Issues in Evaluating the Effectiveness of Hearing Aids in the Elderly: What to Measure and When

Larry E. Humes

doi:10.1055/s-2001-15633

Seminars in Hearing, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Semin Hear 2001; 22(3): 303-316
DOI: 10.1055/s-2001-15633

Issues in Evaluating the Effectiveness of Hearing Aids in the Elderly: What to Measure and When

Larry E. Humes

Audiology Research Laboratory, Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana

Abstract

ABSTRACT

This article reviews recent findings from the author's laboratory on hearing-aid outcome measures for elderly hearing-aid wearers. A factor analysis of 26 hearing-aid outcome measures from 173 elderly hearing-aid wearers after 1 month of hearing aid use identified seven independent dimensions of hearing-aid outcome. Each of these dimensions is described, and viable clinical measures of performance for each dimension are discussed. Knowledge of when to obtain these outcome measures is as important as knowing what to measure. A brief review of prior data on acclimatization to hearing aids as well as of data from 134 elderly hearing-aid wearers evaluated in the author's laboratory after 1-month, 6-months, and 1-year of hearing aid use provides some guidance for this issue.

KEYWORD

Elderly - hearing aids - outcome measures - acclimatization

Volltext

Referenzen

REFERENCES

1 U.S. Bureau of the Census. Current Population Reports, Special Studies, 123-178, Sixty-Five Plus in America Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1992
2 Schoenborn C, Marano M. Current estimates from the National Health Interview Survey: United States, 1987. Vital and Health Statistics, 10, No 166. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office; 1988
3 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak III: why 20 million in U.S. don't use hearing aids for their hearing loss. Part I. Hear J . 1993; 46(1) 20-27
4 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak III: why 20 million in U.S. don't use hearing aids for their hearing loss. Part II. Hear J . 1993; 46(2) 26-31
5 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak III: why 20 million in U.S. don't use hearing aids for their hearing loss. Part III. Hear J . 1993; 46(4) 36-37
6 Kochkin S. Customer satisfaction and subjective benefit with high-performance hearing instruments. Hear Rev . 1996; 3(12) 16-26
7 Kochkin S. Customer satisfaction with single and multiple microphone digital hearing aids. Hear Rev . 2000; 7(11) 24-34
8 Skafte M D. The 1999 hearing instrument market-the dispensers' perspective. Hear Rev . 2000; 7(6) 8-40
9 Tillman T W, Carhart R, Olsen W O. Hearing aid efficiency in a competing speech situation. J Speech Hear Res . 1970; 13 789-811
10 Plomp R. Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Amer . 1978; 63 533-549
11 Humes L E, Christensen L A, Bess F H, Hedley-Williams A. A comparison of the benefit provided by well-fit linear hearing aids and instruments with automatic reductions of low-frequency gain. J Speech Lang Hear Res . 1997; 40 666-685
12 Humes L E, Christensen L A, Thomas T, Bess F H, Hedley-Williams A, Bentler R. A comparison of the aided performance and benefit provided by a linear and a two-channel wide dynamic range compression hearing aid. J Speech Lang Hear Res . 1999; 42 65-79
13 Walden B E, Surr R K, Cord M T, Pavlovic C V. A clinical trial of the ReSound BT2 Personal Hearing System. Am J Audiol . 1998; 7 85-100
14 Walden B E, Surr R K, Cord M T, Pavlovic C V. A clinical trial of the ReSound IC4 hearing device. Am J Audiol . 1999; 8 65-78
15 Larson V D, Williams D W, Henderson W G. Efficacy of 3 commonly used hearing aid circuits: a crossover trial. JAMA . 2000; 284 1806-1813
16 Humes L E, Garner C B, Wilson D L, Barlow N N. Hearing-aid outcome measures following one month of hearing aid use by the elderly. J Speech Lang Hear Res (in press).
17 Bentler R, Niebuhr D, Getta J, Anderson C. Longitudinal study of hearing aid effectiveness. I: Objective measures. J Speech Hear Res . 1993; 36 808-819
18 Bentler R, Niebuhr D, Getta J, Anderson C. Longitudinal study of hearing aid effectiveness. II: Subjective measures. J Speech Hear Res . 1993; 36 820-831
19 Cox R, Alexander G. Maturation of hearing aid benefit: objective and subjective measurements. Ear Hear . 1992; 13 131-141
20 Cox R M, Alexander G C. Measuring satisfaction with amplification in daily life: the SADL scale. Ear Hear . 1999; 20 306-320
21 Dillon H, James A, Ginis J. The client oriented scale of improvement (COSI) and its relationship to several other measures of benefit and satisfaction provided by hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol . 1997; 8 27-43
22 Dillon H, Birtles G, Lovegrove R. Measuring the outcomes of a national rehabilitation program: normative data for the client oriented scale of improvement (COSI) and the hearing aid user's questionnaire (HAUQ). J Am Acad Audiol . 1999; 10 67-79
23 Gatehouse S. Determinants of self-reported disability in older subjects. Ear Hear . 1990; 11 57S-65S
24 Gatehouse S. Hearing aid evaluation: limitations of present procedures and future requirements. J Speech Lang Pathol Audiol . 1993; 1(Mono Suppl) 50-57
25 Gatehouse S. Components and determinants of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear . 1994; 15 30-49
26 Gatehouse S. Glasgow Hearing aid benefit profile: derivation and validation of a client-centered outcome measure for hearing aid services. J Am Acad Audiol . 1999; 10 80-103
27 Humes L E. Dimensions of hearing aid outcome. J Am Acad Audiol . 1999; 10 26-39
28 Humes L E, Halling D, Coughlin M. Reliability and stability of various hearing aid outcome measures in a group of elderly hearing aid wearers. J Speech Hear Res . 1996; 39 923-935
29 Kochkin S. Subjective measures of satisfaction and benefit: establishing norms. Semin Hear . 1997; 18 37-48
30 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak V: consumer satisfaction revisited. Hear J . 2000; 53(1) 38-55
31 Mueller G. Outcome measures: the truth about your hearing aid fittings. Hear J . 1997; 50 21-32
32 Mulrow C, Aguilar C, Endicott J. Quality of life changes and hearing impairment. Ann Intern Med . 1990; 113 188-194
33 Mulrow C, Tuley M, Aguilar C. Sustained benefits of hearing aids. J Speech Hear Res . 1992; 35 1402-1405
34 Mulrow C, Tuley M, Aguilar C. Correlates of successful hearing aid use in older adults. Ear Hear . 1992; 13 108-113
35 Newman C W, Sandridge S A. Benefit from, satisfaction with, and cost-effectiveness of three different hearing aid technologies. Am J Audiol . 1998; 7 115-128
36 Schum D J. Perceived hearing aid benefit in relation to perceived needs. J Am Acad Audiol . 1999; 10 40-45
37 Stelmachowicz P G. Hearing aid outcome measures for children. J Am Acad Audiol . 1999; 10 14-25
38 Walden B E. Toward a model clinical-trials protocol for substantiating hearing aid user-benefit claims. Am J Audiol . 1997; 6 13-24
39 Walden B E, Surr R K, Cord M T, Edwards B, Olson L. Comparison of benefits provided by different hearing aid technologies. J Am Acad Audiol . 2000; 11 540-560
40 Weinstein B. Treatment efficacy: Hearing aids in the management of hearing loss in adults. J Speech Hear Res . 1996; 39 S37-S45
41 Weinstein B. Outcome measures in the hearing aid fitting/selection process. Trends Amplification . 1997; 2 117-137
42 Walden B E, Demorest M E, Hepler E L. Self-report approach to assessing benefit derived from amplification. J Speech Hear Res . 1984; 27 49-56
43 Hosford-Dunn H, Halpern J. Clinical application of the satisfaction with amplification in daily life scale in private practice. I: Statistical, content and factorial validity. J Am Acad Audiol . 2000; 11 523-539
44 Hosford-Dunn H L, Halpern J. Clinical application of the SADL scale in private practice. II: Predictive validity of fitting variables. J Am Acad Audiol . 2001; 12 15-36
45 Cox R M, Alexander G C. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear . 1995; 16 176-186
46 Schum D. Responses of elderly hearing aid users on the hearing aid performance inventory. J Am Acad Audiol . 1992; 3 308-314
47 Dillon H. Shortened hearing aid performance inventory for the elderly (SHAPIE): a statistical approach. Aust J Audiol . 1994; 16 37-48
48 Ventry I, Weinstein B. The hearing handicap inventory for the elderly: a new tool. Ear Hear . 1982; 3 128-134
49 Malinoff R, Weinstein B. Measurement of hearing aid benefit in the elderly. Ear Hear . 1989; 10 354-356
50 Levitt H, Resnick S B. Speech reception by the hearing impaired: methods of testing and development of materials. Scand Audiol Suppl . 1978; 6 107-129
51 Cox R, Alexander G, Gilmore C, Puskalich K M. Use of the connected speech test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners. Ear Hear . 1988; 9 198-207
52 Humes L E, Watson B U, Christensen L A, Cokely C G, Halling D C, Lee L. Factors associated with individual differences in clinical measures of speech recognition among the elderly. J Speech Lang Hear Res . 1994; 37 465-474
53 Gabrielsson A, Schenkman B N, Hagerman B. The effects of different frequency responses on sound quality judgments and speech intelligibility. J Speech Hear Res . 1988; 31 166-177
54 Cox R M, McDaniel D M. Development of the speech intelligibility rating (SIR) test for hearing aid comparisons. J Speech Hear Res . 1989; 32 347-352
55 Gatehouse S. The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am . 1992; 92 1258-1268
56 Turner C W, Humes L E, Bentler R A, Cox R M. A review of past research on changes in hearing aid benefit over time. Ear Hear . 1996; 17 14S-25S
57 Saunders G H, Cienkowski K M. Acclimatization to hearing aids. Ear Hear . 1997; 18 129-139
58 Surr R, Cord M, Walden B. Long-term versus short-term hearing aid benefit. J Am Acad Audiol . 1998; 9 165-171