Issues in Evaluating the Effectiveness of Hearing Aids in the Elderly: What to Measure and When

ABSTRACT

This article reviews recent findings from the author's laboratory on hearing-aid outcome measures for elderly hearing-aid wearers. A factor analysis of 26 hearing-aid outcome measures from 173 elderly hearing-aid wearers after 1 month of hearing aid use identified seven independent dimensions of hearing-aid outcome. Each of these dimensions is described, and viable clinical measures of performance for each dimension are discussed. Knowledge of when to obtain these outcome measures is as important as knowing what to measure. A brief review of prior data on acclimatization to hearing aids as well as of data from 134 elderly hearing-aid wearers evaluated in the author's laboratory after 1-month, 6-months, and 1-year of hearing aid use provides some guidance for this issue.

KEYWORD

Elderly - hearing aids - outcome measures - acclimatization

REFERENCES

• 1 U.S. Bureau of the Census. Current Population Reports, Special Studies, 123-178, Sixty-Five Plus in America Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1992
• 2 Schoenborn C, Marano M. Current estimates from the National Health Interview Survey: United States, 1987. Vital and Health Statistics, 10, No 166. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office; 1988
• 3 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak III: why 20 million in U.S. don't use hearing aids for their hearing loss. Part I.  Hear J . 1993;  46(1) 20-27
• 4 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak III: why 20 million in U.S. don't use hearing aids for their hearing loss. Part II.  Hear J . 1993;  46(2) 26-31
• 5 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak III: why 20 million in U.S. don't use hearing aids for their hearing loss. Part III.  Hear J . 1993;  46(4) 36-37
• 6 Kochkin S. Customer satisfaction and subjective benefit with high-performance hearing instruments.  Hear Rev . 1996;  3(12) 16-26
• 7 Kochkin S. Customer satisfaction with single and multiple microphone digital hearing aids.  Hear Rev . 2000;  7(11) 24-34
• 8 Skafte M D. The 1999 hearing instrument market-the dispensers' perspective.  Hear Rev . 2000;  7(6) 8-40
• 9 Tillman T W, Carhart R, Olsen W O. Hearing aid efficiency in a competing speech situation.  J Speech Hear Res . 1970;  13 789-811
• 10 Plomp R. Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids.  J Acoust Soc Amer . 1978;  63 533-549
• 11 Humes L E, Christensen L A, Bess F H, Hedley-Williams A. A comparison of the benefit provided by well-fit linear hearing aids and instruments with automatic reductions of low-frequency gain.  J Speech Lang Hear Res . 1997;  40 666-685
• 12 Humes L E, Christensen L A, Thomas T, Bess F H, Hedley-Williams A, Bentler R. A comparison of the aided performance and benefit provided by a linear and a two-channel wide dynamic range compression hearing aid.  J Speech Lang Hear Res . 1999;  42 65-79
• 13 Walden B E, Surr R K, Cord M T, Pavlovic C V. A clinical trial of the ReSound BT2 Personal Hearing System.  Am J Audiol . 1998;  7 85-100
• 14 Walden B E, Surr R K, Cord M T, Pavlovic C V. A clinical trial of the ReSound IC4 hearing device.  Am J Audiol . 1999;  8 65-78
• 15 Larson V D, Williams D W, Henderson W G. Efficacy of 3 commonly used hearing aid circuits: a crossover trial.  JAMA . 2000;  284 1806-1813
• 16 Humes L E, Garner C B, Wilson D L, Barlow N N. Hearing-aid outcome measures following one month of hearing aid use by the elderly.  J Speech Lang Hear Res (in press).
• 17 Bentler R, Niebuhr D, Getta J, Anderson C. Longitudinal study of hearing aid effectiveness. I: Objective measures.  J Speech Hear Res . 1993;  36 808-819
• 18 Bentler R, Niebuhr D, Getta J, Anderson C. Longitudinal study of hearing aid effectiveness. II: Subjective measures.  J Speech Hear Res . 1993;  36 820-831
• 19 Cox R, Alexander G. Maturation of hearing aid benefit: objective and subjective measurements.  Ear Hear . 1992;  13 131-141
• 20 Cox R M, Alexander G C. Measuring satisfaction with amplification in daily life: the SADL scale.  Ear Hear . 1999;  20 306-320
• 21 Dillon H, James A, Ginis J. The client oriented scale of improvement (COSI) and its relationship to several other measures of benefit and satisfaction provided by hearing aids.  J Am Acad Audiol . 1997;  8 27-43
• 22 Dillon H, Birtles G, Lovegrove R. Measuring the outcomes of a national rehabilitation program: normative data for the client oriented scale of improvement (COSI) and the hearing aid user's questionnaire (HAUQ).  J Am Acad Audiol . 1999;  10 67-79
• 23 Gatehouse S. Determinants of self-reported disability in older subjects.  Ear Hear . 1990;  11 57S-65S
• 24 Gatehouse S. Hearing aid evaluation: limitations of present procedures and future requirements.  J Speech Lang Pathol Audiol . 1993;  1(Mono Suppl) 50-57
• 25 Gatehouse S. Components and determinants of hearing aid benefit.  Ear Hear . 1994;  15 30-49
• 26 Gatehouse S. Glasgow Hearing aid benefit profile: derivation and validation of a client-centered outcome measure for hearing aid services.  J Am Acad Audiol . 1999;  10 80-103
• 27 Humes L E. Dimensions of hearing aid outcome.  J Am Acad Audiol . 1999;  10 26-39
• 28 Humes L E, Halling D, Coughlin M. Reliability and stability of various hearing aid outcome measures in a group of elderly hearing aid wearers.  J Speech Hear Res . 1996;  39 923-935
• 29 Kochkin S. Subjective measures of satisfaction and benefit: establishing norms.  Semin Hear . 1997;  18 37-48
• 30 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak V: consumer satisfaction revisited. Hear J .  2000;  53(1) 38-55
• 31 Mueller G. Outcome measures: the truth about your hearing aid fittings.  Hear J . 1997;  50 21-32
• 32 Mulrow C, Aguilar C, Endicott J. Quality of life changes and hearing impairment.  Ann Intern Med . 1990;  113 188-194
• 33 Mulrow C, Tuley M, Aguilar C. Sustained benefits of hearing aids.  J Speech Hear Res . 1992;  35 1402-1405
• 34 Mulrow C, Tuley M, Aguilar C. Correlates of successful hearing aid use in older adults.  Ear Hear . 1992;  13 108-113
• 35 Newman C W, Sandridge S A. Benefit from, satisfaction with, and cost-effectiveness of three different hearing aid technologies.  Am J Audiol . 1998;  7 115-128
• 36 Schum D J. Perceived hearing aid benefit in relation to perceived needs.  J Am Acad Audiol . 1999;  10 40-45
• 37 Stelmachowicz P G. Hearing aid outcome measures for children.  J Am Acad Audiol . 1999;  10 14-25
• 38 Walden B E. Toward a model clinical-trials protocol for substantiating hearing aid user-benefit claims.  Am J Audiol . 1997;  6 13-24
• 39 Walden B E, Surr R K, Cord M T, Edwards B, Olson L. Comparison of benefits provided by different hearing aid technologies.  J Am Acad Audiol . 2000;  11 540-560
• 40 Weinstein B. Treatment efficacy: Hearing aids in the management of hearing loss in adults.  J Speech Hear Res . 1996;  39 S37-S45
• 41 Weinstein B. Outcome measures in the hearing aid fitting/selection process.  Trends Amplification . 1997;  2 117-137
• 42 Walden B E, Demorest M E, Hepler E L. Self-report approach to assessing benefit derived from amplification.  J Speech Hear Res . 1984;  27 49-56
• 43 Hosford-Dunn H, Halpern J. Clinical application of the satisfaction with amplification in daily life scale in private practice. I: Statistical, content and factorial validity.  J Am Acad Audiol . 2000;  11 523-539
• 44 Hosford-Dunn H L, Halpern J. Clinical application of the SADL scale in private practice. II: Predictive validity of fitting variables.  J Am Acad Audiol . 2001;  12 15-36
• 45 Cox R M, Alexander G C. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit.  Ear Hear . 1995;  16 176-186
• 46 Schum D. Responses of elderly hearing aid users on the hearing aid performance inventory.  J Am Acad Audiol . 1992;  3 308-314
• 47 Dillon H. Shortened hearing aid performance inventory for the elderly (SHAPIE): a statistical approach.  Aust J Audiol . 1994;  16 37-48
• 48 Ventry I, Weinstein B. The hearing handicap inventory for the elderly: a new tool.  Ear Hear . 1982;  3 128-134
• 49 Malinoff R, Weinstein B. Measurement of hearing aid benefit in the elderly.  Ear Hear . 1989;  10 354-356
• 50 Levitt H, Resnick S B. Speech reception by the hearing impaired: methods of testing and development of materials.  Scand Audiol Suppl . 1978;  6 107-129
• 51 Cox R, Alexander G, Gilmore C, Puskalich K M. Use of the connected speech test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners.  Ear Hear . 1988;  9 198-207
• 52 Humes L E, Watson B U, Christensen L A, Cokely C G, Halling D C, Lee L. Factors associated with individual differences in clinical measures of speech recognition among the elderly.  J Speech Lang Hear Res . 1994;  37 465-474
• 53 Gabrielsson A, Schenkman B N, Hagerman B. The effects of different frequency responses on sound quality judgments and speech intelligibility.  J Speech Hear Res . 1988;  31 166-177
• 54 Cox R M, McDaniel D M. Development of the speech intelligibility rating (SIR) test for hearing aid comparisons.  J Speech Hear Res . 1989;  32 347-352
• 55 Gatehouse S. The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1992;  92 1258-1268
• 56 Turner C W, Humes L E, Bentler R A, Cox R M. A review of past research on changes in hearing aid benefit over time.  Ear Hear . 1996;  17 14S-25S
• 57 Saunders G H, Cienkowski K M. Acclimatization to hearing aids.  Ear Hear . 1997;  18 129-139
• 58 Surr R, Cord M, Walden B. Long-term versus short-term hearing aid benefit.  J Am Acad Audiol . 1998;  9 165-171