Primarily to understand whether clinically relevant factors affect the International Outcome Inventory (IOI-HA) scores and to examine if IOI-HA scores improve when renewing the hearing aids (HA) fo...

To investigate the effect of hearing aid (HA) intervention on long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL) changes in first-time and experienced HA users using the 15D questionnaire. Secondly, the study explored the relationship between clinical parameters and changes in 15D scores. A prospective observational study. The study population included 1562 patients (1113 first-time and 449 experienced HA users) referred for HA rehabilitation. All patients responded to the 15D at baseline, two months after HA fitting, and at long-term follow-up (698 ± 298 d). Among both first-time and experienced HA users, significant improvements in hearing-dimension (15D-3) score were observed at two-month follow-up which sustained at long-term follow-up. 15D total scores significantly decreased at long-term follow-up. Self-reported hearing abilities, word recognition scores, and HA use time were significantly and positively correlated to increased 15D. Both groups of HA users reported improved hearing-related QoL after HA treatment which sustained at long-term follow-up but the improvement in total 15D total score did not sustain for either group. The results suggest that HA intervention positively affects hearing-related QoL among older adults with hearing loss, and the findings support the use of 15D as a tool for the evaluation of HA treatment effects.

To provide clinical guidance in hearing aid prescription for older adults with presbycusis, we investigated differences in self-reported hearing abilities and hearing aid effectiveness for premium or basic hearing aid users. Secondly, as an explorative analysis, we investigated if differences in gain prescription verified with real-ear measurements explain differences in self-reported outcomes. The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial in which the patients were blinded towards the purpose of the study. In total, 190 first-time hearing aid users (>60 years of age) with symmetric bilateral presbycusis were fitted with either a premium or basic hearing aid. The randomization was stratified on age, sex, and word recognition score. Two outcome questionnaires were distributed: the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) and the short form of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ-12). In addition, insertion gains were calculated from real-ear measurements at first-fit for all fitted hearing aids. Premium hearing aid users reported 0.7 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.1) scale points higher total SSQ-12 score per item and 0.8 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.4) scale points higher speech score per item, as well as 0.6 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.1) scale points higher qualities score compared to basic-feature hearing aid users. No significant differences in reported hearing aid effectiveness were found using the IOI-HA. Differences in the prescribed gain at 1 and 2 kHz were observed between premium and basic hearing aids within each company. Premium-feature devices yielded slightly better self-reported hearing abilities than basic-feature devices, but a statistically significant difference was only found in three out of seven outcome variables, and the effect was small. The generalizability of the study is limited to community-dwelling older adults with presbycusis. Thus, further research is needed for understanding the potential effects of hearing aid technology for other populations. Hearing care providers should continue to insist on research to support the choice of more costly premium technologies when prescribing hearing aids for older adults with presbycusis.Clinical Trial Registration:https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT04539847.

The aim of this study was to determine whether the differences in insertion gains from the first fit to generic prescriptions of hearing aids can predict the self-reported hearing aid (HA) outcomes...

Objective: To obtain and evaluate detailed descriptions of potential value propositions as seen by adults undergoing hearing rehabilitation with hearing aids. Design: Semi-structured interviews with patients and audiologists, a literature search, and the inclusion of domain knowledge from experts and scientists were used to derive value propositions. A two-alternative forced-choice paradigm and probabilistic choice models were used to investigate hearing aid users’ preferences for the value propositions through an online platform. Study sample: Twelve hearing aid users (mean age 70, range 59–70) and eleven clinicians were interviewed. A total of 173 experienced hearing aid users evaluated the value propositions. Results: Twenty-nine value propositions as described by patients, clinicians, and hearing care experts where identified, from which twenty-one value propositions were evaluated. Results of the pair-wise evaluation method show that the value propositions judged to be the most important for the hearing aid users were: “13. To solve the hearing problem you have”, “09. Thorough diagnosis of the hearing”, and “16. The hearing aid solution is adapted to individual needs”, which are related to finding the correct hearing solution and to be considered in the process. The value propositions judged to be least important were: “04 Next of kin and others involved in the process”, “26. To be in the same room as the practitioner”, and “29. The practitioner’s human characteristics”, related to the involvement of others in the process and the proximity and personal manner of the practitioners.

The retrospective reporting of users’ hearing aid (HA) usage can provide insight into individualized HA usage patterns. Understanding these HA usage patterns can help to provide a tailored solution to meet the usage needs of HA users. This study aims to understand the HA usage pattern in daily-life situations from self-reported data and to examine its relationship to self-reported outcomes. A total of 1537 participants who responded to questions related to situations where they always took off or put on the HAs were included in the study. A latent class analysis was performed to stratify the HA users according to their HA usage pattern. The results showed distinct usage patterns in the latent classes derived for both scenarios. The demographics, socio-economic indicators, hearing loss, and user-related factors were found to impact HA usage. The results showed that the HA users who reported using the HAs all the time (regular users) had better self-reported HA outcomes than situational users, situational non-users, and non-users. The study explained the underlying distinct HA usage pattern from self-reported questionnaires using latent class analysis. The results emphasized the importance of regular use of HAs for a better self-reported HA outcome.