Disparities in Hearing Aid Use Among Those With Hearing Loss in Rural and Urban Settings

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology Pub Date : 2025-03-21 DOI:10.1002/lio2.70125
Paul Johnson, Emmanuel Garcia Morales, Nicholas Reed
{"title":"Disparities in Hearing Aid Use Among Those With Hearing Loss in Rural and Urban Settings","authors":"Paul Johnson,&nbsp;Emmanuel Garcia Morales,&nbsp;Nicholas Reed","doi":"10.1002/lio2.70125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To investigate potential disparities in hearing aid use among urban and rural populations with hearing loss.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Study Design</h3>\n \n <p>Cross-sectional analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We used pooled data from the 2017 and 2018 rounds of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS). Our analytic sample was restricted to 8107 participants with hearing loss (those who reported little to a lot of trouble hearing) and with a full set of covariates. Multivariate logistic regression models for the probability of hearing aid use were estimated using a participant's place of residence (rural/urban) and household income relative to the Federal Poverty Level (low and middle income ≤ 200% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL); high income &gt; 200% FPL) as main exposures.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In models using place of residence as the main exposure, we found no statistically significant difference in hearing aid use between rural and urban populations. In models combining place of residence with income, we found that respondents in the rural high-income group were at the highest odds for hearing aid use (odds ratio (OR): 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.52–2.59) when compared to the rural low and middle-income group and, similarly, for the urban high-income (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.26–1.96) and urban low and middle-income groups (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.02–1.69).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>There are potential interactions of metro status and income regarding hearing aid use that are more pronounced in rural populations. This might allow policymakers to target interventions for hearing loss to rural and low-income populations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Level of Evidence</h3>\n \n <p>3</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48529,"journal":{"name":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","volume":"10 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lio2.70125","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lio2.70125","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To investigate potential disparities in hearing aid use among urban and rural populations with hearing loss.

Study Design

Cross-sectional analysis.

Methods

We used pooled data from the 2017 and 2018 rounds of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS). Our analytic sample was restricted to 8107 participants with hearing loss (those who reported little to a lot of trouble hearing) and with a full set of covariates. Multivariate logistic regression models for the probability of hearing aid use were estimated using a participant's place of residence (rural/urban) and household income relative to the Federal Poverty Level (low and middle income ≤ 200% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL); high income > 200% FPL) as main exposures.

Results

In models using place of residence as the main exposure, we found no statistically significant difference in hearing aid use between rural and urban populations. In models combining place of residence with income, we found that respondents in the rural high-income group were at the highest odds for hearing aid use (odds ratio (OR): 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.52–2.59) when compared to the rural low and middle-income group and, similarly, for the urban high-income (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.26–1.96) and urban low and middle-income groups (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.02–1.69).

Conclusions

There are potential interactions of metro status and income regarding hearing aid use that are more pronounced in rural populations. This might allow policymakers to target interventions for hearing loss to rural and low-income populations.

Level of Evidence

3

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
农村和城市听力损失者在助听器使用方面的差异
目的探讨城乡听力损失人群在助听器使用方面的潜在差异。研究设计横断面分析。方法我们使用了2017年和2018年医疗保险现行受益人调查(MCBS)的汇总数据。我们的分析样本被限制为8107名听力损失的参与者(那些报告听力很少或很多问题的人),并具有全套协变量。使用参与者的居住地(农村/城市)和家庭收入相对于联邦贫困水平(低收入和中等收入≤联邦贫困水平(FPL)的200%)估计助听器使用概率的多变量logistic回归模型;高收入(200% FPL)作为主要敞口。结果在以居住地为主要暴露点的模型中,我们发现农村和城市人口在助听器使用方面没有统计学上的显著差异。在结合居住地与收入的模型中,我们发现,与农村低收入和中等收入群体相比,农村高收入群体的受访者使用助听器的几率最高(比值比(OR): 1.99, 95%置信区间(CI): 1.52-2.59),同样,城市高收入群体(OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.26-1.96)和城市中低收入群体(OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.02-1.69)也是如此。结论城市地位和收入对助听器使用的潜在相互作用在农村人群中更为明显。这可能使政策制定者能够针对农村和低收入人群的听力损失进行干预。证据级别3
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
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
245
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Variability in Physical Exam Documentation for Obstructive Sleep Apnea Issue Information Chronic Rhinosinusitis and Autoimmune Diseases: A Comprehensive Large Population-Based Analysis Geospatial Analysis of Rural–Urban Access of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgeons and Clinics in Vermont Transoral Approach for Balloon Dilation of the Eustachian Tube
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1