Elizabeth Convery

Introduction: Hearing loss is highly prevalent and impacts many aspects of a person’s life, including communication, social engagement, employment, general health and well-being. Yet, many people do not access hearing healthcare and are unaware of the range of hearing healthcare options available. Barriers to hearing healthcare include poor understanding of hearing loss and its impact; poor knowledge of help-seeking for hearing healthcare options; minimal support to help decide which option is best; and stigma related to hearing loss. These barriers lead to many people not receiving the hearing healthcare they need. Guided by theories of behaviour change and implementation science, HearChoice , an online tailored decision support intervention, has been co-developed to empower adults with hearing difficulties by offering them choice and control over their own hearing healthcare. HearChoice aims to facilitate informed decisions, accessibility and uptake of hearing healthcare, including a wide range of interventions, for adults with hearing difficulties. The objectives of the trial are to evaluate the effectiveness, health economics and feasibility of HearChoice . Methods and analysis: This online randomised controlled trial will recruit participants with hearing difficulties across Australia, with an anticipated sample size of 640. Participants will be randomised to either HearChoice (treatment) or an Australia-specific Hearing Option Grid (active control), both delivered online. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline when the interventions will be offered, at 7 days post-intervention (primary endpoint) and at 3 months post-intervention. An email reminder will be sent at 1-month post-intervention. The primary outcome is decisional conflict. Secondary outcomes include measures of readiness and self-efficacy to take action, hearing-related quality of life and empowerment, assessment of the value and impact of HearChoice , work performance and health, and feasibility measures. Primary analysis will compare outcomes between HearChoice and the active control at the primary endpoint. Ethics and dissemination: The study was approved by the Curtin University Human Ethics Committee (HRE2023-0024). All participants will provide written informed consent prior to participation. A broad dissemination plan of the study findings includes peer-reviewed publications, scientific conference presentations, articles and presentations for the wider community and public written in lay and accessible language, and social media. Trial registration number: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12624001139561).

Background: Patients often need multiple fine-tuning appointments with their hearing health care provider to achieve satisfactory hearing aid outcomes. A smartphone app that enables patients to remotely request and receive new hearing aid settings could improve hearing health care access and efficiency. Introduction: We assessed the usability of ReSound Assist™, (ReSound America, Bloomington, MN) the remote communication feature of a hearing aid app, and investigated whether hearing aid outcomes are influenced by app-based versus in-person patient-provider communication. Materials and Methods: Thirty adults were fit bilaterally with hearing aids and randomized to intervention and control groups. During a 6-week field trial, participants reported hearing aid problems via ReSound Assist (intervention) or at a scheduled face-to-face follow-up appointment (control). Usability of ReSound Assist was assessed with a questionnaire and interview. Hearing aid performance, benefit, satisfaction, and daily usage were compared for both groups. Results: ReSound Assist was rated as highly usable. Participants identified specific aspects of effectiveness and efficiency that could be improved. Similar problems were reported by intervention and control participants regardless of communication mode (app-based vs. in-person). However, almost half the requests received via ReSound Assist were for problems that required advice from the provider or physical modifications to the hearing aids rather than fine-tuning, highlighting the continued importance of in-person hearing health care. There was no significant difference in hearing aid outcomes between intervention and control participants. Conclusions: Apps enabling remote patient-provider communication are a viable method for hearing aid users to seek and receive help with hearing aid problems that can be addressed through fine-tuning.

Purpose: Hearing loss self-management refers to the knowledge and skills people use to manage the effects of hearing loss on all aspects of their daily lives. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between self-reported hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Method: Thirty-seven adults with hearing loss, all of whom were current users of bilateral hearing aids, participated in this observational study. The participants completed self-report inventories probing their hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Correlation analysis was used to investigate the relationship between individual domains of hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Results: Participants who reported better self-management of the effects of their hearing loss on their emotional well-being and social participation were more likely to report less aided listening difficulty in noisy and reverberant environments and greater satisfaction with the effect of their hearing aids on their self-image. Participants who reported better self-management in the areas of adhering to treatment, participating in shared decision making, accessing services and resources, attending appointments, and monitoring for changes in their hearing and functional status were more likely to report greater satisfaction with the sound quality and performance of their hearing aids. Conclusion: Study findings highlight the potential for using information about a patient's hearing loss self-management in different domains as part of clinical decision making and management planning.

The University of Queensland's institutional repository, UQ eSpace, aims to create global visibility and accessibility of UQ’s scholarly research.

Hearing health care is biomedically focused, device-centered, and clinician-led. There is emerging evidence that these characteristics—all of which are hallmarks of a health care system designed to address acute, rather than chronic, conditions—may contribute to low rates of help-seeking and hearing rehabilitation uptake among adults with hearing loss. In this review, we introduce audiologists to the Chronic Care Model, an organizational framework that describes best-practice clinical care for chronic conditions, and suggest that it may be a viable model for hearing health care to adopt. We further introduce the concept of chronic condition self-management, a key component of chronic care that refers to the knowledge and skills patients use to manage the effects of a chronic condition on all aspects of daily life. Drawing on the chronic condition evidence base, we demonstrate a link between the provision of effective self-management support and improved clinical outcomes and discuss validated methods with which clinicians can support the acquisition and application of self-management skills in their patients. We examine the extent to which elements of chronic condition self-management have been integrated into clinical practice in audiology and suggest directions for further research in this area.

Objectives: Self-fitting hearing aids have the potential to increase the accessibility of hearing health care. The aims of this study were to (1) identify factors that are associated with the ability to successfully set up a pair of commercially available self-fitting hearing aids; 2) identify factors that are associated with the need for knowledgeable, personalized support in performing the self-fitting procedure; and (3) evaluate performance of the individual steps in the self-fitting procedure. Design: Sixty adults with hearing loss between the ages of 51 and 85 took part in the study. Half of the participants were current users of bilateral hearing aids; the other half had no previous hearing aid experience. At the first appointment, participants underwent assessments of health locus of control, hearing aid self-efficacy, cognitive status, problem-solving skills, demographic characteristics, and hearing thresholds. At the second appointment, participants followed a set of computer-based instructions accompanied by video clips to self-fit the hearing aids. The self-fitting procedure required participants to customize the physical fit of the hearing aids, insert the hearing aids into the ear, perform self-directed in situ audiometry, and adjust the resultant settings according to their preference. Participants had access to support with the self-fitting procedure from a trained clinical assistant (CA) at all times. Results: Forty-one (68%) of the participants achieved a successful self-fitting. Participants who self-fit successfully were significantly more likely than those who were unsuccessful to have had previous experience with hearing aids and to own a mobile device (when controlling for four potential covariates). Of the 41 successful self-fitters, 15 (37%) performed the procedure independently and 26 (63%) sought support from the CA. The successful self-fitters who sought CA support were more likely than those who self-fit independently to have a health locus of control that is externally oriented toward powerful others. Success rates on the individual steps in the self-fitting procedure were relatively high. No one step was more problematic than any other, nor was there a systematic tendency for particular participants to make more errors than others. Steps that required use of the hearing aids in conjunction with the self-fitting app on the participant’s mobile device had the highest rates of support use. Conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that nonaudiologic factors should be considered when selecting suitable candidates for the self-fitting hearing aids evaluated in this study. Although computer-based instructions and video clips were shown to improve self-fitting skill acquisition relative to past studies in which printed instruction booklets were used, the majority of people are still likely to require access to support from trained personnel while carrying out the self-fitting procedure, especially when this requires the use of an app.

Purpose: To determine the factor structure of a clinical tool for the assessment of hearing loss self-management, and to identify predictors of the total score on the assessment and the extracted factor scores. Materials and methods: Hearing loss self-management assessments were conducted with 62 older adults. The factor structure of the assessment was determined by exploratory factor analysis. Multiple linear regression analyses identified significant contributors to the total score and to each of the extracted factors. Results: Three factors were identified, each representing a distinct domain of hearing loss self-management: Actions, Psychosocial Behaviours, and Knowledge. The most common significant predictor was hearing health care experience, which predicted self-management overall and in the Actions and Knowledge domains. Health literacy predicted hearing loss self-management overall and in the Psychosocial Behaviours domain. Actions were additionally predicted by hearing aid self-efficacy and gender, Psychosocial Behaviours by health locus of control, and Knowledge by age. Conclusions: The results of the factor analysis suggested that hearing loss self-management is a multidimensional construct. Each domain of hearing loss self-management was influenced by different contextual factors. Subsequent interventions to improve hearing loss self-management should therefore be domain-specific and tailored to relevant contextual factors.

Self-fitting hearing aids (SFHAs)—devices that enable self-directed threshold measurements leading to a prescribed hearing aid (HA) setting, and fine-tuning, without the need for professional support—are now commercially available. This study examined outcomes obtained with one commercial SFHA, the Companion (SoundWorld Solutions), when support was available from a clinical assistant during self-fitting. Participants consisted of 27 experienced and 25 new HA users who completed the self-fitting process, resulting in 38 user-driven and 14 clinician-driven fittings. Following 12 weeks’ experience with the SFHAs in the field, outcomes measured included the following: coupler gain and output, HA handling and management skills, speech recognition in noise, and self-reported benefit and satisfaction. In addition, the conventionally fitted HAs of 22 of the experienced participants who had user-driven fittings were evaluated. Irrespective of HA experience, the type of fitting (user- or clinician-driven) had no significant effect on coupler gain, speech recognition scores, or self-reported benefit and satisfaction. Users selected significantly higher low-frequency gain in the SFHAs when compared with the conventionally fitted HAs. The conventionally fitted HAs were rated significantly higher for benefit and satisfaction on some subscales due to negative issues with the physical design and implementation of the SFHAs, rather than who drove the fitting process. Poorer cognitive function was associated with poorer handling and management of the SFHAs. Findings suggest that with the right design and support, SFHAs may be a viable option to improve the accessibility of hearing health care.

Objective: To evaluate the capacity of a self-management assessment tool to identify unmet hearing health care (HHC) needs; to determine whether such an assessment yields novel and clinically useful information. Design: Hearing loss self-management (HLSM) was assessed with the Partners in Health scale and the Cue and Response interview from the Flinders Chronic Condition Management Program™. The results of the scale and the interview were compared to determine the extent to which they each contributed to the assessment of HLSM. Study sample: Thirty older adults who currently receive HHC. Results: The two assessment tools were useful in identifying the specific domains in which participants lacked good HLSM skills. While participants tended to have a high level of knowledge about hearing loss and technology-based interventions, many reported the presence of unmet psychosocial needs with no clear plan for addressing them. There was considerable variation in terms of the extent to which their audiologists facilitated shared decision-making. Conclusions: The results suggest that HLSM has the potential to play an important role in audiological rehabilitation. A HLSM assessment tool that more precisely matches the unique needs of people with hearing loss should be developed, along with interventions to meet those needs.

Background:Hearing aids and personal sound amplification products that are designed to be self-fitted by the user at home are becoming increasingly available in the online marketplace. While these devices are often marketed as a low-cost alternative to traditional hearing health-care, little is known about people’s ability to successfully use and manage them. Previous research into the individual components of a simulated self-fitting procedure has been undertaken, but no study has evaluated performance of the procedure as a whole using a commercial product.Purpose:To evaluate the ability of a group of adults with a hearing loss to set up a pair of commercially available self-fitting hearing aids for their own use and to investigate factors associated with a successful outcome.Research Design:An interventional study that used regression analysis to identify potential contributors to the outcome.Study Sample:Forty adults with mild to moderately severe hearing loss participated in the study: 20 current hearing aid users (the “experienced” group) and 20 with no previous amplification experience (the “new” group). Twenty-four participants attended with partners, who were present to offer assistance with the study task as needed.Data Collection and Analysis:Participants followed a set of written, illustrated instructions to perform a multistep self-fitting procedure with a commercially available self-fitting hearing aid, with optional assistance from a lay partner. Standardized measures of cognitive function, health literacy, locus of control, hearing aid self-efficacy, and manual dexterity were collected. Statistical analysis was performed to examine the proportion of participants in each group who successfully performed the self-fitting procedure, factors that predicted successful completion of the task, and the contributions of partners to the outcome.Results:Fifty-five percent of participants were able to successfully perform the self-fitting procedure. Although the same success rate was observed for both experienced and new participants, the majority of the errors relating to the hearing test and the fine-tuning tasks were made by the experienced participants, while all of the errors associated with physically customizing the hearing aids and most of the insertion errors were made by the new participants. Although the majority of partners assisted in the self-fitting task, their contributions did not significantly influence the outcome. Further, no characteristic or combination of characteristics reliably predicted which participants would be successful at the self-fitting task.Conclusions:Although the majority of participants were able to complete the self-fitting task without error, the provision of knowledgeable support by trained personnel, rather than a fellow layperson, would most certainly increase the proportion of users who are able to achieve success. Refinements to the instructions and the physical design of the hearing aid may also serve to improve the success rate. Further evaluation of the range of self-fitting hearing aids that are now on the market should be undertaken.