A cost-utility analysis of adult group audiologic rehabilitation: are the benefits worth the cost?

The purpose of this study was to conduct a cost-utility analysis comparing two treatment approaches: (1) hearing aid use alone (HA) and (2) hearing aid use with short-term group postfitting audiologic rehabilitation (HA + AR). A total of 105 veterans, 67 males and 38 females, with at least a mild sensorineural hearing loss participated in this study. The SF-36V was administered to each participant before and after treatment. This instrument measures both mental component summary (MCS) scales and physical component summary (PCS) scales of quality of life. As a whole, the participants exhibited a statistically significant improvement in mean MCS scores pre- to postintervention, with average improvements of 1.4 and 3.0 points for the HA and HA + AR groups, respectively. With the use of the MCS scores, the results of a cost-utility analysis revealed that HA treatment cost $60.00 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, while HA + AR cost only $31.91 per QALY gained, making HA + AR the more cost-effective treatment.

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

[2]  Ware J.E.Jr.,et al.  THE MOS 36- ITEM SHORT FORM HEALTH SURVEY (SF- 36) CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND ITEM SELECTION , 1992 .

[3]  D. Brooks,et al.  Counselling and its effect on hearing aid use. , 1979, Scandinavian audiology.

[4]  R. Schow,et al.  Aural Rehabilitation by ASHA Audiologists: 1980-1990. , 1993, American journal of audiology.

[5]  R. Klein,et al.  Low Prevalence of Hearing Aid Use Among Older Adults with Hearing Loss: The Epidemiology of Hearing Loss Study , 1998, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[6]  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.

[7]  D. Lansky,et al.  Using health status measures in the hospital setting: from acute care to 'outcomes management'. , 1992, Medical care.

[8]  M. Pichora-Fuller,et al.  Aural Rehabilitation in a Teaching Hospital: Evaluation and Results , 1984, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[9]  Drewett Rf,et al.  Measuring outcome of total knee replacement using quality of life indices. , 1992 .

[10]  G. Larsen,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: effect of improved battery life and comparison with amiodarone therapy. , 1992, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  A. Holmes,et al.  Efficacy of audiologic rehabilitation for older adults. , 1996, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

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

[13]  S. Kochkin,et al.  Key to Graphs & Tables , 2022 .

[14]  R. Bentler,et al.  Relating hearing aid use to well‐being among older adults , 1998 .

[15]  F. Sonnenberg,et al.  Myocardial revascularization for chronic stable angina. Analysis of the role of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty based on data available in 1989. , 1990, Annals of internal medicine.

[16]  D Byrne.  Key issues in hearing aid selection and evaluation. , 1992, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[17]  M. Drummond,et al.  Health Care Technology: Effectiveness, Efficiency and Public Policy@@@Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes , 1988 .

[18]  S. Folstein,et al.  "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. , 1975, Journal of psychiatric research.

[19]  T Hnath-Chisolm,et al.  The effects of intervention strategy on self-perception of hearing handicap. , 1992, Ear and hearing.

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

[21]  M. Demorest,et al.  Psychometric principles in the selection, interpretation, and evaluation of communication self-assessment inventories. , 1984, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[22]  D. Schum,et al.  Feasible Aural Rehabilitation Services for Busy Clinical Settings. , 1994, American journal of audiology.

[23]  R. Anderson,et al.  United States life tables, 1999. , 2002, National vital statistics reports : from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System.

[24]  Donald R. Miller,et al.  Health Status in VA Patients: Results from the Veterans Health Study , 1999, American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality.

[25]  C. Mulrow,et al.  Quality-of-life changes and hearing impairment. A randomized trial. , 1990, Annals of internal medicine.

[26]  D. Lansky,et al.  Outcomes management in heart valve replacement surgery: early experience. , 1992, The Journal of heart valve disease.

[27]  J. Niparko,et al.  Cost Utility of the Multichannel Cochlear Implant in 258 Profoundly Deaf Individuals , 1996, The Laryngoscope.

[28]  Sergei Kochkin.  “Baby Boomers” spur growth in potential market, but penetration rate declines , 1999 .

[29]  S. Wilson.  Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes , 1987 .

[30]  Phillips Rc,et al.  Outcomes management in heart valve replacement surgery: early experience. , 1992 .

[31]  C. Crandell.  Hearing aids: Their effects on functional health status , 1998 .

[32]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) , 1992 .