Speech perception, real-ear measurements and self-perceived hearing impairment after remote and face-to-face programming of hearing aids: A randomized single-blind agreement study

Archive ouverte

Venail, Frederic | Picot, Marie | Marin, Grégory | Falinower, Sylvain | Samson, Jacques | Cizeron, Gilles | Balcon, Maxime | Blanc, Denis | Bricaud, Jeremy | Lorenzi, Antoine | Ceccato, Jean-Charles | Puel, Jean-Luc

Edité par CCSD ; SAGE Publications -

International audience. IntroductionCurrent literature does not provide strong evidence that remote programming of hearing aids is effective, despite its increasing use by audiologists. We tested speech perception outcomes, real-ear insertion gain, and changes in self-perceived hearing impairment after face-to-face and remote programming of hearing aids in a randomized multicentre, single-blind crossover study.MethodsAdult experienced hearing aid users were enrolled during routine follow-up visits to audiology clinics. Hearing aids were programmed both face to face and remotely, then participants randomly received either the face-to-face or remote settings in a blinded manner and were evaluated 5 weeks later. Participants then received the other settings and were evaluated 5 weeks later.ResultsData from 52 out of 60 participants were analysed. We found excellent concordance in performance of hearing aids programmed face to face and remotely for speech understanding in quiet (phonetically balanced kindergarten test – intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92 (95% confidence interval: 0.87–0.95)), and good concordance in performance for speech understanding in noise (phonetically balanced kindergarten +5 dB signal-to-noise ratio – intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.55–0.82)). Face-to-face and remote programming took 10 minutes (±2.9) and 10 minutes (±2.8), respectively. Real-ear insertion gains were highly correlated for input sound at 50, 65 and 80 dB sound pressure levels. The programming type did not affect the abbreviated profile of hearing aid questionnaire scores.ConclusionsIn experienced hearing aid users, face-to-face and remote programming of hearing aids give similar results in terms of speech perception, with no increase in the time spent on patients’ care and no difference in self-reported hearing benefit.

Consulter en ligne

Suggestions

Du même auteur

Evaluation of otoscopy simulation as a training tool for real-time remote otoscopy

Archive ouverte | Venail, Frederic | CCSD

International audience. OBJECTIVE:Teleotoscopy requires the assistance of telehealth facilitators; but their training requirements remain to be determined. We evaluated the use of an otoscopy simulator to train faci...

ROS-Induced Activation of DNA Damage Responses Drives Senescence-Like State in Postmitotic Cochlear Cells: Implication for Hearing Preservation

Archive ouverte | Benkafadar, Nesrine | CCSD

In our aging society, age-related hearing loss (ARHL) has become a major socioeconomic issue. Reactive oxygen species (ROS)may be one of the main causal factors of age-related cochlear cell degeneration. We examined whether ROS-in...

Validation of a tablet-based application for hearing self-screening in an adult population

Archive ouverte | Génin, Arnaud | CCSD

International audience. Objective: This study evaluated the diagnostic performances of a tablet-based hearing screening test by assisted-test and self-test modes.Design/method: Measurements were performed with the S...

Chargement des enrichissements...