Teleaudiology Services for Rehabilitation With Hearing Aids in Adults: A Systematic Review

Abstract

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.6534473.

Teleaudiology hearing aid fitting follow-up consultations for adults: single blinded crossover randomised control trial and cohort studies

“…HA programming, counselling, and instructions) (reviewed in Tao et al 2018;Angley, Schnittker, and Tharpe 2017), comparison of these results is difficult. The closest studies of teleaudiology services have been those examining real ear measurements (Campos and Ferrari 2012;Pross, Bourne, and Cheung 2016), counselling programme Rubinstein 1994, 1995;Laplante-Levesque, Pichora-Fuller, and Gagne 2006;Lundberg, Andersson, and Lunner 2011;Thoren et al 2011;Thoren et al 2014), and of specific procedures performed by teleaudiology but in isolation from the other procedures (Tao et al 2018;Ferrari 2006;Ferrari and Bernardez-Braga 2009;Reginato and Ferrari 2014;Campos and Ferrari 2012;Pearce, Ching, and Dillon 2009;Penteado et al 2012Penteado et al , 2014Venail et al 2019). None of these were implementation studies or compared the outcomes of remote to face-to-face follow-up services, nor was there assistance of a trained facilitator.…”

“…In order to address the global burden of hearing loss, there is an increasing focus on teleaudiology rehabilitation services (Bush et al 2016;Swanepoel and Hall 2010;Tao et al 2018). Models for delivering some audiology rehabilitation services with minimal involvement of a clinician (e.g.…”

“…Over the past 10-15 years, there has been a growing amount of published literature on HA teleaudiology services delivered by clinicians that investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of such services (Bush et al 2016;Swanepoel and Hall 2010;Tao et al 2018). More recently, a review of outcomes from HA rehabilitation services for adults delivered by teleaudiology demonstrated insufficient and low-quality evidence to support its implementation into routine clinical practice (Tao et al 2018). Hence, there is a need for further investigation in this field; comparative studies which evaluate the outcomes of new services versus the gold standard face-to-face ones are essential (Kothari et al 2009).…”

Climbing up the hearing rehabilitation ladder

“…Platforms for eHealth solutions in audiology span from offline versions to internet-based and mobile-based platforms . To date, several reviews on eHealth solutions in audiology have been published including wide-ranging applications (Swanepoel & Hall, 2010), eHealth applications in hearing amplification and cochlear implantation (Bush, Thompson, Irungu, & Ayugi, 2016), use of eHealth in clinical activities supporting the HA adult patient journey , services in adult hearing rehabilitation (Tao et al, 2018), and interventions for adults with hearing loss, tinnitus, and vestibular disorders (Beukes, Manchaiah, Allen, Baguley, & Andersson, 2019).…”

Internet-Based Audiological Interventions: An Update for Clinicians

“…Reasons for these difficulties could include the proximity of clinics, transportation difficulties, health-related problems, loss of income when taking time off of work, or stigma associated with seeing health care professionals (Cuijpers, van Straten, & Andersson, 2008). Within the field of audiology, various teleaudiology solutions have been developed for screening, diagnostic, pediatric, remote programming, and rehabilitation purposes (Krupinksi, 2015;McCarthy, Leigh, & Arthur-Kelly, 2018;Paglialonga, Nielsen, Ingo, Barr, & Laplante-Lévesque, 2018;Swanepoel & Hall, 2010;Tao et al, 2018). Ways in which to deliver these solutions range from offline platforms (such as PCbased applications, DVDs; Vreeburg, Diekstra, & Hosman, 2018) to Internet-based interventions (IBIs; Carlbring, Andersson, Cuijpers, Riper, & Hedman-Lagerlöf, 2018) and mobile health devices, such as smartphone applications (Akter & Ray, 2010).…”