Literature DB >> 30085938

Time From Hearing Aid Candidacy to Hearing Aid Adoption: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.

Annie N Simpson1,2, Lois J Matthews2, Christy Cassarly2, Judy R Dubno1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Although many individuals with hearing loss could benefit from intervention with hearing aids, many do not seek or delay seeking timely treatment after the onset of hearing loss. There is limited data-based evidence estimating the delay in adoption of hearing aids with anecdotal estimates ranging from 5 to 20 years. The present longitudinal study is the first to assess time from hearing aid candidacy to adoption in a 28-year ongoing prospective cohort of older adults, with the additional goal of determining factors influencing delays in hearing aid adoption, and self-reported successful use of hearing aids.
DESIGN: As part of a longitudinal study of age-related hearing loss, a wide range of demographic, biologic, and auditory measures are obtained yearly or every 2 to 3 years from a large sample of adults, along with family, medical, hearing, noise exposure, and hearing aid use histories. From all eligible participants (age ≥18; N = 1530), 857 were identified as hearing aid candidates either at baseline or during their participation, using audiometric criteria. Longitudinal data were used to track transition to hearing aid candidacy and hearing aid adoption. Demographic and hearing-related characteristics were compared between hearing aid adopters and nonadopters. Unadjusted estimated overall time (in years) to hearing aid adoption and estimated delay times were stratified by demographic and hearing-related factors and were determined using a time-to-event analysis (survival analysis). Factors influencing rate of adoption in any given time period were examined along with factors influencing successful hearing aid adoption.
RESULTS: Age, number of chronic health conditions, sex, retirement status, and education level did not differ significantly between hearing aid adopters and nonadopters. In contrast, adopters were more likely than nonadopters to be married, of white race, have higher socioeconomic status, have significantly poorer higher frequency (2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 6.0, and 8.0 kHz) pure-tone averages, poorer word recognition in quiet and competing multi-talker babble, and reported more hearing handicap on the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly/Adults emotional and social subscales. Unadjusted estimation of time from hearing aid candidacy to adoption in the full participant cohort was 8.9 years (SE ± 0.37; interquartile range = 3.2-14.9 years) with statistically significant stratification for race, hearing as measured by low- and high-frequency pure-tone averages, keyword recognition in low-context sentences in babble, and the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly/Adults social score. In a subgroup analysis of the 213 individuals who adopted hearing aids and were assigned a success classification, 78.4% were successful. No significant predictors of success were found.
CONCLUSIONS: The average delay in adopting hearing aids after hearing aid candidacy was 8.9 years. Nonwhite race and better speech recognition (in a more difficult task) significantly increased the delay to treatment. Poorer hearing and more self-assessed hearing handicap in social situations significantly decreased the delay to treatment. These results confirm the assumption that adults with hearing loss significantly delay seeking treatment with hearing aids.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30085938      PMCID: PMC6363915          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000641

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  22 in total

1.  Hearing loss prevalence and risk factors among older adults in the United States.

Authors:  Frank R Lin; Roland Thorpe; Sandra Gordon-Salant; Luigi Ferrucci
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2011-02-27       Impact factor: 6.053

2.  Application of the Consumer Decision-Making Model to Hearing Aid Adoption in First-Time Users.

Authors:  Amyn M Amlani
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2016-05

3.  Gender and hearing aids: patterns of use and determinants of nonregular use.

Authors:  Katharina Staehelin; Sibylle Bertoli; Rudolf Probst; Christian Schindler; Julia Dratva; Elisabeth Zemp Stutz
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Hearing aid use among older U.S. adults; the national health and nutrition examination survey, 2005-2006 and 2009-2010.

Authors:  Kathleen E Bainbridge; Virginia Ramachandran
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Acceptability, benefit and costs of early screening for hearing disability: a study of potential screening tests and models.

Authors:  A Davis; P Smith; M Ferguson; D Stephens; I Gianopoulos
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 4.014

6.  Health behavior theories as predictors of hearing-aid uptake and outcomes.

Authors:  Gabrielle H Saunders; Melissa T Frederick; ShienPei C Silverman; Claus Nielsen; Ariane Laplante-Lévesque
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2016-05-05       Impact factor: 2.117

7.  Auditory rehabilitation of older people from the general population--the Leiden 85-plus study.

Authors:  Jacobijn Gussekloo; L E de Bont; M von Faber; J A Eekhof; J A de Laat; J H Hulshof; E van Dongen; R G Westendorp
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 8.  Survival analysis part I: basic concepts and first analyses.

Authors:  T G Clark; M J Bradburn; S B Love; D G Altman
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2003-07-21       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 9.  Survival analysis part II: multivariate data analysis--an introduction to concepts and methods.

Authors:  M J Bradburn; T G Clark; S B Love; D G Altman
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2003-08-04       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 10.  Survival analysis part IV: further concepts and methods in survival analysis.

Authors:  T G Clark; M J Bradburn; S B Love; D G Altman
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2003-09-01       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  25 in total

Review 1.  Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: Smartphone-Connected Listening Devices.

Authors:  David W Maidment; Amyn M Amlani
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2020-12-16

2.  Understanding degraded speech leads to perceptual gating of a brainstem reflex in human listeners.

Authors:  Heivet Hernández-Pérez; Jason Mikiel-Hunter; David McAlpine; Sumitrajit Dhar; Sriram Boothalingam; Jessica J M Monaghan; Catherine M McMahon
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2021-10-20       Impact factor: 8.029

3.  A pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening.

Authors:  Judy R Dubno; Pranab Majumder; Janet Prvu Bettger; Rowena J Dolor; Victoria Eifert; Howard W Francis; Carl F Pieper; Kristine A Schulz; Mina Silberberg; Sherri L Smith; Amy R Walker; David L Witsell; Debara L Tucci
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2022-06-25

4.  What factors are important to whom in what context, when adults are prescribed hearing aids for hearing loss? A realist review protocol.

Authors:  Emma Broome; Carly Meyer; Paige Church; Helen Henshaw
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 3.006

5.  Assessment of Hearing Aid Benefit Using Patient-Reported Outcomes and Audiologic Measures.

Authors:  James R Dornhoffer; Ted A Meyer; Judy R Dubno; Theodore R McRackan
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2020-04-02       Impact factor: 1.854

Review 6.  Using Sox2 to alleviate the hallmarks of age-related hearing loss.

Authors:  Ebenezer N Yamoah; Mark Li; Anit Shah; Karen L Elliott; Kathy Cheah; Pin-Xian Xu; Stacia Phillips; Samuel M Young; Daniel F Eberl; Bernd Fritzsch
Journal:  Ageing Res Rev       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 10.895

7.  A Wearable, Extensible, Open-Source Platform for Hearing Healthcare Research.

Authors:  Louis Pisha; Julian Warchall; Tamara Zubatiy; Sean Hamilton; Ching-Hua Lee; Ganz Chockalingam; Patrick P Mercier; Rajesh Gupta; Bhaskar D Rao; Harinath Garudadri
Journal:  IEEE Access       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 3.367

Review 8.  Smartphone-Based Applications to Detect Hearing Loss: A Review of Current Technology.

Authors:  Alexandria L Irace; Rahul K Sharma; Nicholas S Reed; Justin S Golub
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2020-12-29       Impact factor: 5.562

9.  Electronic Health Records As a Platform for Audiological Research: Data Validity, Patient Characteristics, and Hearing-Aid Use Persistence Among 731,213 U.S. Veterans.

Authors:  Gabrielle H Saunders; Lauren K Dillard; Oliver Zobay; John B Cannon; Graham Naylor
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2021 July/Aug       Impact factor: 3.562

10.  Ototoxicity After Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy: Factors Associated With Discrepancies Between Patient-Reported Outcomes and Audiometric Assessments.

Authors:  Shirin Ardeshirrouhanifard; Sophie D Fossa; Robert Huddart; Patrick O Monahan; Chunkit Fung; Yiqing Song; M Eileen Dolan; Darren R Feldman; Robert J Hamilton; David Vaughn; Neil E Martin; Christian Kollmannsberger; Paul Dinh; Lawrence Einhorn; Robert D Frisina; Lois B Travis
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2022 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.