Abbreviated Profile Of Hearing Aid Benefit Scores Research Articles

Open-fitting hearing aids: a comparative analysis between open behind-the-ear and open completely-in-the-canal instant-fit devices.

Our study aims to assess the open-fitting capabilities and vent properties of traditional open-fitting behind-the-ear (open BTE) hearing aids to instant-fit open-fitting completely-in-the-canal (open CIC) systems. The study analysed data from 40 patients grouped in two groups based on the used hearing aids. Free field pure tone and speech audiometry were performed to obtain the free-field pure tone average and free-field word recognition score (WRS). The matrix sentence test was employed to evaluate the auditory performance and functional outcomes of patients. The Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life (SADL) and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire were used to assess the personal satisfaction and benefit provided by the hearing aid. Real ear measurements were conducted to objectively evaluate the Real-Ear Unaided Gain (REUG) and Real-Ear Occluded Gain (REOG) of the two groups. For this purpose, six frequency bands (band 1 from 125 to 200Hz, band 2 from 250 to 400Hz, band 3 from 500 to 800Hz, band 4 from 1000 to 1600Hz, band 5 from 2000 to 3150Hz, and band 6 from 4000 to 6300Hz) were defined and compared. Free-field WRS exhibited a significant difference (p-value = 0.004) between open BTE and open CIC, with better results for the open BTE. Matrix test speech reception threshold scores did not differ significantly between groups. No statistical significant difference were observed between APHAB and SADL total scores. Correlation tests revealed a negative correlation between SRT and APHAB scores in the open BTE group, not seen in the open CIC. No statistically significant difference was observed for all bands of REUG values, demonstrating comparability in terms of acoustic resonance of the external auditory canal. Comparing the REOG recorded in the two groups a significant difference was observed for bands 2 through 6. While the average REOG values for bands 5 and 6 were higher in patients with traditional open BTE aids, in contrast, for bands 2, 3, and 4, the REOG values for the open CIC group were higher and statistically significant compared to patients wearing traditional open-fitting BTE hearing aids. Patients with open CIC seem to perform worse in quiet environments compared to noisy ones, as indicated by the free field WRS score. However, the absence of differences in functional performance assessed with the matrix sentence test, and in the psychosocial aspects, makes these devices a good solution for individuals who reject hearing aids due to aesthetic concerns. The differences in terms of real ear measurements, while statistically significant, do not negatively impact overall performance.

Validity and reliability of the ERSA questionnaire in Turkish.

This methodological study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Evaluation of the Impact of Hearing Loss in Adults (ERSA) questionnaire for individuals with treated hearing loss. The study involved 200 participants, and both exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used to examine structural validity. External validity was assessed by correlating ERSA scores with the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB). Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were evaluated using Cronbach's alpha and the intraclass correlation coefficient, respectively. The Turkish ERSA demonstrated strong psychometric properties, with significant correlations between APHAB and ERSA scores and excellent internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The findings suggest that the Turkish ERSA is a valid and reliable tool for evaluating the impact of hearing loss in individuals.

“I do not hear you!”: hearing-impaired cancer patients report their communication experiences

PurposeHearing impairment has a high impact on communication between cancer patients and their oncologists. What is the patient’s perspective on this problem and how can physicians draw lessons from it?MethodsTogether with otorhinolaryngologists and hearing-impaired patients, we developed a questionnaire including the sections: WHO (Five) Well-Being Index (5 items), Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) as established self-estimation of hearing function (24 items), use of hearing aid (4 items) as well as patients’ experiences (15 items), difficulties (9 items) and wishes (7 items) regarding the communication with physicians. The experiences, difficulties, wishes, and life satisfaction of cancer patients were analyzed between groups based on participants' APHAB scores, well-being and use of hearing aids. A total of 104 cancer survivors (median age 76.5 years, range 32–90 years) were included.ResultsBetween the groups of subjectively hearing-impaired and normal hearing participants, we registered a significant difference in difficulties in conversation, wishes for physician–patient communication and psychological well-being. Depending on participants’ well-being, wishes and difficulties differed. Differences were also found between participants with and without hearing aids in terms of difficulties in conversation, but not in terms of their wishes and well-being. A large proportion of participants classified as subjectively hearing-impaired according to APHAB already had a hearing aid.ConclusionsCancer patients with hearing loss are very restricted in their understanding of given information and hearing aid use cannot completely compensate for this. Consequently, communication guidelines should be considered and specific educational tools need to be developed for these groups.

Association of Bone Conduction Devices for Single-Sided Sensorineural Deafness With Quality of Life

Although bone conduction devices (BCDs) have been shown to improve audiological outcomes of patients with single-sided sensorineural deafness (SSD), their effects on the patients' quality of life (QOL) are unclear. To investigate the association of BCDs on QOL in patients with SSD. Literature search of databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov) from January 1, 1978, to June 24, 2021, was performed. Prospective interventional studies with 10 or more participants with SSD (defined as pure tone average >70 dB hearing loss in the worse hearing ear and ≤30 dB in the better hearing ear) who underwent unilateral BCD implantation and assessment of QOL before and after the intervention using a validated tool were eligible for inclusion. Studies on adults and children were eligible for inclusion. Patients with only conductive, mixed, or bilateral hearing loss were excluded. Data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Study clinical and demographic characteristics were obtained. Meta-analysis of mean differences in QOL scores before and after the intervention was performed. Study bias was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute risk of bias tool. The main study outcome was mean change in QOL scores at 6 months after insertion of BCDs. The 3 QOL instruments used in the studies included the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), the Health Utilities Index-3 (HUI-3), and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). The APHAB and the SSQ are the hearing-related QOL measures, whereas the HUI-3 is a generic QOL measure. A total of 486 articles were identified, and 11 studies with 203 patients met the inclusion criteria. Only adult studies met inclusion criteria. Ten of 11 studies were nonrandomized cohort studies. The BCDs assessed were heterogeneous. There was a significant statistical and clinically meaningful improvement in the global APHAB scores (mean change, 15.50; 95% CI, 12.63-18.36; I2 = 0) and the SSQ hearing qualities (mean change, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.46-1.92; I2 = 78.4%), speech (mean change, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.68-2.37; I2 = 0), and spatial hearing (mean change, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.57-2.44; I2 = 81.1%) subscales. There was no significant change detected in the mean HUI-3 scores (mean change, 0.03; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.10; I2 = 0). The risk of bias was assessed to be low to moderate. These findings suggest that adult patients who receive BCDs may experience improvements in hearing-specific QOL measures but not in generic QOL measures. Prospective QOL studies should be considered in this cohort, particularly for children with SSD.

Bone-Anchored and Closed Skin Bonebridge Implant in Adults: Hearing Performances and Quality of Life

Introduction: Bonebridge^® is a novel active bone-anchored hearing implant. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ease of implantation, the hearing performances, and the patient-reported benefit. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective cross-sectional study of 24 consecutive adult patients implanted for a mixed hearing loss (13 chronic otitis media (COM) and 11 other aetiologies). Twenty-one implants were placed in the retrosigmoid position and 3 in the mastoid. Audiometry, Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire, as well as 5 implant-specific questions (analogue visual scale [AVS] 0–10 score), was administered. Results: Surgery lasted 73 ± 29.7 min on average. No major complication occurred. All patients were users at the last follow-up visit (median: 9-month range: 3–25). The average prosthetic gain was similar in COM and other aetiologies (43 ± 4.8 dB and 50 ± 7.2, respectively, not significant, Wilcoxon test). Bone-conduction thresholds were not deteriorated by surgery (Kruskal-Wallis test, not significant). APHAB scores improved in all categories except aversiveness (global score 45 ± 7.0% in COM and 32 ± 10.2% in others, not significant, and Wilcoxon test). Local pain (AVS: 3.23 ± 3.2, n = 16) and manipulation difficulties (3.1 ± 3.69) were low. The device was considered aesthetic (8.3 ± 2.49). Perfectible autonomy (5.0 ± 2.8) and difficulties wearing the implant during sport or at work (5.1 ± 3.47) were the weakest points. Conclusions: BoneBridge^® implant provides reproducible results for the rehabilitation of mixed hearing losses and unilateral hearing loss.

Clinical Application and Psychometric Properties of a Swedish Translation of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit.

The impact of hearing loss on the individual and his/her everyday life can be assessed using questionnaires with the purpose to improve rehabilitation quality. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) can be used to evaluate disability in everyday life associated with hearing loss. Previous studies have examined APHAB outcomes in sensorineural hearing loss and we do not know whether the type of hearing loss influence questionnaire outcomes. The purpose was to evaluate the psychometric properties of a Swedish translation of the APHAB and the influence of demographic variables on the outcome in a clinical sample. A descriptive, cross-sectional study in a clinical sample. Forty-eight participants with no hearing aid experience seeking audiological rehabilitation for the first time. These participants represented different degrees of hearing loss and three types of hearing loss: monaural mixed, binaural mixed, and binaural sensorineural hearing loss. Pure-tone audiometry was conducted and the participants completed the unaided APHAB during their first appointment at the clinic. Psychometric properties of the questionnaire were examined and the influence of age, gender, type of hearing loss, and degree of hearing loss on APHAB scores were studied. The psychometric properties indicate high test-retest reliability but there seems to be some potential issues with the properties of the reverberation (RV) subscale. The items from the RV subscale failed to load as a separate component and the internal consistency of the subscale improved by removing four items (items 1, 9, 11, and 16). With few exceptions, APHAB scores were not influenced by age, gender, or type of hearing loss. APHAB scores were generally influenced by degree of hearing loss in both the best and the worst ear. This Swedish version of the APHAB can be additionally improved by addressing the inconsistencies found in the RV subscale by rephrasing or removing some items. The degree of hearing loss has some influence on questionnaire outcomes but not age, gender, and type of hearing loss.

APHAB scores for individual assessment of the benefit of hearing aid fitting

The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire measures subjective hearing impairment on four different subscales pertaining to different listening situations. Using a very large patient cohort, this study aims to show how answers are distributed within the four subscales before and after hearing aid fitting, and what benefit the patients experience. The results are discussed on the basis of the available literature. Between April 2013 and March 2016, 35,000APHAB questionnaires from nine German statutory health insurance providers were evaluated. The average values before and after hearing aid fitting, as well as the benefit, were determined for all four APHAB subscales and analyzed graphically. The results of the subjective evaluation of hearing impairment before and after hearing aid fitting and the resultant benefit were plotted by percentile distribution graphs and boxplots. The data were analyzed statistically. There was no overlap of the interquartile ranges before and after hearing aid fitting in any of the APHAB subscales. In three scales (EC, BN and RV), the median improvement after hearing aid fitting was nearly 30percentage points. In the AV subscale, this value was slightly negative. The percentile distribution graphs used in this study allow individual evaluation of subjective hearing impairment before and after hearing aid fitting, as well as of the resultant benefit, on the background of ahuge database. Additionally, it is demonstrated why presentation as boxplots and the average benefit values calculated from these is problematic.

Totally implantable hearing system: Five‐year hearing results

1) To provide long-term hearing outcome measures of a totally implantable hearing system (implant) and compare to the baseline unaided (BLU) and baseline aided (BLA) conditions, and 2) discuss relevant safety measures. Prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter, single-subject-as-own-control design. Fifty-one subjects with mild to severe sensorineural hearing loss were implanted between 2008 and 2009 and enrolled in this postmarket approval study in the setting of private and hospital-based practices. Forty-nine of these subjects completed the 5-year study, which included annual follow-ups. Primary effectiveness endpoints were speech reception threshold (SRT) and word recognition scores at 50 dB (WRS50s). Secondary effectiveness endpoints were WRSs and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) scores. Adverse Device Effects (ADEs) and Serious Adverse Device Effects (SADEs) reported during the study period and a comparison of bone conduction scores are submitted as safety measures. Compared to the BLA condition, 1) SRT scores were improved at every annual follow-up; 2) WRS50s were better in 49%, and the same in 41% at the 5-year follow-up; 3) WRSs were improved by 17% at the 5-year follow-up; and 4) APHAB scores were improved in most subscales at every annual follow-up. There were three SADEs in three subjects and 15 ADEs in 11 subjects. Bone conduction scores increased by 3.7 dB at the 5-year follow-up. Average battery life was 4.9 years. The implant compared favorably to the subjects' hearing aid throughout the 5-year period in all of the areas measured and was found to be safe. 2b. Laryngoscope, 128:210-216, 2018.

Associations between the probabilities of frequency-specific hearing loss and unaided APHAB scores

The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire reports subjective hearing impairments in four typical conditions. We investigated the association between the frequency-specific probability of hearing loss and scores from the unaided APHAB (APHABu) to determine whether the APHABu could be useful in primary diagnoses of hearing loss, in addition to pure tone and speech audiometry. This retrospective study included database records from 6558 patients (average age 69.0 years). We employed a multivariate generalised linear mixed model to analyse the probabilities of hearing losses (severity range 20–75 dB, evaluated in 5-dB steps), measured at different frequencies (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, and 8.0 kHz), for nearly all combinations of APHABu subscale scores (subscale scores from 20 to 80%, evaluated in steps of 5%). We calculated the probability of hearing loss for 28,561 different combinations of APHABu subscale scores (results available online). In general, the probability of hearing loss was positively associated with the combined APHABu score (i.e. increasing probability with increasing scores). However, this association was negative at one frequency (8 kHz). The highest probabilities were for a hearing loss of 45 dB at test frequency 2.0 kHz, but with a wide spreading. We showed that the APHABu subscale scores were associated with the probability of hearing loss measured with audiometry. This information could enrich the expert’s evaluation of the subject’s hearing loss, and it might help resolve suspicious cases of aggravation. The 0.5 and 8.0 kHz frequencies influenced hearing loss less than the frequencies in-between, and 2.0 kHz was most influential on intermediate degree hearing loss (around 45 dB), which corresponded to the frequency-dependence of speech intelligibility measured with speech audiometry.

Auditory Gain, Quality of Life, and Audiological Benefits in Bone-Anchored Hearing Device Users in Fundación Santafé De Bogotá, Colombia

The objective of this study is to determine the auditory gain, quality of life, audiological benefits, in bone-anchored hearing device users (BAHA). It is a retrospective and concurrent evaluation of thirty patients fitted unilaterally and seven fitted bilaterally for at least six months. Patients were assessed with audiometric testing and application of Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB). Regarding sound-field pure audiometry results, we found a statistically significant gain in all frequencies using the bone-anchored device. APHAB scores showed statistically significant subjective audiological gains in all subscales except for the aversiveness subscale. GBI mean scores for all items in both groups were all above 3, suggesting quality of life improvement in conductive and mixed hearing loss patients. BP100 users showed a greater clinical gain in the APHAB global score and subscales compared with Divino users. In conclusion the BAHA provides significant auditory gain, subjective audiological benefits and improves quality of life in all BAHA users. This study shows a significant clinical and statistical benefit of BAHA measured by audiometric testing and by the APHAB and GBI questionnaires.

Bone-anchored hearing implants in single-sided deafness patients: Long-term use and satisfaction by gender.

To examine the long-term satisfaction and possible effects of gender in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) who underwent bone-anchored hearing implant (BAHI) surgery. Retrospective case-control study. All (n = 145) consecutive SSD patients fitted with a BAHI between January 2001 and October 2011 were asked to complete a questionnaire consisting of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), the Communication Profile for the Hearing Impaired (CPHI), and the SSD questionnaire. Twenty-three of the 135 responding patients (17%) reported discontinuation of the device over an average follow-up time of 61.7 months. No significant differences were found in the degree of disability or coping between men and women, according to the APHAB and CPHI scores. Improvement in quality of life and appreciation of the BAHI were not affected by gender, age, directional hearing ability, and handling of the device. The appearance of the device positively affected their appreciation. At the mean follow-up time of 117 months, 69.2% was using their BAHI. In the domains background noise, reverberant surroundings, and aversion to sounds, the mean APHAB scores were significantly changed at 3 months, 1 year, and 10 years after implantation. Our study examined the results of BAHI use in SSD patients over a relatively long follow-up period, with an average of 5 years. The majority of users (83%) were satisfied with the device. No significant gender differences were in terms of reported appreciation, hearing disability, or coping with a BAHI. 3b.

Study of the long-term effects of frequency compression by behavioral verbal tests in adults.

To verify the effect of long-term use of hearing aids with frequency compression for verbal behavior tests and daily activities. Thirty-two adults, aged between 30 and 60 years old, with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing loss at high frequencies with steeply sloping configuration were divided into two groups: 16 with hearing aids with frequency compression algorithm enabled and 16 not enabled. All participants underwent the detection tests of consonant sounds, monosyllable recognition in quiet environments, identification of fricative monosyllables, and Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire in five times throughout a 12-month trial. Detection of consonant sounds, recognition of monosyllables in quiet environments and identification of fricative monosyllables improved significantly with frequency compression enabled. Participants had their APHAB scores improved whether they were adapted to the frequency compression or not. Frequency compression provides the anticipated improvement in audibility, detection of high-frequency consonant sounds, and recognition of monosyllables.

The SoundBite hearing system: Patient‐assessed safety and benefit study

To determine the safety and efficacy of the SoundBite for patients over a 6 month period of use. Prospective, multisite, nonrandomized patient enrollment with outcomes based on audiometric profile and self-reported assessment. Patients with single-sided deafness were eligible for the study. Patients were fit with the standard SoundBite sound transducer and were asked to wear the device regularly for 6 months. At the end of the trial period, patients completed both a self-assessment and the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaires. Thirty-four subjects completed the study. Mean APHAB scores improved significantly for ease of communication (P < 0.001), background noise (P < 0.001), reverberation (P < 0.001), and global benefit (P < 0.001). Patients reported high rates of auditory benefit in a variety of listening situations and high rates of overall satisfaction with the device. One adverse event with a superficial mouth sore was reported and resolved after appropriate dental care. Twelve patients (35%) reported acoustic feedback. In six of these patients, the feedback resolved after device adjustment. The SoundBite is a new hearing prosthesis that delivers bone conduction energy. It offers advantages over traditional osseointegrated devices that require surgical placement. Patient satisfaction with the device after 6 months of regular use is high. The SoundBite provided improvement in ease of communication, hearing in background noise, sound reverberation, and an overall global hearing benefit. Acoustic feedback is the most commonly reported problem with the SoundBite, and this is minimized with proper fitting.

Tinnitus and quality of life after round window vibroplasty

To measure the Quality of Life outcomes and impact on tinnitus perception in a group of patients after Round Window Vibroplasty (RW-VSB) for mixed or conductive hearing loss. A single-subject, repeated measures design was employed. All VSB fittings were based on hearing thresholds results and were not set to mask tinnitus. Ten Round Window-Vibroplasty patients were assessed with the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the Tinnitus Reaction Questionnaire (TRQ). Subjects reported less hearing difficulties in 3 of 4 APHAB subscales. Tinnitus perception was decreased in all subjects with tinnitus pre-operatively. Round window vibroplasty in our cohort of patients with mixed or conductive hearing improved quality of life outcomes. There was significant improvement on APHAB scores and a significant decrease in tinnitus perception in subjects experiencing tinnitus prior to implantation.

先天性外耳道閉鎖症例における埋め込み型骨導補聴器（Ｂｏｎｅ‐Ａｎｃｈｏｒｅｄ Ｈｅａｒｉｎｇ Ａｉｄ：ＢＡＨＡ）の有効性に関する検討

The effectiveness of bone anchored hearing aid (BAHA) for the patients with congenital aural atresia was evaluated by multicenter clinical study in Japan. Twenty patients (17 bilateral and 3 hemilateral) of congenital auricular atresia were registered for this study and finally, 18 of them (15 bilateral and 3 unilateral) were subjected to further evaluation. Primary endpoint of this study was free sound-field pure-tone audiometory and speech threshold hearing test in quiet and noisy circumstances. Secondary endpoint of this study was patient's satisfaction based upon APHAB (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit) questionnaire survey. These results were compared between before and 12 weeks after BAHA surgery. Both hearing level of pure tone and speech threshold significantly improved after BAHA surgery. APHAB scores also suggested the improvement of the QOL after BAHA usage, except for the scores that concerned with unpleasantness of noisy sound. BAHA is one of the useful options for the treatment of congenital auricular atresia.

Effect of digital frequency compression (DFC) on speech recognition in candidates for combined electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS).

To compare the effects of conventional amplification (CA) and digital frequency compression (DFC) amplification on the speech recognition abilities of candidates for a partial-insertion cochlear implant, that is, candidates for combined electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS). The participants were 6 patients whose audiometric thresholds at 500 Hz and below were <or=60 dB HL and whose thresholds at 2000 Hz and above were >or=80 dB HL. Six tests of speech understanding were administered with CA and DFC. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) was also administered following use of CA and DFC. Group mean scores were not statistically different in the CA and DFC conditions. However, 2 patients received substantial benefit in DFC conditions. APHAB scores suggested increased ease of communication, but also increased aversive sound quality. Results suggest that a relatively small proportion of individuals who meet EAS candidacy will receive substantial benefit from a DFC hearing aid and that a larger proportion will receive at least a small benefit when speech is presented against a background of noise. This benefit, however, comes at a cost-aversive sound quality.

Short-Term and Long-Term Hearing Aid Benefit and User Satisfaction: A Comparison between Two Fitting Protocols

Currently published hearing aid fitting protocols recommend speech-in-noise testing and loudness measures, but it remains unclear how these measures affect hearing aid benefit and user satisfaction. This study compared two protocols in their effects on benefit and satisfaction. Protocol A included an electroacoustic analysis, real-ear measures, and hearing aid adjustments based on users' comments. Protocol B included all of Protocol A and a speech-in-noise test, loudness discomfort levels, and aided loudness. Thirty-two participants completed the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life (SADL) at 45 days and three months post-initial fitting. Fewer hearing aid adjustments were made to the hearing aids for participants fitted with Protocol B than participants fitted with Protocol A, but final gains were similar for both groups. Although similar APHAB scores were obtained for both protocols, SADL scores decreased between 45 days and three months for Protocol A.

Audiometric Correlates of the Unaided APHAB

The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) is a self-report questionnaire that is used to quantify the impact of a hearing problem on an individual's daily life. In this investigation, the relationships were explored between typical clinical audiometric data and the four subscale scores of the APHAB administered in the unaided (without-amplification) condition. Sixty subjects provided APHAB scores, audiograms, and speech recognition data. Analyses revealed significant relationships between audiometric data and each of the three APHAB subscales that reflect speech communication (EC, RV, and BN). None of these subscales was significantly more strongly related to any specific audiological variable. However, the pattern of associations between audiometric variables and subscale scores was consistent with predictions based on item content for subscales EC and RV, but not for BN. As predicted, no relationship was found between audiometric data and scores for the Aversiveness subscale (AV). Even for the subscales with the strongest associations, differences in audiometric data could be used to explain half or less of the variance in self-report data.