures. The RMS significantly improved digit triplet recognition across loudspeaker conditions and reduced verbal response times in the midline and indirect conditions. The CROS system improved speech recognition and listening effort only in the indirect condition. Subjective ratings analyses revealed that significantly more participants indicated that the remote microphone made it easier for them to listen and to stay motivated. Behavioral and subjective indices of listening effort indicated that an RMS provided the most consistent benefit for speech recognition and listening effort for children with limited unilateral hearing. RMSs could therefore be a beneficial technology option in classrooms for children with limited hearing unilaterally.

Listening Effort in Native and Nonnative English-Speaking Children Using Low Linguistic Single- and Dual-Task Paradigms.

Purpose It is not clear if behavioral indices of listening effort are sensitive to changes in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for young children (7-12 years old) from multilingual backgrounds. The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of SNR on listening effort in multilingual school-aged children (native English, nonnative English) as measured with a single- and a dual-task paradigm with low-linguistic speech stimuli (digits). The study also aimed to explore age effects on digit triplet recognition and response times (RTs). Method Sixty children with normal hearing participated, 30 per language group. Participants completed single and dual tasks in three SNRs (quiet, -10 dB, and -15 dB). Speech stimuli for both tasks were digit triplets. Verbal RTs were the listening effort measure during the single-task paradigm. A visual monitoring task was the secondary task during the dual-task paradigm. Results Significant effects of SNR on RTs were evident during both single- and dual-task paradigms. As expected, language background did not affect the pattern of RTs. The data also demonstrate a maturation effect for triplet recognition during both tasks and for RTs during the dual-task only. Conclusions Both single- and dual-task paradigms were sensitive to changes in SNR for school-aged children between 7 and 12 years of age. Language background (English as native language vs. English as nonnative language) had no significant effect on triplet recognition or RTs, demonstrating practical utility of low-linguistic stimuli for testing children from multilingual backgrounds.

Speech-perception-in-noise and bilateral spatial abilities in adults with delayed sequential cochlear implant.

OBJECTIVE: To determine speech-perception-in-noise (with speech and noise spatially distinct and coincident) and bilateral spatial benefits of head-shadow effect, summation, squelch and spatial release of masking in adults with delayed sequential cochlear implants. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional one group post-test-only exploratory design was employed. Eleven adults (mean age 47 years; range 21-69 years) of the Pretoria Cochlear Implant Programme (PCIP) in South Africa with a bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss were recruited. Prerecorded Everyday Speech Sentences of The Central Institute for the Deaf (CID) were used to evaluate participants' speech-in-noise perception at sentence level. An adaptive procedure was used to determine the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR, in dB) at which the participant's speech reception threshold (SRT) was achieved. Specific calculations were used to estimate bilateral spatial benefit effects. RESULTS: A minimal bilateral benefit for speech-in-noise perception was observed with noise directed to the first implant (CI 1) (1.69 dB) and in the speech and noise spatial listening condition (0.78 dB), but was not statistically significant. The head-shadow effect at 180 degrees was the most robust bilateral spatial benefit. An improvement in speech perception in spatially distinct speech and noise indicates the contribution of the second implant (CI 2) is greater than that of the first implant (CI 1) for bilateral spatial benefit. CONCLUSION: Bilateral benefit for delayed sequentially implanted adults is less than previously reported for simultaneous and sequentially implanted adults. Delayed sequential implantation benefit seems to relate to the availability of the ear with the most favourable SNR.