Dataset Information

Evaluating the short-term and long-term effects of an internet-based aural rehabilitation programme for hearing aid users in general clinical practice: a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Guided internet-based intervention beyond hearing aid (HA) fitting has been shown to be efficacious in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, internet interventions have rarely been applied clinically as a part of regular aural rehabilitation (AR). Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of internet-based AR for HA users from a clinical population. OUTCOME MEASURES:The Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE) was used as the primary outcome measure, and the Communication Strategies Scale (CSS) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were used as secondary outcome measures. All questionnaires were administered before and directly after the intervention and at 6 months postintervention. METHODS:We used a parallel group design (RCT). The data were collected in 2013-2014 at three different clinics. Seventy-four HA users were randomly assigned to receive either full internet-based AR (intervention group, n=37) or one element of the internet-based AR (control group, n=37). RESULTS:Data were analysed following the intention-to-treat principle. Each group showed improved HHIE scores over time and did not differ significantly from each other. The intervention group showed significantly greater improvement compared with the control group for the CSS total and the non-verbal subscale scores. The intervention group and control group were also subdivided into two age groups: 20-59 years and 60-80 years. Significantly better improvement on the CSS total and non-verbal subscale scores was found in the older group compared with the younger participants. CONCLUSIONS:This study indicates that participants in an internet-based intervention applied in general clinical practice showed improved self-reported communication skills compared with a control group. Receiving a full intervention was not more effective in improving self-reported hearing problems than receiving just one element of the internet-based intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:This trial is registered at ClinicalTrals.gov, NCT01837550; results.

SUBMITTER: Malmberg M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5734201 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating the short-term and long-term effects of an internet-based aural rehabilitation programme for hearing aid users in general clinical practice: a randomised controlled trial.

Malmberg Milijana M Lunner Thomas T Kähäri Kim K Andersson Gerhard G

BMJ open 20170606 5

<h4>Objective</h4>Guided internet-based intervention beyond hearing aid (HA) fitting has been shown to be efficacious in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, internet interventions have rarely been applied clinically as a part of regular aural rehabilitation (AR). Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of internet-based AR for HA users from a clinical population.<h4>Outcome measures</h4>The Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE) was used as the primary outcome measure, and ...[more]

PMID: 28592571

Similar Datasets

Project description:Measurement of outcomes has become increasingly important to assess the benefit of audiologic rehabilitation, including hearing aids, in adults. Data from questionnaires, however, are based on retrospective recall of events and experiences, and often can be inaccurate. Questionnaires also do not capture the daily variation that typically occurs in relevant events and experiences. Clinical researchers in a variety of fields have turned to a methodology known as ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to assess quotidian experiences associated with health problems. The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility of using EMA to obtain real-time responses from hearing aid users describing their experiences with challenging hearing situations.This study required three phases: (1) develop EMA methodology to assess hearing difficulties experienced by hearing aid users; (2) make use of focus groups to refine the methodology; and (3) test the methodology with 24 hearing aid users. Phase 3 participants carried a personal digital assistant 12 hr per day for 2 weeks. The personal digital assistant alerted participants to respond to questions four times a day. Each assessment started with a question to determine whether a hearing problem was experienced since the last alert. If "yes," then up to 23 questions (depending on contingent response branching) obtained details about the situation. If "no," then up to 11 questions obtained information that would help to explain why hearing was not a problem. Each participant completed the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE) both before and after the 2-week EMA testing period to evaluate for "reactivity" (exacerbation of self-perceived hearing problems that could result from the repeated assessments).Participants responded to the alerts with a 77% compliance rate, providing a total of 991 completed momentary assessments (mean = 43.1 per participant). A substantial amount of data were obtained with the methodology. It is important to note that participants reported a "hearing problem situation since the last alert" 37.6% of the time (372 responses). The most common problem situation involved "face-to-face conversation" (53.8% of the time). The next most common problem situation was "telephone conversation" (17.2%) followed by "TV, radio, iPod, etc." (15.3%), "environmental sounds" (9.7%), and "movies, lecture, etc." (4.0%). Comparison of pre- and post-EMA mean HHIE scores revealed no significant difference (p > 0.05), indicating that reactivity did not occur for this group. It should be noted, however, that 37.5% of participants reported a greater sense of awareness regarding their hearing loss and use of hearing aids.Results showed participants were compliant, gave positive feedback, and did not demonstrate reactivity based on pre- and post-HHIE scores. We conclude that EMA methodology is feasible with patients who use hearing aids and could potentially inform hearing healthcare (HHC) services. The next step is to develop and evaluate EMA protocols that provide detailed daily patient information to audiologists at each stage of HHC. The advantages of such an approach would be to obtain real-life outcome measures, and to determine within- and between-day variability in outcomes and associated factors. Such information at present is not available from patients who seek and use HHC services.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Adults living with hearing loss have highly variable knowledge of hearing aids, resulting in suboptimal use or nonuse. This issue can be addressed by the provision of high-quality educational resources. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to assess the everyday experiences of first-time hearing aid users when using a newly developed, theoretically informed cocreated mobile health (mHealth) educational intervention called m2Hear. This intervention aims to deliver greater opportunities for individualization and interactivity compared with our previously developed multimedia intervention, C2Hear. METHODS:A total of 16 first-time hearing aid users trialed m2Hear for a period of 10-weeks in their everyday lives, after which individual semistructured interviews were completed. The data were analyzed using an established deductive thematic analysis procedure underpinned by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior model. The model stipulates that to engage in a target behavior, an individual must have physical and psychological capability, physical and social opportunity, and automatic and reflective motivation. RESULTS:Capability-m2Hear was viewed as a concise and comprehensive resource, suitable for a range of digital literacy skills. It was stated that m2Hear could be conveniently reused to provide useful reminders that facilitate knowledge of hearing aids and communication. Opportunity-m2Hear was simple and straightforward to use, enabling greater individualization and independence. The availability of m2Hear via mobile technologies also improved accessibility. Motivation-m2Hear provided greater support and reassurance, improving confidence and empowering users to self-manage their hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS:Overall, this qualitative study suggests that m2Hear supports first-time hearing aid users to successfully self-manage their hearing loss postfitting. Furthermore, this study demonstrates the utility of employing a combined theoretical and ecologically valid approach in the development of mHealth educational resources to meet the individual self-management needs of adults living with hearing loss. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03136718; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03136718.

Project description:ObjectiveTo establish the acceptability and feasibility of delivering the Active Communication Education (ACE) programme to increase quality of life through improving communication and hearing aid use in the UK National Health Service.DesignRandomised controlled, open feasibility trial with embedded economic and process evaluations.SettingAudiology departments in two hospitals in two UK cities.ParticipantsTwelve hearing aid users aged 18 years or over who reported moderate or less than moderate benefit from their new hearing aid.InterventionsConsenting participants (along with a significant other) were to be randomised by a remote, centralised randomisation service in groups to ACE plus treatment-as-usual (intervention group) or treatment-as-usual only (control group).Primary outcome measuresThe primary outcomes were related to feasibility: recruitment, retention, treatment adherence and acceptability to participants and fidelity of treatment delivery.Secondary outcome measuresInternational Outcomes Inventory for Hearing Aids, Self-Assessment of Communication, EQ-5D-5L and Short-Form 36. Blinding of the participants and facilitator was not possible.ResultsTwelve hearing aid users and six significant others consented to take part. Eight hearing aid users were randomised: four to the intervention group; and four to treatment-as-usual only. Four significant others participated alongside the randomised participants. Recruitment to the study was very low and centres only screened 466 hearing aid users over the 15-month recruitment period, compared with the approximately 3500 anticipated. Only one ACE group and one control group were formed. ACE could be delivered and appeared acceptable to participants. We were unable to robustly assess attrition and attendance rates due to the low sample size.ConclusionsWhile ACE appeared acceptable to hearing aid users and feasible to deliver, it was not feasible to identify and recruit participants struggling with their hearing aids at the 3-month posthearing aid fitting point.Trial registration numberISRCTN28090877.

Dataset Information

Evaluating the short-term and long-term effects of an internet-based aural rehabilitation programme for hearing aid users in general clinical practice: a randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Evaluating the short-term and long-term effects of an internet-based aural rehabilitation programme for hearing aid users in general clinical practice: a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets