Dimensions of hearing aid outcome.

Dimensions of hearing aid outcome are explored in this paper. First, a variety of hearing aid outcome measures is defined including objective and subjective performance, objective and subjective benefit, satisfaction, and use. Following the definition of these terms, factor analysis is described as a statistical tool that can be of assistance in establishing the number and nature of the relevant dimensions of hearing aid outcome. Next, the results from three recent studies that included a variety of measures of hearing aid outcome are examined and factor analysis is applied to the data from each study. This examination leads to the conclusion that hearing aid outcome is a multidimensional construct, rather than unidimensional. The most complete description of hearing aid outcome will be obtained when including at least one measure of aided speech recognition performance, one or more measures of objective benefit in speech recognition, one or two subjective measures of sound quality or listening effort, and one measure of either subjective benefit, satisfaction, or use.

[1]  Robyn M. Cox,et al.  The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit , 1995, Ear and hearing.

[2]  Gerald A. Studebaker,et al.  The Vanderbilt Hearing Aid Report II , 1991 .

[3]  V. Carstairs.  Utilisation of Hearing Aids Issued by the National Health Service , 1973 .

[4]  L E Humes,et al.  Factors associated with individual differences in clinical measures of speech recognition among the elderly. , 1994, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[5]  H. Dillon,et al.  Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) and its relationship to several other measures of benefit and satisfaction provided by hearing aids. , 1997, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[6]  R M Cox,et al.  Use of the Connected Speech Test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners. , 1988, Ear and hearing.

[7]  I. M. Ventry,et al.  The Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly: a New Tool , 1982, Ear and hearing.

[8]  T. S. Kapteyn.  Satisfaction with fitted hearing aids. I. An analysis of technical information. , 1977, Scandinavian audiology.

[9]  R M Cox,et al.  Comparison of two questionnaires for patient-assessed hearing aid benefit. , 1991, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[10]  B E Walden,et al.  Self-report approach to assessing benefit derived from amplification. , 1984, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[11]  H. Dillon,et al.  The National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) New Procedure for Selecting the Gain and Frequency Response of a Hearing Aid , 1986, Ear and hearing.

[12]  J. Jerger,et al.  Factor analytic structure of auditory impairment in elderly persons. , 1997, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[13]  M. Haggard,et al.  Use and benefit of postaural aid in sensory hearing loss. , 1981, Scandinavian audiology.

[14]  R M Cox,et al.  Maturation of hearing aid benefit: objective and subjective measurements. , 1992, Ear and hearing.

[15]  D. Schum.  Responses of elderly hearing aid users on the hearing aid performance inventory. , 1992, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[16]  F H Bess,et al.  A comparison of the benefit provided by well-fit linear hearing aids and instruments with automatic reductions of low-frequency gain. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[17]  Jae-on Kim,et al.  Introduction to Factor Analysis , 1978 .

[18]  Jae-On Kim,et al.  Introduction to Factor Analysis: What It Is and How To Do It , 1978 .

[19]  T S Kapteyn,et al.  Satisfaction with fitted hearing aids. II. An investigation into the influence of psycho-social factors. , 1977, Scandinavian audiology.

[20]  B Hagerman,et al.  The effects of different frequency responses on sound quality judgments and speech intelligibility. , 1988, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[21]  B. Weinstein,et al.  Measurement of hearing aid benefit in the elderly. , 1989, Ear and hearing.

[22]  S Gatehouse,et al.  Components and Determinants of Hearing Aid Benefit , 1994, Ear and hearing.

[23]  R Carhart,et al.  An expanded test for speech discrimination utilizing CNC monosyllabic words. Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6. SAM-TR-66-55. , 1966, [Technical report] SAM-TR. USAF School of Aerospace Medicine.

[24]  B. Weinstein.  Outcome Measures in the Hearing Aid Fitting/Selection Process , 1997, Trends in amplification.

[25]  H Levitt,et al.  Speech reception by the hearing-impaired: methods of testing and the development of new tests. , 1978, Scandinavian audiology. Supplementum.

[26]  B. Weinstein,et al.  The Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly as a measure of hearing aid benefit. , 1988, Ear and hearing.

[27]  L. Humes,et al.  Reliability and stability of various hearing-aid outcome measures in a group of elderly hearing-aid wearers. , 1996, Journal of speech and hearing research.