Premium versus entry-level hearing aids: using group concept mapping to investigate the drivers of preference

Saleh, Hasan; Folkeard, Paula; Eeckhoutte, Maaike Van; Scollie, Susan

doi:10.1080/14992027.2021.2009923

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, previous studies did not provide evidence to suggest that premium HAs yield better self-reported real-world outcomes or laboratory outcomes (Cox et al, 2014;Johnson et al, 2016;2017;Plyler et al, 2021;Saleh et al, 2021). Although Wu et al (2019) found that premium HAs provided better speech understanding and sound localization in the laboratory, this improvement was not transferred to the real-world setting.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…Those in more demanding listening environments reported significant improvement with premium HAs compared to those in less demanding sound environments. Also, the preference of using premium technology was found to be a factor in Cox et al (2016) , Plyler et al (2021) , and Saleh et al (2021) . These results indicate that candidacy for premium technologies and auditory ecology are highly relevant aspects that should be included in the HA provision process to improve current clinical procedures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The slightly better reported SSQ outcomes using premium HAs could also be related to non-signal-processing factors, such as connectivity and having access to smartphone user-controlled settings. Saleh et al (2021) investigated drivers of user preference between premium and entry-level HAs using group concept mapping approach and found that these non-signal-processing factors significantly influenced the preference of premium HAs. This underlines the importance of including non-audiological features, such a connectivity, in modern HAs and could have a significant impact on the reported outcomes using premium HAs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Impact of hearing aid technology level at first-fit on self-reported outcomes in patients with presbycusis: a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To provide clinical guidance in hearing aid prescription for older adults with presbycusis, we investigated differences in self-reported hearing abilities and hearing aid effectiveness for premium or basic hearing aid users. Secondly, as an explorative analysis, we investigated if differences in gain prescription verified with real-ear measurements explain differences in self-reported outcomes. The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial in which the patients were blinded towards the purpose of the study. In total, 190 first-time hearing aid users (>60 years of age) with symmetric bilateral presbycusis were fitted with either a premium or basic hearing aid. The randomization was stratified on age, sex, and word recognition score. Two outcome questionnaires were distributed: the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) and the short form of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ-12). In addition, insertion gains were calculated from real-ear measurements at first-fit for all fitted hearing aids. Premium hearing aid users reported 0.7 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.1) scale points higher total SSQ-12 score per item and 0.8 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.4) scale points higher speech score per item, as well as 0.6 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.1) scale points higher qualities score compared to basic-feature hearing aid users. No significant differences in reported hearing aid effectiveness were found using the IOI-HA. Differences in the prescribed gain at 1 and 2 kHz were observed between premium and basic hearing aids within each company. Premium-feature devices yielded slightly better self-reported hearing abilities than basic-feature devices, but a statistically significant difference was only found in three out of seven outcome variables, and the effect was small. The generalizability of the study is limited to community-dwelling older adults with presbycusis. Thus, further research is needed for understanding the potential effects of hearing aid technology for other populations. Hearing care providers should continue to insist on research to support the choice of more costly premium technologies when prescribing hearing aids for older adults with presbycusis.Clinical Trial Registration:https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT04539847.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of hearing aid technology level at first-fit on self-reported outcomes in patients with presbycusis: a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Modified Multiple Stimulus With Hidden Reference and Anchors–Gabrielsson Total Impression Sound Quality Rating Comparisons for Speech in Quiet, Noise, and Reverberation

Rahme,

Folkeard,

Beaulac

et al. 2023

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to obtain, analyze, and compare subjective sound quality data for the same test stimuli using modified multistimulus MUSHRA (Multiple Stimulus with Hidden Reference and Anchors) based procedures (viz., MUSHRA with custom anchors and MUSHRA without anchor) and the single-stimulus Gabrielsson's total impression rating procedure. Method: Twenty normally hearing young adults were recruited in this study. Participants completed sound quality ratings on two different hearing aid recording data sets—Data Set A contained speech recordings from four different hearing aids under a variety of noisy and processing conditions, and Data Set B contained speech recordings from a single hearing aid under a combination of different noisy, reverberant, and signal processing conditions. Recordings in both data sets were rated for their quality using the total impression rating procedure. In addition, quality ratings of Data Set A recordings were obtained using a MUSHRA with custom anchors, while the ratings of Data Set B recordings were collected using a MUSHRA without anchor. Results: Statistical analyses revealed a high test–retest reliability of quality ratings for the same stimuli that were rated multiple times. In addition, high-interrater reliability was observed with all three rating procedures. Further analyses indicated (a) a high correlation between the total impression rating and the two modified MUSHRA ratings and (b) a similar relationship between the average and standard deviation of the subjective rating data obtained by the total impression rating and MUSHRA with custom anchors on Data Set A, and the total impression rating and the MUSHRA without anchor on Data Set B. Conclusion: Both sound quality procedures, namely, the MUSHRA-based procedures and the total impression rating scale, obtained similar quality ratings of varied hearing aid speech recordings with high reliability.

show abstract

Hearing at the Mall: Multibeam Processing Technology Improves Hearing Group Conversations in a Real-World Food Court Environment

Folkeard,

Jensen,

Parsi

et al. 2024

Am J Audiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate conversation hearing with an adaptive beamforming hearing aid that supports adaptive tracking of multiple talkers in an ecologically valid, real-world food court environment in a busy mall. Method: Twenty older adult experienced hearing aid wearers with sensorineural hearing loss were fitted in the lab with binaural receiver-in-the-canal style hearing aids set with two programs, each having a different beamforming strategy. The participant and two researchers then met in a moderately noisy and reverberant food court at a local mall where the participant was asked to listen to a conversation between the two researchers. Participants rated the extent of their agreement with 10 positively worded statements specific to the conversation twice, once for each program. Participants then provided program-preference ratings for seven different aspects of a conversation during which the programs were switched back and forth by the researcher, so that participants were unaware of the condition to which they were listening. Results: Real-world subjective ratings for all domains resulted in positive values on average for both programs. Pairwise comparisons indicated that the intervention algorithm had higher absolute ratings on five of the 10 criteria including understanding, clarity, focus, listening effort, and background noise. Ratings for preference between programs indicated a significant preference for the intervention algorithm for all seven criteria. Conclusions: In a real-world setting, the use of hearing aids with separate processing of sounds from the front and back hemisphere provided positive subjective ratings. However, following a group conversation with multiple conversation partners, improvements in the algorithm to account for the locations of interlocutors and the natural head turning of the hearing aid wearer that occurs during a conversation by adding and controlling multiple adaptive beams in the front hemisphere significantly influenced preference for all aspects rated.

show abstract

Premium versus entry-level hearing aids: using group concept mapping to investigate the drivers of preference

Abstract: List of the different cluster names, their overall themes, total number of statements, example statements, and average bridging values.

Cited by 4 publications

References 81 publications

Impact of hearing aid technology level at first-fit on self-reported outcomes in patients with presbycusis: a randomized controlled trial

Impact of hearing aid technology level at first-fit on self-reported outcomes in patients with presbycusis: a randomized controlled trial

Modified Multiple Stimulus With Hidden Reference and Anchors–Gabrielsson Total Impression Sound Quality Rating Comparisons for Speech in Quiet, Noise, and Reverberation

Hearing at the Mall: Multibeam Processing Technology Improves Hearing Group Conversations in a Real-World Food Court Environment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About