| 1. |
- Hill-Feltham, P. R., et al.
(författare)
-
Hearing outcome measures for conductive and mixed hearing loss treatment in adults: a scoping review
- 2021
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Audiology. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1499-2027 .- 1708-8186. ; 60:4, s. 239-245
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective Rehabilitation options for conductive and mixed hearing loss are continually expanding, but without standard outcome measures comparison between different treatments is difficult. To meaningfully inform clinicians and patients core outcome sets (COS), determined via a recognised methodology, are needed. Following our previous work that identified hearing, physical, economic and psychosocial as core areas of a future COS, the AURONET group reviewed hearing outcome measures used in existing literature and assigned them into different domains within the hearing core area. Design Scoping review. Study Sample Literature including hearing outcome measurements for the treatment of conductive and/or mixed hearing loss. Results The literature search identified 1434 studies, with 278 subsequently selected for inclusion. A total of 837 hearing outcome measures were reported and grouped into nine domains. The largest domain constituted pure-tone threshold measurements accounting for 65% of the total outcome measures extracted, followed by the domains of speech testing (20%) and questionnaires (9%). Studies of hearing implants more commonly included speech tests or hearing questionnaires compared with studies of middle ear surgery. Conclusions A wide range of outcome measures are currently used, highlighting the importance of developing a COS to inform individual practice and reporting in trials/research.
|
|
| 2. |
- Hodgetts, W. E., et al.
(författare)
-
A comparison of three approaches to verifying aided Baha output
- 2010
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Audiology. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1499-2027 .- 1708-8186. ; 49:4, s. 286-295
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: The objective of the present study was to compare three methods of estimating the audibility of aided speech using the Baha. Subjects: 23 Adult Baha users with primarily bilateral conductive hearing loss were recruited from the Bone Conduction Amplification Program at the Institute for Reconstructive Sciences in Medicine in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Methods: A test Baha was set to each subject's preferred listening level. The same Baha was used to assess the audibility of the long-term average speech spectrum (LTASS) for each of the following three approaches: 1) Aided soundfield thresholds, 2) Real Ear SPL, and 3) Real Head Acceleration Level. Results: Significant differences were discovered between the three approaches. Aided soundfield thresholds consistently over-estimated the sensation level of aided speech. The Real Ear SPL approach provided reasonable estimates in the mid-frequencies. However, low- and high-frequency estimates for the Real Ear approach have significant limitations. Conclusions: The Real Head Acceleration Level appears to be the most accurate method of determining aided audibility with the Baha.
|
|
| 3. |
- Hodgetts, W. E., et al.
(författare)
-
Technology-Limited and Patient-Derived Versus Audibility-Derived Fittings in Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Users: A Validation Study
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Ear and Hearing. - 1538-4667 .- 0196-0202. ; 32:1, s. 31-39
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: Current approaches to fit bone-anchored hearing aid (Baha) rely heavily on patient feedback of "loudness" and "sound quality." Audiologists are limited to this approach for two reasons: (1) the technology in current models of Baha does not allow for much fine-tuning of frequency response or maximum output on an individual basis and (2) there has not been a valid approach to verify the frequency response or maximum output on an individual basis. The objectives of this study are to (1) describe an alternative approach to fit Baha, an "audibility-derived (AD)" fitting, and (2) test whether outcomes improve with this new fitting compared with the current "patient-derived (PD)" fitting. Design: This study used a repeated measures design where each subject experienced both the AD and PD fittings in random order. Subjects were tested on a variety of outcome measures including output levels of aided speech, hearing in noise test (quiet and in noise), consonant recognition in noise, aided loudness, and subjective percentage of words understood. Results: Electromechanical testing revealed significantly higher aided output with the AD fitting, especially in the high frequencies. Subjects performed significantly better in all outcome measures with the AD fitting approach except when testing aided loudness and subjective perception for which the differences were nonsignificant. When the input levels to the Baha were soft, advantages for the AD fitting were emerging on these tests, but they did not reach significance. Conclusions: This study presents a more objective, fitting approach for Baha that leads to better outcomes in the laboratory. The next steps will be to test these fittings in the real world and to make the approach generally available to clinicians fitting Bahas.
|
|
| 4. |
- Johansson, Martin L, et al.
(författare)
-
Physical outcome measures for conductive and mixed hearing loss treatment: A systematic review
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Clinical Otolaryngology. - : Wiley. - 1749-4478. ; 43:5, s. 1226-1234
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundThe number of potential options for rehabilitation of patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss is continually expanding. To be able to inform patients and other stakeholders, there is a need to identify and develop patient-centred outcomes for treatment of hearing loss. Objective of reviewTo identify outcome measures in the physical core area used when reporting the outcome after treatment of conductive and mixed hearing loss in adult patients. Search strategySystematic review of the literature related to reported physical outcome measures after treatment of mixed or conductive hearing loss without restrictions regarding type of intervention, treatment or device. Evaluation methodAny measure reporting the physical outcome after treatment or intervention of mixed or conductive hearing loss was sought and categorised. The physical outcome measures that had been extracted were then grouped into domains. ResultsThe literature search resulted in the identification of 1434 studies, of which 153 were selected for inclusion in the review. The majority (57%) of papers reported results from middle ear surgery, with the remainder reporting results from either bone conduction hearing devices or middle ear implants. Outcomes related to complications were categorised into 17 domains, whereas outcomes related to treatment success was categorised into 22 domains. ConclusionsThe importance of these domains to patients and other stakeholders needs to be further explored in order to establish which of these domains are most relevant to interventions for conductive or mixed hearing loss. This will allow us to then assess which outcome measures are most suitable for inclusion in the core set.
|
|
| 5. |
- Ostevik, A. V., et al.
(författare)
-
Psychosocial outcome measures for conductive and mixed hearing loss treatment: An overview of the relevant literature
- 2021
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Audiology. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1499-2027 .- 1708-8186. ; 60:9, s. 641-649
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective To identify the psychosocial assessments utilized with individuals with conductive and/or mixed hearing loss as part of a broader effort by the Auditory Rehabilitation Outcomes Network (AURONET) group to develop a core set of patient-centred outcome measures. Design A review of articles published between 2006 and 2016 was completed. Included studies had more than three adult participants, were available in English, and reported a psychosocial outcome from any treatment of mixed and/or conductive hearing loss. Study sample Sixty-six articles from seven databases. Results Sixty-six articles met our inclusion/exclusion criteria. Within this set, 15 unique psychosocial or patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) were identified, with the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) being the most frequently dispensed. Five of the fifteen were only administered in one study. In-house questionnaires (IHQs) were reported in 19 articles. Conclusions Only 66 (22%) of the 300 articles with outcomes contained a PRO. Some of the mostly frequently employed PROs (e.g., APHAB) were judged to include only social items and no psychological items. Lack of PRO standardization and the use of IHQs make psychosocial comparisons across treatments in this population difficult for patients, clinicians and stakeholders.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
