McPherson B, Wong E T L
Division of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong, China.
Disabil Rehabil. 2005 Jun 3;27(11):601-9. doi: 10.1080/09638280400019682.
his study evaluated the effectiveness of a recently developed, low-cost 'over-the-counter' style hearing aid with elderly people, who had mild to moderate mixed or sensorineural hearing losses. Two aspects were focused upon, objective change in the participants' aided hearing measures and the self-reported performance and benefit obtained from the hearing aid.
The hearing aids were trialed by 19 elderly persons over a 3-month period. Aided hearing thresholds and real-ear insertion gain measures were obtained from participants, three questionnaires (the Client-Oriented Scale of Improvement [COSI], the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids [IOI-HA] and the Profile of Hearing Aid Performance--Chinese version [PHAP-C]) were completed, and an open-ended interview was conducted.
Objective tests noted that the trial hearing aid was able to provide appropriate amplification for the elderly participants in this study. The device was rated by the majority of participants as providing benefit, with 16 of the participants (84%) using their hearing aid from at least 1 to over 8 h each day and with all participants considering the low-cost instrument 'worth the trouble' of wearing. Participant ratings of benefit with the IOI-HA were comparable with those obtained in a normative study in which subjects used more expensive conventional hearing aids. Using the COSI questionnaire, participants typically concluded that their hearing improvement with the study device was 'slightly better' to 'better' than without amplification. The PHAP-C questionnaire results indicated that, while wearing their hearing aids, participants experienced difficulties only infrequently in most everyday listening situations. Comments made during open-ended interviews were equally positive and negative, with most negative comments focused on difficulties with either acoustic feedback or background noise annoyance while wearing the hearing instrument.CONCLUSION. Affordable, over-the-counter hearing devices provide a potential opportunity for greater numbers of persons with hearing loss to access amplification and benefit from improved communicative abilities. Further investigation and further development of these instruments is warranted, to provide enhanced rehabilitation outcomes for elderly persons with hearing impairment.
本研究评估了一种最近研发的低成本“非处方”式助听器对患有轻至中度混合性或感音神经性听力损失的老年人的有效性。研究聚焦于两个方面，即参与者助听措施的客观变化以及自我报告的使用助听器后的表现和益处。
19名老年人在3个月的时间里试用了这些助听器。从参与者那里获取了助听阈值和真耳插入增益测量数据，完成了三份问卷（以客户为导向的改进量表[COSI]、助听器国际结果量表[IOI-HA]和助听器性能概况——中文版[PHAP-C]），并进行了一次开放式访谈。
客观测试表明，试验用助听器能够为本研究中的老年参与者提供适当的放大功能。大多数参与者认为该设备有益，16名参与者（84%）每天至少使用助听器1至8小时以上，所有参与者都认为这种低成本仪器“值得佩戴”。参与者在IOI-HA上的益处评分与一项规范性研究中的评分相当，在该规范性研究中，受试者使用的是更昂贵的传统助听器。使用COSI问卷时，参与者通常得出结论，与未使用放大设备相比，使用研究中的设备后他们的听力改善“略好”至“更好”。PHAP-C问卷结果表明，在佩戴助听器时，参与者在大多数日常聆听情况下很少遇到困难。开放式访谈中的评论既有积极的也有消极的，大多数消极评论集中在佩戴助听器时的声反馈问题或背景噪音干扰方面。结论：价格实惠的非处方听力设备为更多听力损失者提供了获得放大功能并从改善的沟通能力中受益的潜在机会。有必要对这些仪器进行进一步的研究和开发，以便为有听力障碍的老年人提供更好的康复效果。
