Consumer Survey on Hearing Aid Benefit and Satisfaction.

PURPOSE: There is unexplained variability in self-reported hearing aid outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate determinants of hearing aid benefit and satisfaction ratings using a large-scale customer survey and to analyze the relation between demographic variables, hearing aid attributes, benefit, and satisfaction. METHOD: The study used a retrospective design wherein 2,109 hearing aid users, recruited by Hearing Tracker and Hearing Loss Association of America, completed an online survey. The survey included questions about demographics, perceived hearing loss, devices, service delivery, cost, benefit, and satisfaction. The analytic approach included descriptive summaries and regression models to evaluate potential determinants of hearing aid benefit and satisfaction ratings. RESULTS: Hearing aid sound quality, fit and comfort, and battery life were related to both benefit and satisfaction. Respondents who rated these outcomes favorably were also likely to benefit from, and be satisfied with, their hearing aids. Benefit was also related to degree of hearing loss, hearing aid experience, and cost. Hearing aid users with greater self-perceived hearing loss, more hearing aid experience, and more expensive hearing aids reported more benefit. Satisfaction was also related to age, employment status, and brand. Younger respondents, those who were students, and those using certain brands reported more satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight importance of good hearing aid outcomes (quality, fit/comfort, and battery life) for benefit and satisfaction ratings. Professionals who fit hearing aids should strive to focus on achieving these outcomes and researchers should strive to explain the remaining variability in ratings of benefit and satisfaction. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.22280854.

Hearing Healthcare Professionals' Views about Over-The-Counter (OTC) Hearing Aids: Analysis of Retrospective Survey Data.

Over-the-counter hearing aids have been available to consumers in the US since 17 October 2022 following a ruling by the Food and Drug Administration. However, their reception by hearing healthcare professionals (HHP) has been mixed, and concerns have been expressed by many HHPs. The aim of this study was to examine the concerns that HHPs have towards over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids. The study used a retrospective survey design. The survey data of HHPs (n = 730) was obtained from Hearing Tracker. A 22-item structured questionnaire was administered using a Question Scout platform. Descriptive analyses examined reported areas of concern and a Fisher's exact test examined the relationship between demographics and responses. A cluster analysis with partitioning around medoids (PAM) was used to identify a sub-group of participants based on responses. Nearly half of HHPs who participated reported that they will support patients with OTC hearing aids purchased elsewhere, whereas a quarter reported that they will sell OTC hearing aids in their clinic or website. HHPs expressed over 70% agreement in 'concern' statements in 14 of the 17 items. Issues about safety, counseling, and audiological care were the key concerns expressed by HHPs about OTC hearing aids. Some demographics (i.e., profession, primary position) were associated with responses to some statements. Two groups were identified based on the responses to concern statements. The HHPs in the first cluster 'OTC averse' (51%) agreed on all the 17 concern statements, whereas the second cluster 'OTC apprehensive' (49%) had some items rated as disagree (i.e., consumers will give up on amplification) and neither agree nor disagree (i.e., do not provide good value, warranties and return periods will be worse), and remaining items were rated as agree. OTC hearing aids were initiated to improve affordability, accessibility, and hearing aid uptake and are currently a rapidly emerging category of hearing devices. Overall, the results of the current study indicate that HHPs have serious concerns about OTC hearing aids. HHP concerns cited in this study provide useful feedback to stakeholders (e.g., HHP professional agencies, FDA, industry, and insurance payers) involved in improving OTC hearing aid implementation.

Consumer Ratings of the Most Desirable Hearing Aid Attributes.

BACKGROUND: Modern hearing aids have various features and functionalities, such as digital wireless streaming, bilateral connectivity, rechargeability, and specialized programs, which allow for a multitude of hearing aid attributes (e.g., comfort, reliability, and clarity). Consumers likely vary greatly in their preferences for these hearing aid attributes. Their preferences might be related to various demographic and hearing loss characteristics. PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to describe which hearing aid attributes consumers find desirable when choosing their hearing aids and to explore factors that might predict preferences. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional. STUDY SAMPLE: 14,993. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: In this retrospective study, hearing aid attribute preferences were evaluated from consumers who answered questions in the Help Me Choose tool on the HearingTracker.com Web site. Chi-squared tests and correlation analyses were used to identify potential relationships between attribute preference and respondent characteristics. Cluster analysis with Partitioning Around Medoids (PAM) was used to identify patterns of attribute preferences. RESULTS: Of the 21 hearing aid attributes queried, the four most favorably rated were improved ability to hear friends and family in quiet and in noisy settings, physical comfort, and reliability, with 75 to 88% of respondents rating these attributes as very or extremely important. Type of hearing loss, technology level preference, and mobile phone brand were significantly associated with preferences for all 21 hearing aid attributes. PAM cluster analysis unveiled two unique user groups based on their preference to hearing aid attributes. One-third of the respondents preferred high-end technology and favored all types of advanced attributes. The other two-thirds of users predominantly preferred either advanced or best match and were more selective about which attributes were most important to them. CONCLUSION: Patterns in preferences to hearing aid attributes help identify unique subgroups of consumers. Patient preferences for specific hearing aid attributes, in addition to audiologic characteristics, could help audiologists in recommending hearing aids for their patients.

Hearing Aid Consumer Reviews: A Linguistic Analysis in Relation to Benefit and Satisfaction Ratings.

Purpose Online reviews have been used by hearing aid owners to share their experiences and to provide suggestions to potential hearing aid buyers, although they have not been systematically examined. The study was aimed at examining the hearing aid consumer reviews using automated linguistic analysis, and how the linguistic variables relate to self-reported hearing aid benefit and satisfaction ratings. Method The study used a cross-sectional design. One thousand three hundred seventy-eight consumer hearing aid reviews (i.e., text response to open-ended question), self-reported benefit and satisfaction ratings on hearing aids in a 5-point scale with meta-data (e.g., hearing aid brand, technology level) extracted from the Hearing Tracker website were analyzed using automated text analysis method known as the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count. Results Self-reported hearing aid benefit and satisfaction ratings were high (i.e., mean rating of 4.04 in a 5-point scale). Examining the association between overall rating and the key linguistic variables point to two broad findings. First, the more people were personally, socially, and emotionally engaged with the hearing device experience, the higher they rated their hearing device(s). Second, a minimal occurrence of clinic-visit language dimensions points to factors that likely affect benefit and satisfaction ratings. For example, if people mention paying too much money (money), their overall ratings are generally lower. Conversely, if people write about their health or home, the ratings were higher. There was no significant difference in linguistic analysis across different hearing aid brands and technology levels. Conclusions Hearing aid consumers are generally satisfied with their hearing device(s), and their online reviews contain information about social/emotional dimensions as well as clinic-visit related aspects that have bearing toward hearing aid benefit and satisfaction ratings. These results suggest that the natural language used by consumers provide insights on their perceived benefit/satisfaction from their hearing device.

Hearing aid acquisition and ownership: what can we learn from online consumer reviews?

OBJECTIVE: To explore the publicised opinions of consumers actively participating in online hearing aid reviews. DESIGN: A retrospective design examining data generated from an online consumer review website (www.HearingTracker.com). Qualitative data (open text responses) were analysed using the open source automated topic modelling software IRaMuTeQ (http://www.iramuteq.org/) to identify themes. Outputs were compared with quantitative data from the consumer reviews (short response questions exploring hearing aid performance and benefit, and some meta-data such as hearing aid brand and years of hearing aid ownership). STUDY SAMPLE: 1378 online consumer hearing aid reviews. RESULTS: Six clusters within two domains were identified. The domain Device Acquisition included three clusters: Finding the right provider, device and price-point; Selecting a hearing aid to suit the hearing loss; Attaining physical fit and device management skills. The domain Device Use included three clusters: Smartphone streaming to hearing aids; Hearing aid adjustment using smartphone; and Hearing in noise. CONCLUSIONS: Although online hearing aid consumers indicate positive performance on multiple-choice questions relating to hearing aid performance and benefit, their online reviews describe a number of barriers limiting their success. Hearing healthcare clinicians must employ a personalised approach to audiological rehabilitation to ensure individual clients' needs are met.

Media Use by Older Adults With Hearing Loss: An Exploratory Survey.

Objectives There has been a substantial increase in people with health conditions seeking health-related information online. The aim of this study was to examine the media usage by older adults with hearing loss. Method The study used a cross-sectional survey design. A total of 556 older adults with hearing loss (Hearing Tracker website users) completed the survey that was focused on (a) demographic information, (b) general electronic media usage, (c) sources of hearing health information, and (d) social media use for hearing health information. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests. Results When seeking hearing health care information, the majority of the participants turned to the Internet (54%) followed by health professionals (34%) as the first response to their symptoms. Both sources were also rated as the easiest means of obtaining hearing health information. The information from health care providers was rated as more reliable and important for decision making than that from the Internet. Facebook and YouTube were the most frequently used social media platforms with over 40% of the respondents using them "most of the time" or "sometimes." All the social media platforms were rated less favorably than other sources for ease of finding information, reliability, and importance in decision making. Conclusion Older adults with hearing loss use various forms of electronic media for seeking hearing health information. They place the most trust on the information obtained from hearing health care professionals. These professionals need to be aware of the quality of information available on the Internet and social media sources in order to direct patients to credible sources. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12170397.

Negative Side Effects Associated with Hearing Aid Use in Adults with Hearing Loss.

BACKGROUND: The low uptake of hearing aids in the United States has been attributed to a number of reasons, including low perceived hearing disability, limited perceived benefit and cost. Another possible reason may be related to negative side effects associated with hearing aid use. PURPOSE: The present study was aimed at determining and classifying the negative side effects associated with hearing aid use in adults with hearing loss. RESEARCH DESIGN: The study used a cross-sectional survey design. STUDY SAMPLE: Five hundred and twelve participants completed an electronic survey. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The data was collected using the negative side effects of hearing aids (NSE-HAs) questionnaire. Data were analyzed using Chi square analysis, principal components analysis, and calculation of Cronbach's alpha. RESULTS: Some individuals reported negative side effects for all 32 items. However, careful examination of results suggests that, as a whole, reported negative side effects tend to be mild with mean scores falling close to the lower quartile of the total scores. Chi square test results suggest that the variables of age, gender, duration of hearing loss, self-reported hearing disability, and duration of hearing aid use seem to be significantly associated with the reported negative side effects. The NSE-HAs questionnaire was found to have a complex structure as indicated by the principal components analysis. However, good internal consistency was found in both the full scale and subscales. CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that, although a large number of adults with hearing loss who use hearing aids experience some degree of negative side effects, those effects tend to be mild.