Dataset Information

The cognitive and psychosocial effects of auditory training and hearing aids in adults with hearing loss.

ABSTRACT: Purpose:Our study assessed the efficacy of the simultaneous use of hearing aids and auditory training for improving cognition and psychosocial function in adults with hearing loss, and the relationships between hearing loss, speech perception and cognition. Participants and methods:A 40-person (aged 50-90 years) pilot study in Melbourne, Australia, was conducted. Participants with hearing impairment completed the Geriatric Depression Scale-Short Form, questions about social activity participation, a wide range of cognitive tasks and a speech perception test at baseline, 3 and 6 months. Participants underwent auditory training for 6 months and used hearing aids for 3 months. Results:Correlations and structural equation modeling suggested that several cognitive domains were associated with speech perception at baseline, but only the Incongruent Stroop cognition measure was associated with hearing loss. Hearing aid use reduced problems with communication, but there were no significant improvements in speech perception, social interaction or cognition. The effect of hearing aids and auditory training for improving depressive symptoms was significant with a moderate to large effect size (Cohen's d=0.87). Conclusion:The small sample size and a relatively high rate of attrition meant that this study was underpowered. However, baseline results suggested relationships between hearing loss, speech perception and cognition, and the hearing intervention provided evidence of reduced depressive symptoms. A full-scale, randomized hearing loss intervention and a longer neuroim-aging study with cognitive outcomes measured in the short term as well as after several years of hearing aid use are needed.

SUBMITTER: Nkyekyer J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6331065 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The cognitive and psychosocial effects of auditory training and hearing aids in adults with hearing loss.

Nkyekyer Joanna J Meyer Denny D Pipingas Andrew A Reed Nicholas S NS

Clinical interventions in aging 20190111

<h4>Purpose</h4>Our study assessed the efficacy of the simultaneous use of hearing aids and auditory training for improving cognition and psychosocial function in adults with hearing loss, and the relationships between hearing loss, speech perception and cognition.<h4>Participants and methods</h4>A 40-person (aged 50-90 years) pilot study in Melbourne, Australia, was conducted. Participants with hearing impairment completed the Geriatric Depression Scale-Short Form, questions about social activi ...[more]

PMID: 30666098

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe main clinical intervention for mild to moderate hearing loss is the provision of hearing aids. These are routinely offered and fitted to those who seek help for hearing difficulties. By amplifying and improving access to sounds, and speech sounds in particular, the aim of hearing aid use is to reduce the negative consequences of hearing loss and improve participation in everyday life.ObjectivesTo evaluate the effects of hearing aids for mild to moderate hearing loss in adults.Search methodsThe Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the ENT Trials Register; the Cochrane Register of Studies Online; MEDLINE; PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 23 March 2017.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) of hearing aids compared to a passive or active control in adults with mild to moderate hearing loss.Data collection and analysisWe used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes in this review were hearing-specific health-related quality of life and the adverse effect pain. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, listening ability and the adverse effect noise-induced hearing loss. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.Main resultsWe included five RCTs involving 825 participants. The studies were carried out in the USA and Europe, and were published between 1987 and 2017. Risk of bias across the studies varied. Most had low risk for selection, reporting and attrition bias, and a high risk for performance and detection bias because blinding was inadequate or absent.All participants had mild to moderate hearing loss. The average age across all five studies was between 69 and 83 years. The duration of the studies ranged between six weeks and six months.There was a large beneficial effect of hearing aids on hearing-specific health-related quality of life associated with participation in daily life as measured using the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE, scale range 1 to 100) compared to the unaided/placebo condition (mean difference (MD) -26.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) -42.16 to -10.77; 722 participants; three studies) (moderate-quality evidence).There was a small beneficial effect of hearing aids on general health-related quality of life (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.38, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.21; 568 participants; two studies) (moderate-quality evidence). There was a large beneficial effect of hearing aids on listening ability (SMD -1.88, 95% CI -3.24 to -0.52; 534 participants; two studies) (moderate-quality evidence).Adverse effects were measured in only one study (48 participants) and none were reported (very low-quality evidence).Authors' conclusionsThe available evidence concurs that hearing aids are effective at improving hearing-specific health-related quality of life, general health-related quality of life and listening ability in adults with mild to moderate hearing loss. The evidence is compatible with the widespread provision of hearing aids as the first-line clinical management in those who seek help for hearing difficulties. Greater consistency is needed in the choice of outcome measures used to assess benefits from hearing aids. Further placebo-controlled studies would increase our confidence in the estimates of these effects and ascertain whether they vary according to age, gender, degree of hearing loss and type of hearing aid.

Project description:This article reports on the psychosocial development and factors influencing outcomes of 5-year-old children with cochlear implants (CIs) or hearing aids (HAs). It further examines differences between children with CIs and HAs with similar levels of hearing loss. Data were collected as part of the Longitudinal Outcomes of Children with Hearing Impairment study-a prospective, population-based study. Parents/caregivers of children completed the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire ( n = 333), the Social Skills subscale from the Child Development Inventory ( n = 317), and questionnaires on functional auditory behavior (Parents' Evaluation of Aural/oral performance of Children), and demographics. Children completed assessments of nonverbal cognitive ability (Wechsler Non-verbal Scale of Ability) and language (Preschool Language Scale - fourth edition). On average, parent-rated Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire scores on emotional or behavioral difficulties were within 1 SD of the normative mean; however, Child Development Inventory scores on social skills were more than 1 SD below the norm. Children with severe-to-profound hearing losses using HAs had significantly more behavioral problems than children with CIs. Regression analyses showed that non-verbal cognitive ability, language, and functional auditory behavior were significantly associated with psychosocial outcomes for children with HAs, whereas outcomes for children with CIs were associated with functional auditory behavior and the presence of additional disabilities. Age at hearing intervention, severity of hearing loss, and communication mode were not associated with outcomes. The results suggest that even children who develop good language ability with the help of a HA or CI may have psychosocial problems if they exhibit difficulties with listening and communicating in everyday environments. The findings have implications for developing interventions for young children with hearing loss.

Project description:Older adults with age-related hearing loss often use hearing aids (HAs) to compensate. However, certain challenges in speech perception, especially in noise still exist, despite today's HA technology. The current study presents an evaluation of a home-based auditory exercises program that can be used during the adaptation process for HA use. The home-based program was developed at a time when telemedicine became prominent in part due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The study included 53 older adults with age-related symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss. They were divided into three groups depending on their experience using HAs. Group 1: Experienced users (participants who used bilateral HAs for at least 2 years). Group 2: New users (participants who were fitted with bilateral HAs for the first time). Group 3: Non-users. These three groups underwent auditory exercises for 3 weeks. The auditory tasks included auditory detection, auditory discrimination, and auditory identification, as well as comprehension with basic (syllables) and more complex (sentences) stimuli, presented in quiet and in noisy listening conditions. All participants completed self-assessment questionnaires before and after the auditory exercises program and underwent a cognitive test at the end. Self-assessed improvements in hearing ability were observed across the HA users groups, with significant changes described by new users. Overall, speech perception in noise was poorer than in quiet. Speech perception accuracy was poorer in the non-users group compared to the users in all tasks. In sessions where stimuli were presented in quiet, similar performance was observed among new and experienced uses. New users performed significantly better than non-users in all speech in noise tasks; however, compared to the experienced users, performance differences depended on task difficulty. The findings indicate that HA users, even new users, had better perceptual performance than their peers who did not receive hearing aids.

Project description:Introduction : Speech recognition in adverse listening conditions becomes more difficult as we age, particularly for individuals with age-related hearing loss (ARHL). Whether these difficulties can be eased with training remains debated, because it is not clear whether the outcomes are sufficiently general to be of use outside of the training context. The aim of the current study was to compare training-induced learning and generalization between normal-hearing older adults and those with ARHL. Methods : Fifty-six listeners (60-72 y/o), 35 participants with ARHL, and 21 normal hearing adults participated in the study. The study design was a cross over design with three groups (immediate-training, delayed-training, and no-training group). Trained participants received 13 sessions of home-based auditory training over the course of 4 weeks. Three adverse listening conditions were targeted: (1) Speech-in-noise, (2) time compressed speech, and (3) competing speakers, and the outcomes of training were compared between normal and ARHL groups. Pre- and post-test sessions were completed by all participants. Outcome measures included tests on all of the trained conditions as well as on a series of untrained conditions designed to assess the transfer of learning to other speech and non-speech conditions. Results : Significant improvements on all trained conditions were observed in both ARHL and normal-hearing groups over the course of training. Normal hearing participants learned more than participants with ARHL in the speech-in-noise condition, but showed similar patterns of learning in the other conditions. Greater pre- to post-test changes were observed in trained than in untrained listeners on all trained conditions. In addition, the ability of trained listeners from the ARHL group to discriminate minimally different pseudowords in noise also improved with training. Conclusions : ARHL did not preclude auditory perceptual learning but there was little generalization to untrained conditions. We suggest that most training-related changes occurred at higher level task-specific cognitive processes in both groups. However, these were enhanced by high quality perceptual representations in the normal-hearing group. In contrast, some training-related changes have also occurred at the level of phonemic representations in the ARHL group, consistent with an interaction between bottom-up and top-down processes.

Project description:ObjectivesThe goal of this study was to identify the effects of auditory deprivation (age-related hearing loss) and auditory stimulation (history of hearing aid use) on the neural registration of sound across two stimulus presentation conditions: (1) equal sound pressure level and (2) equal sensation level.DesignWe used a between-groups design, involving three groups of 14 older adults (n = 42; 62 to 84 years): (1) clinically defined normal hearing (≤25 dB from 250 to 8000 Hz, bilaterally), (2) bilateral mild-moderate/moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss who have never used hearing aids, and (3) bilateral mild-moderate/moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss who have worn bilateral hearing aids for at least the past 2 years.ResultsThere were significant delays in the auditory P1-N1-P2 complex in older adults with hearing loss compared with their normal hearing peers when using equal sound pressure levels for all participants. However, when the degree and configuration of hearing loss were accounted for through the presentation of equal sensation level stimuli, no latency delays were observed. These results suggest that stimulus audibility modulates P1-N1-P2 morphology and should be controlled for when defining deprivation and stimulus-related neuroplasticity in people with hearing loss. Moreover, a history of auditory stimulation, in the form of hearing aid use, does not appreciably alter the neural registration of unaided auditory evoked brain activity when quantified by the P1-N1-P2.ConclusionsWhen comparing auditory cortical responses in older adults with and without hearing loss, stimulus audibility, and not hearing loss-related neurophysiological changes, results in delayed response latency for those with age-related hearing loss. Future studies should carefully consider stimulus presentation levels when drawing conclusions about deprivation- and stimulation-related neuroplasticity. Additionally, auditory stimulation, in the form of a history of hearing aid use, does not significantly affect the neural registration of sound when quantified using the P1-N1-P2-evoked response.

Dataset Information

The cognitive and psychosocial effects of auditory training and hearing aids in adults with hearing loss.

Publications

The cognitive and psychosocial effects of auditory training and hearing aids in adults with hearing loss.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets