Ibrahim Almufarrij, Harvey Dillon, Benjamin Adams, Aneela Greval, Kevin J Munro
{"title":"新成年助听器使用者的听力偏好:一项注册的、双盲的、随机的、混合方法的初始与真实听力匹配的临床试验。","authors":"Ibrahim Almufarrij, Harvey Dillon, Benjamin Adams, Aneela Greval, Kevin J Munro","doi":"10.1177/23312165231189596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Hearing aid verification with real-ear measurement (REM) is recommended in clinical practice. Improvements, over time, in accuracy of manufacturers' initial fit mean the benefit of routine REM for new adult users is unclear. This registered, double-blinded, randomized, mixed-methods clinical trial aimed to (i) determine whether new adult hearing aid users prefer initial or real-ear fit and (ii) investigate the reasons for preferences. New adult hearing aid users (<i>n</i> = 45) were each fitted with two programs: the initial fit and real-ear fit, both with adjustments based on immediate feedback from the patient. Participants were asked to complete daily paired-comparisons of the two programs with a magnitude estimation of the preference, one for each of clarity/comfort in quiet/noise as well as overall preference. The results revealed gain adjustment requests were low in number and small in magnitude. Deviation from NAL-NL2 targets (after adjustment for a 65 dB SPL input) was close to zero, except at high frequencies where real-ear fits were around 3 dB closer to target. There was no difference in clarity ratings between programs, but comfort ratings favored initial fit. Overall, 10 participants (22%) expressed a preference for real-ear fit. Reasons for preference were primarily based on comfort with the initial fit and clarity with real-ear fit. It may be acceptable to fit new adult users with mild-to-moderate hearing loss without the need for REMs, if the primary outcome of interest is user preference. It remains to be seen if the findings generalize to other fitting software, other outcome measures and more severe hearing loss.</p>","PeriodicalId":48678,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Hearing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10637150/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Listening Preferences of New Adult Hearing Aid Users: A Registered, Double-Blind, Randomized, Mixed-Methods Clinical Trial of Initial Versus Real-Ear Fit.\",\"authors\":\"Ibrahim Almufarrij, Harvey Dillon, Benjamin Adams, Aneela Greval, Kevin J Munro\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23312165231189596\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Hearing aid verification with real-ear measurement (REM) is recommended in clinical practice. Improvements, over time, in accuracy of manufacturers' initial fit mean the benefit of routine REM for new adult users is unclear. This registered, double-blinded, randomized, mixed-methods clinical trial aimed to (i) determine whether new adult hearing aid users prefer initial or real-ear fit and (ii) investigate the reasons for preferences. New adult hearing aid users (<i>n</i> = 45) were each fitted with two programs: the initial fit and real-ear fit, both with adjustments based on immediate feedback from the patient. Participants were asked to complete daily paired-comparisons of the two programs with a magnitude estimation of the preference, one for each of clarity/comfort in quiet/noise as well as overall preference. The results revealed gain adjustment requests were low in number and small in magnitude. Deviation from NAL-NL2 targets (after adjustment for a 65 dB SPL input) was close to zero, except at high frequencies where real-ear fits were around 3 dB closer to target. There was no difference in clarity ratings between programs, but comfort ratings favored initial fit. Overall, 10 participants (22%) expressed a preference for real-ear fit. Reasons for preference were primarily based on comfort with the initial fit and clarity with real-ear fit. It may be acceptable to fit new adult users with mild-to-moderate hearing loss without the need for REMs, if the primary outcome of interest is user preference. It remains to be seen if the findings generalize to other fitting software, other outcome measures and more severe hearing loss.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48678,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Hearing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10637150/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Hearing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23312165231189596\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Hearing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23312165231189596","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
建议在临床实践中使用真实耳朵测量(REM)进行助听器验证。随着时间的推移,制造商初始拟合准确性的提高意味着常规REM对新成年用户的好处尚不清楚。这项注册、双盲、随机、混合方法的临床试验旨在(i)确定新的成人助听器使用者是喜欢初次佩戴还是真正佩戴,以及(ii)调查偏好的原因。新的成人助听器使用者(n = 45)分别配备了两个程序:初始贴合和真正的耳朵贴合,两者都根据患者的即时反馈进行调整。参与者被要求完成两个项目的每日配对比较,并对偏好进行幅度估计,分别评估安静/噪音中的清晰度/舒适度以及总体偏好。结果表明,增益调整请求数量少,幅度小。与NAL-NL2目标的偏差(调整65 dB SPL输入)接近于零,但在实际耳朵适合度约为3的高频下除外 距离目标近dB。节目之间的清晰度评分没有差异,但舒适度评分有利于初始适合度。总体而言,10名参与者(22%)表示更喜欢真正的耳朵贴合感。偏好的原因主要是基于最初贴合的舒适度和真正贴合耳朵的清晰度。如果感兴趣的主要结果是用户偏好,那么在不需要REMs的情况下,适合轻度至中度听力损失的新成年用户可能是可以接受的。这些发现是否适用于其他拟合软件、其他结果测量和更严重的听力损失,还有待观察。
Listening Preferences of New Adult Hearing Aid Users: A Registered, Double-Blind, Randomized, Mixed-Methods Clinical Trial of Initial Versus Real-Ear Fit.
Hearing aid verification with real-ear measurement (REM) is recommended in clinical practice. Improvements, over time, in accuracy of manufacturers' initial fit mean the benefit of routine REM for new adult users is unclear. This registered, double-blinded, randomized, mixed-methods clinical trial aimed to (i) determine whether new adult hearing aid users prefer initial or real-ear fit and (ii) investigate the reasons for preferences. New adult hearing aid users (n = 45) were each fitted with two programs: the initial fit and real-ear fit, both with adjustments based on immediate feedback from the patient. Participants were asked to complete daily paired-comparisons of the two programs with a magnitude estimation of the preference, one for each of clarity/comfort in quiet/noise as well as overall preference. The results revealed gain adjustment requests were low in number and small in magnitude. Deviation from NAL-NL2 targets (after adjustment for a 65 dB SPL input) was close to zero, except at high frequencies where real-ear fits were around 3 dB closer to target. There was no difference in clarity ratings between programs, but comfort ratings favored initial fit. Overall, 10 participants (22%) expressed a preference for real-ear fit. Reasons for preference were primarily based on comfort with the initial fit and clarity with real-ear fit. It may be acceptable to fit new adult users with mild-to-moderate hearing loss without the need for REMs, if the primary outcome of interest is user preference. It remains to be seen if the findings generalize to other fitting software, other outcome measures and more severe hearing loss.
Trends in HearingAUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGYOTORH-OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
44
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍:
Trends in Hearing is an open access journal completely dedicated to publishing original research and reviews focusing on human hearing, hearing loss, hearing aids, auditory implants, and aural rehabilitation. Under its former name, Trends in Amplification, the journal established itself as a forum for concise explorations of all areas of translational hearing research by leaders in the field. Trends in Hearing has now expanded its focus to include original research articles, with the goal of becoming the premier venue for research related to human hearing and hearing loss.