| Literature DB >> 33194218 |
Surina Fordington1, Tamsin Holland Brown2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the acceptability and usability of the Hear Glue Ear mobile application to guide families and support speech and language development in children with otitis media with effusion (OME). To assess the validity of the app's game-based hearing test to estimate changes in hearing levels between audiology appointments.Entities:
Keywords: OME; Otitis media with effusion; audiology; child; hearing; language development; mobile application; speech
Year: 2020 PMID: 33194218 PMCID: PMC7594221 DOI: 10.1177/2055207620966163
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Digit Health ISSN: 2055-2076
Figure 1.Speech ‘banana’ showing the range of frequencies used in everyday speech. The letters correspond to individual sounds used in speech. In OME-associated hearing loss, lower frequency sounds are commonly compromised.
Figure 2.Current management of OME in the UK.[12]
Figure 3.Sections of the ‘Hear Glue Ear’ app: (a) Home panel; (b) Information; (c) ‘How’s My Hearing?’ hearing test; (d) Audiobook; (e) Counting song; (f) ‘Getting Dressed’ listening game.
Summary of the user requirements addressed by the Hear Glue Ear application.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Informing parents about OME and its management | Information section | Information and frequently asked questions (FAQs) about OME and its management, provided by National Deaf Children’s Society (NDCS). Information is concise and easy for parents to access remotely and reduces the need for environmentally damaging paper leaflets currently used. |
| Monitoring a child’s hearing from home | ‘How’s My Hearing?’ hearing test | Game-based hearing test. Uses 500–4000 Hz frequency and 20–70 dB volume with warble and pure tone audiometry. Correctly and incorrectly heard sounds are displayed on a matrix-style graph for parents and clinicians to view. |
| Identifying trends in OME-associated hearing loss | Analytics section | Results in the ‘How’s My Hearing?’ hearing test are displayed over time in a line graph to provide an estimate of trends in hearing loss, which is known to fluctuate in OME. |
| Developing auditory processing skills | Audiobooks | Audiobooks enable children to match auditory cues with visual representations throughout. Questions at the end of each story aim to develop skills around auditory processing and auditory memory. |
| Exposure to acoustic-phonetic stimuli | Songs | The songs, provided by Pinkfong educational videos, focus on phonetics and rhyming to improve children’s exposure to the full enrichment of speech sounds. |
| Following auditory instructions | ‘Getting Dressed’ game | The game involves children listening to and following auditory instructions and aims to develop listening and auditory processing skills and to practise building on auditory cues in a relaxed home environment. |
| Access to tailored speech support | Speech and Language Therapy section | The portal enables speech and language therapists to upload personal speech support videos for children. The therapist can view when the child has seen the video and upload the next one. |
| Encouraging parental engagement with their child’s speech and language development | All of the above | Clinician recommendation of the app and clear guidance in
the app encourage active and supported involvement of
parents with their child’s hearing loss management, which
has been shown to improve long term speech and language outcomes.[ |
Figure 4.User interface showing the results of the hearing screen, which can be accessed by parents and clinicians. The green bars represent sounds correctly identified, the red bars represent sounds not identified and the grey bar represents muted controls correctly identified. The white boxes indicate that no sound was presented. The parent may choose to display overlay icons which attempt to correlate their child’s performance in the listening game with everyday sounds they may be struggling to hear.
Figure 5.User interface showing the assessment of the ambient noise level, which must be below 35 dB for the test to commence.
Figure 6.User interface showing establishment of the hearing screen volume level, which is relative to the minimum audible level of an adult with normal hearing.
Figure 7.Summary of the experimental protocol for the study.
Figure 8.Comparison of percentage score obtained in the app’s hearing screen with the pure tone average (PTA) obtained in clinic for each child ().
Child responses to the oral questionnaire given immediately after being shown the app. % shows the percentage of responses where a child clearly responded ‘yes’ and excludes ‘no’ or neutral responses.
| Response | % (number who agreed/total) |
|---|---|
| Acceptability | |
| Liked using the app | 100 (18/18) |
| Found the app fun | 100 (18/18) |
| Accessibility | |
| Thought the app was easy to use | 93.3 (14/15) |
| Could use the app by themselves without the help of an adult | 73.3 (11/15) |
| Thought their friends would be able to use the app | 100 (13/13) |
| Thought other children would like the app | 100 (13/13) |
Caregiver responses to the written questionnaire given immediately after being shown the app. % shows the percentage of responses where ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ were selected (total number of responses minus ‘neutral’, ‘disagree’ or ‘strongly disagree’).
| Response | % (number who agreed/total) |
|---|---|
| Acceptability | |
| Would like their child to use the app regularly | 73.1% (17/26) |
| Would recommend the app to other families | 87.5% (7/8) |
| Accessibility | |
| Thought most children and adults would learn to use the app quickly | 100% (21/21) |
| Felt confident using the app themselves | 100% (21/21) |
| Thought the app was easy for children to use | 72% (18/25) |
| Thought their child could use the app without assistance | 59.1% (13/22) |
| Thought that they themselves could use the app without the support of a technical person | 95.8% (23/24) |
| Felt that they did not need to learn anything new before using the app | 85% (17/20) |
| Usefulness | |
| Felt they had gained confidence in how to support their child improve their listening skills | 61.9% (13/21) |
| Felt that the app made it easier to report their child’s hearing levels to the clinician | 81% (17/21) |
| Felt it would enable them to give more accurate long term information about their child's hearing to clinicians | 85% (17/20) |
| Felt their child was as engaged with the activities present in the app as with other activities | 82.6% (19/23) |
Figure 9.Panel of responses to the caregiver questionnaire.
Caregiver responses to the follow-up questionnaire given after using the app for one week at home. % shows the percentage of responses where ‘yes’ was clearly stated, and excludes ‘no’ or neutral responses.
| Response | % (number who agreed/total) |
|---|---|
| Uptake | |
| Had downloaded the app | 87.0% (20/23) |
| Had used the app between appointments | 73.9% (17/23) |
| Usefulness | |
| Understood the purpose of the app | 100% (16/16) |
| Felt the app provided strategies to help their child | 85.7% (12/14) |
| Thought that the app helped to support their child whilst their hearing was reduced from glue ear | 61.5% (8/13) |
| Accessibility | |
| Found the app easy to use | 100% (8/8) |
| Thought their child found the app easy to use | 100% (8/8) |
| Acceptability | |
| Felt their child enjoyed using the app | 88.9% (8/9) |
| Rated the app as good or better | 85.7% (12/14) |
Clinician responses to the written questionnaire given immediately after being shown the app. % shows the percentage of responses where ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ were selected (total number of responses – ‘neutral’, ‘disagree’ or ‘strongly disagree’.
| Response | % (number who agreed/total) |
|---|---|
| Acceptability | |
| Felt that they would like their patients to use the app regularly | 77.8% (14/18) |
| Felt that the information gained from the ‘How’s My Hearing?’ test would be useful to review with parents and support discussion | 66.7% (10/16) |
| Felt that the app could enable more accurate long term information about hearing abilities between appointments | 55.6% (10/18) |
| Accessibility | |
| Thought that the app was easy for adults to use | 88.9% (16/18) |
| Thought that the app was easy for children to use | 83.3% (15/18) |
| Thought that the app’s functions were well integrated | 82.4% (14/17) |
| Thought that there was no inconsistency in the app | 93.8% (15/16) |
| Thought that their patients would learn to use the app quickly | 88.9% (16/18) |
| Felt confident using the app | 72.2% (13/18) |
| Felt that they did not need to learn a lot before using the app | 82.4% (14/17) |
Figure 10.Panel of responses to the clinician questionnaire.
Clinician/caregiver responses to the written MARS questionnaire given after being shown the app. Mean score is a mean average of all responses, which have a possible range 1–5 (1 being poorest and 5 being best).
| Category | Mean score (range) |
|---|---|
| Engagement | 4.8 (4.6–5) |
| Functionality | 4.7 (4.6–5) |
| Aesthetics | 4.7 (4.3–5) |
| Information | 4.7 (4.3–5) |
| App quality | 4.7 (4.4–5) |