S Brosch1, L Michels, P S Mauz, H de Maddalena, H Löwenheim. 1. Bereich Phoniatrie und Pädaudiologie der Klinik für Hals-, Nasen-, Ohrenheilkunde, Universität Tübingen. sibylle.brosch@med.uni-tuebingen.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A large proportion of older as well as younger patients do not use their hearing aids. Of the younger hearing impaired population, this occurs in the majority of those who do not benefit sufficiently from their hearing aids and, consequently, they face difficulties in their working and social life. SCIENTIFIC QUESTION: Our aim was to evaluate whether a classical hearing aid adjustment is of sufficient predictive value to determine whether adequate rehabilitation in everyday and professional life will occur. METHODS AND RESULTS: A questionnaire was returned by 197 adult hearing impaired patients. Only 108 were using their hearing aids all the time; 57 rarely and 32 never. The main reason for this low rehabilitation rate proved to be inadequate amplification. At the workplace, insufficient speech discrimination came into play. Another important factor was dysacusis induced by specific noise signals. There was an intolerable acoustic feedback in 40% which could not be sufficiently alleviated. Taking these results into account, only about a third of patients were sufficiently rehabilitated. CONCLUSIONS: Proof of effectiveness in a typical audiological testing situation is an important but not a fully reliable predictor for effectiveness in everyday life. Even when hearing aids are shown to be effective with such testing, their application in particular everyday or work situations may be insufficient of even impossible.
BACKGROUND: A large proportion of older as well as younger patients do not use their hearing aids. Of the younger hearing impaired population, this occurs in the majority of those who do not benefit sufficiently from their hearing aids and, consequently, they face difficulties in their working and social life. SCIENTIFIC QUESTION: Our aim was to evaluate whether a classical hearing aid adjustment is of sufficient predictive value to determine whether adequate rehabilitation in everyday and professional life will occur. METHODS AND RESULTS: A questionnaire was returned by 197 adult hearing impairedpatients. Only 108 were using their hearing aids all the time; 57 rarely and 32 never. The main reason for this low rehabilitation rate proved to be inadequate amplification. At the workplace, insufficient speech discrimination came into play. Another important factor was dysacusis induced by specific noise signals. There was an intolerable acoustic feedback in 40% which could not be sufficiently alleviated. Taking these results into account, only about a third of patients were sufficiently rehabilitated. CONCLUSIONS: Proof of effectiveness in a typical audiological testing situation is an important but not a fully reliable predictor for effectiveness in everyday life. Even when hearing aids are shown to be effective with such testing, their application in particular everyday or work situations may be insufficient of even impossible.
Authors: H P Zenner; V Struwe; G Schuschke; M Spreng; G Stange; P Plath; W Babisch; E Rebentisch; P Plinkert; K D Bachmann; H Ising; G Lehnert Journal: HNO Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 1.284
Authors: Liam Smeeth; Astrid E Fletcher; Edmond Siu-Woon Ng; Sue Stirling; Maria Nunes; Elizabeth Breeze; Christopher J Bulpitt; Dee Jones; Alistair Tulloch Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-04-27 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Manuela Joore; Daniëlle Brunenberg; Horst Zank; Hans van der Stel; Lucien Anteunis; Gijs Boas; Hans Peters Journal: Int J Technol Assess Health Care Date: 2002 Impact factor: 2.188