Einflussfaktoren auf die Rehabilitation der Innenohrschwerhörigkeit mit Hörgeräten

ZusammenfassungHintergrundSowohl ältere als auch jüngere, berufstätige Patienten nutzen aus unterschiedlichen Gründen ihr Hörgerät nicht regelmäßig oder gar nicht. FragestellungZiel der Arbeit war, zu klären, ob eine klassische Hörgeräteanpassung ein ausreichender Prädiktor für eine suffiziente Rehabilitation darstellt.Methoden/ErgebnisseEs wurden 197 erwachsene Patienten befragt. Nur 108 davon nutzten ihr Hörgerät ständig, 57 trugen es manchmal und 32 nie. Bei den beruflichen Gründen für diese auffällig niedrige Rehabilitationsrate waren v. a.die mangelhafte Sprachverständlichkeit und eine Dysakusis bei spezifischen Schallsignalen wesentlich. In 40% kam es zu einer intolerablen Rückkopplung, da die Otoplastik nicht ausreichend abdichtete. Berücksichtigt man auch dieses Ergebnis, so ergibt sich eine Rate suffizienter Rehabilitation von lediglich 33%.FazitDer Nachweis der Wirksamkeit in der typischen audiologischen Prüfungssituation ist ein notwendiger, aber kein ausreichender Prädiktor für die ausreichende Wirksamkeit im Alltag.AbstractBackgroundA large proportion of older as well as younger patients do not use their hearing aids. Of the younger hearing impaired population, this occurs in the majority of those who do not benefit sufficiently from their hearing aids and, consequently, they face difficulties in their working and social life.Scientific questionOur aim was to evaluate whether a classical hearing aid adjustment is of sufficient predictive value to determine whether adequate rehabilitation in everyday and professional life will occur.Methods and resultsA questionnaire was returned by 197 adult hearing impaired patients. Only 108 were using their hearing aids all the time; 57 rarely and 32 never. The main reason for this low rehabilitation rate proved to be inadequate amplification. At the workplace, insufficient speech discrimination came into play. Another important factor was dysacusis induced by specific noise signals. There was an intolerable acoustic feedback in 40% which could not be sufficiently alleviated. Taking these results into account, only about a third of patients were sufficiently rehabilitated.ConclusionsProof of effectiveness in a typical audiological testing situation is an important but not a fully reliable predictor for effectiveness in everyday life. Even when hearing aids are shown to be effective with such testing, their application in particular everyday or work situations may be insufficient of even impossible.

[1]  H. Zenner,et al.  Aktive elektronische Hörimplantate für Mittel- und Innenohrschwerhörige – eine neue Ära der Ohrchirurgie Teil I: Grundprinzipien und Nomenklaturvorschlag , 1997, HNO.

[2]  C. Mulrow,et al.  A critical reevaluation of the Quantified Denver Scale of Communication Function. , 1990, Ear and hearing.

[3]  [Use of hearing aids by the elderly: correlation between intention and behavior]. , 1996, Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie.

[4]  Identifying the needs of elderly, hearing-impaired persons: the importance and utility of hearing aid attributes , 2002, European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology.

[5]  H. Zenner,et al.  Gehörschäden durch Freizeitlärm , 1999, HNO.

[6]  Horst Zank,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF A QUESTIONNAIRE TO MEASURE HEARING-RELATED HEALTH STATE PREFERENCES FRAMED IN AN OVERALL HEALTH PERSPECTIVE , 2002, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[7]  B. Hanratty,et al.  Effective management of the elderly hearing impaired--a review. , 2000, Journal of public health medicine.

[8]  Elizabeth Breeze,et al.  Reduced hearing, ownership, and use of hearing aids in elderly people in the UK–the MRC Trial of the Assessment and Management of Older People in the Community: a cross-sectional survey , 2002, The Lancet.

[9]  T. Wiley,et al.  Self-reported hearing handicap and audiometric measures in older adults. , 2000, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[10]  D. Brooks,et al.  Some factors influencing choice of type of hearing aid in the UK: behind-the-ear or in-the-ear. , 1994, British journal of audiology.

[11]  H. Zenner,et al.  [Active electronic cochlear implants for middle and inner ear hearing loss--a new era in ear surgery. I: Basic principles and recommendations on nomenclature]. , 1997, HNO.

[12]  H. von Wedel,et al.  Demands on hearing aid features—special signal processing for elderly users? , 2003, International journal of audiology.

[13]  R. Probst Eine neue Generation aktiver Hörimplantate , 1997, HNO.

[14]  A. Davis,et al.  The impact of hearing impairment: a global health problem. , 1999, International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology.

[15]  Martin Walger,et al.  Determining the Importance of Fundamental Hearing Aid Attributes , 2002, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[16]  S. Hands Hearing loss in over-65s: is routine questionnaire screening worthwhile? , 2000, The Journal of Laryngology & Otology.