Assessment of a Hearing Aid Training Program for Health Care Workers.

IF 1.4 4区医学 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY American Journal of Audiology Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00067

Marissa Merrifield, Karen A Doherty

{"title":"Assessment of a Hearing Aid Training Program for Health Care Workers.","authors":"Marissa Merrifield, Karen A Doherty","doi":"10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to develop and evaluate an in-person hearing aid training program designed for health care workers and personal care aides (PCAs) who care for older adults.Method: Participants were 18 health care workers and PCAs whose clients were older adults. This was a randomized controlled study in which half of the participants were assigned to the experimental group (n = 9) and the other half to a control group (n = 9). The experimental group was administered a hearing aid training program that was developed in this study for health care workers and PCAs. Participants in the control group were trained on a task similar in complexity and administration time to the hearing aid training program. The Practical Hearing Aid Skills Test-Revised Version 2 (PHAST-Rv2) was administered before and immediately after training. A 2 × 2 mixed analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the pre- and post-training scores between and within the experimental and control groups. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the differences between pre- and post-training scores on each of the administered PHAST-Rv2 tasks. In addition, participants were asked about their experience helping clients with their hearing aids.Results: Mean pre- and post-training PHAST-Rv2 scores for the experimental group were 59.50% and 95.84%, respectively, and 57.66% and 59.96%, respectively, for the control group. Results from a 2 × 2 mixed ANOVA with time point (pre- and post-training) as the within-subject variable and group (experimental and control) as the between-subject variable demonstrated that hearing aid training significantly improved PHAST-Rv2 scores for the experimental group. Post-training, the tasks that the experimental group improved on the most were brushing the microphone port, cleaning the dome, placing the hearing aids in the charger, and inserting the hearing aid into the model ear. No demographic variables were significantly correlated with the participants' improvement on the PHAST-Rv2 post-training score.Conclusion: A hearing aid training program designed specifically for health care workers was shown to be an efficient and effective way to improve how well health care workers can care for and operate a hearing aid.","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Audiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00067","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to develop and evaluate an in-person hearing aid training program designed for health care workers and personal care aides (PCAs) who care for older adults.

Method: Participants were 18 health care workers and PCAs whose clients were older adults. This was a randomized controlled study in which half of the participants were assigned to the experimental group (n = 9) and the other half to a control group (n = 9). The experimental group was administered a hearing aid training program that was developed in this study for health care workers and PCAs. Participants in the control group were trained on a task similar in complexity and administration time to the hearing aid training program. The Practical Hearing Aid Skills Test-Revised Version 2 (PHAST-Rv2) was administered before and immediately after training. A 2 × 2 mixed analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the pre- and post-training scores between and within the experimental and control groups. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the differences between pre- and post-training scores on each of the administered PHAST-Rv2 tasks. In addition, participants were asked about their experience helping clients with their hearing aids.

Results: Mean pre- and post-training PHAST-Rv2 scores for the experimental group were 59.50% and 95.84%, respectively, and 57.66% and 59.96%, respectively, for the control group. Results from a 2 × 2 mixed ANOVA with time point (pre- and post-training) as the within-subject variable and group (experimental and control) as the between-subject variable demonstrated that hearing aid training significantly improved PHAST-Rv2 scores for the experimental group. Post-training, the tasks that the experimental group improved on the most were brushing the microphone port, cleaning the dome, placing the hearing aids in the charger, and inserting the hearing aid into the model ear. No demographic variables were significantly correlated with the participants' improvement on the PHAST-Rv2 post-training score.

Conclusion: A hearing aid training program designed specifically for health care workers was shown to be an efficient and effective way to improve how well health care workers can care for and operate a hearing aid.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

医护人员助听器培训项目评估。

目的：本研究旨在开发和评估一项针对医护人员和护理老年人的个人护理助理（PCA）的现场助听器培训项目：参与者为 18 名医护人员和个人护理助理，他们的客户均为老年人。这是一项随机对照研究，一半参与者被分配到实验组（9 人），另一半参与者被分配到对照组（9 人）。实验组接受本研究为医护人员和个人护理助理开发的助听器培训项目。对照组的参与者则接受与助听器培训项目在复杂程度和实施时间上相似的任务培训。在培训前和培训后立即进行实用助听器技能测试-修订版 2 (PHAST-Rv2)。采用 2 × 2 混合方差分析（ANOVA）来比较实验组和对照组之间和内部的培训前后得分。我们使用描述性统计来检验培训前后在每项 PHAST-Rv2 任务上的得分差异。此外，还询问了学员帮助客户配戴助听器的经验：实验组培训前和培训后 PHAST-Rv2 的平均得分分别为 59.50% 和 95.84%，对照组分别为 57.66% 和 59.96%。以时间点（培训前和培训后）为被试内变量，以组别（实验组和对照组）为被试间变量的 2 × 2 混合方差分析结果表明，助听器培训显著提高了实验组的 PHAST-Rv2 分数。培训后，实验组改进最大的任务是刷麦克风端口、清洁圆顶、将助听器放入充电器和将助听器插入模型耳。人口统计学变量与参与者在 PHAST-Rv2 培训后得分的提高无明显关联：专为医护人员设计的助听器培训计划被证明是提高医护人员护理和操作助听器能力的有效方法。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

American Journal of Audiology AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

16.70%

发文量

163

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Mission: AJA publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles pertaining to clinical audiology methods and issues, and serves as an outlet for discussion of related professional and educational issues and ideas. The journal is an international outlet for research on clinical research pertaining to screening, diagnosis, management and outcomes of hearing and balance disorders as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. The clinical orientation of the journal allows for the publication of reports on audiology as implemented nationally and internationally, including novel clinical procedures, approaches, and cases. AJA seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work. Scope: The broad field of clinical audiology, including audiologic/aural rehabilitation; balance and balance disorders; cultural and linguistic diversity; detection, diagnosis, prevention, habilitation, rehabilitation, and monitoring of hearing loss; hearing aids, cochlear implants, and hearing-assistive technology; hearing disorders; lifespan perspectives on auditory function; speech perception; and tinnitus.