OBJECTIVE: Adult hearing screening may be a solution to the under-diagnosis and under-treatment of hearing loss in adults. Limited use and satisfaction with hearing aids indicate that consideration of alternative interventions following hearing screening may be needed. The primary aim of this study is to provide an overview of all intervention types that have been offered to adult (≥ 18 years) screen-failures. DESIGN: Systematic literature review. Articles were identified through systematic searches in PubMed, EMBASE, Cinahl, the Cochrane Library, private libraries, and through reference checking. RESULTS: Of the initial 3027 papers obtained from the searches, a total of 37 were found to be eligible. The great majority of the screening programmes (i.e. 26) referred screen-failures to a hearing specialist without further rehabilitation being specified. Most of the others (i.e. seven) led to the provision of hearing aids. Four studies offered alternative interventions comprising communication programme elements (e.g. speechreading, hearing tactics) or advice on environmental aids. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions following hearing screening generally comprised referral to a hearing specialist or hearing aid rehabilitation. Some programmes offered alternative rehabilitation options. These may be valuable as an addition to or replacement of hearing aid rehabilitation. It is recommended that this be addressed in future research.
OBJECTIVE: Adult hearing screening may be a solution to the under-diagnosis and under-treatment of hearing loss in adults. Limited use and satisfaction with hearing aids indicate that consideration of alternative interventions following hearing screening may be needed. The primary aim of this study is to provide an overview of all intervention types that have been offered to adult (≥ 18 years) screen-failures. DESIGN: Systematic literature review. Articles were identified through systematic searches in PubMed, EMBASE, Cinahl, the Cochrane Library, private libraries, and through reference checking. RESULTS: Of the initial 3027 papers obtained from the searches, a total of 37 were found to be eligible. The great majority of the screening programmes (i.e. 26) referred screen-failures to a hearing specialist without further rehabilitation being specified. Most of the others (i.e. seven) led to the provision of hearing aids. Four studies offered alternative interventions comprising communication programme elements (e.g. speechreading, hearing tactics) or advice on environmental aids. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions following hearing screening generally comprised referral to a hearing specialist or hearing aid rehabilitation. Some programmes offered alternative rehabilitation options. These may be valuable as an addition to or replacement of hearing aid rehabilitation. It is recommended that this be addressed in future research.
Authors: Gabrielle H Saunders; Melissa T Frederick; ShienPei C Silverman; Tina Penman; Austin Gardner; Theresa H Chisolm; Celia D Escabi; Preyanca H Oree; Laura C Westermann; Victoria A Sanchez; Michelle L Arnold Journal: J Am Acad Audiol Date: 2018-01-25 Impact factor: 1.664
Authors: Scott D Nash; Karen J Cruickshanks; Guan-Hua Huang; Barbara E K Klein; Ronald Klein; F Javier Nieto; Theodore S Tweed Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-04-18 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Danielle Schönborn; Faheema Mahomed Asmail; Karina C De Sousa; Ariane Laplante-Lévesque; David R Moore; Cas Smits; De Wet Swanepoel Journal: Am J Audiol Date: 2020-06-08 Impact factor: 1.493