Satisfaction level with hearing aid in the daily life of Army Healthcare System users

Luciane R Veiga, Alvaro R C Merlo, Sotero S Mengue, Luciane R Veiga, Alvaro R C Merlo, Sotero S Mengue

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to investigate satisfaction levels with hearing aids in daily life of Army Health System users, in addition to associated factors. Adults and seniors from 3rd Military Area that had purchased hearing aids within the years 1998 and 2003 were selected to answer SADL (Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life) questionnaire. We excluded patients aged less than 18 years; those that had acquired hearing aid for less than 6 weeks, and patients with severe comprehension and expression limitation. The results showed that patients were considerably satisfied with the use of aids. There was lower satisfaction level with the negative factor subscale of SADL (Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life), especially in relation to telephone using. The factors that were associated with satisfaction were linked to the person and, mainly, to auditory rehabilitation. The data showed that, beyond the selection of the most technically appropriate hearing aid, it is highly important to follow auditory rehabilitation programs including home trials, guidance and counseling so that patients can have realistic expectations.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Studied population and satisfaction level with hearing aids among users of hearing aids acquired through FUSEX between 1998 and 2003.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparative graph of overall satisfaction and subscale scores in the population of patients at FUSEX 3ª RM that acquired hearing aids between 1998 and 2003 and the standard of the American study (Cox and Alexander, 1999). Bars show percentile 20 and 80.

References

    1. Beck LB. The role of outcomes data in health-care resource allocation. Ear Hear. 2000;21(4):895–965.
    1. Campos CAH, Russo ICP, Almeida K. In: 2. Almeida K, Iorio MCM., editors. Vol. 3. Lovise; São Paulo: 2003. Indicaçã o, seleçã o e adaptaçã o de próteses auditivas: princípios gerais. pp. 35–54. (Próteses auditivas – Fundamentos teóricos e aplicaçõ es clínicas.).
    1. Cox RM, Alexander GC. Measuring satisfaction with amplification in daily life: The SADL scale. Ear Hear. 1999;20(4):306–320.
    1. Cox RM, Alexander GC. Expectations about hearing aids and their relationship to fitting outcome. J Am Acad Audiol. 2000;11(7):368–382.
    1. Cox RM, Alexander GC. Validation of the SADL questionnaire. Ear Hear. 2001;22(2):151–160.
    1. Crow R, Gage H, Hampson S, Hart J, Kimber A, Storey L, Thomas H. The measurement of satisfaction with healthcare: implications for a systematic review of the literature. Health Technol Assess. 2002;6(32):1–256.
    1. Crowley HJ, Nabelek IV. Estimation of client-assessed hearing aid performance based upon unaided variables. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1996;39(1):19–27.
    1. Fabry DA, Jacobson GP, Newman CW. The development of the three-clinic hearing aid selection profile. Correspondência pessoal. Mai, 2000
    1. Garstecki DC, Erler SF. Hearing loss, control and demographic factors influencing hearing aid use among older adults. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998;41(3):527–537.
    1. Henderson D, Salvi RJ, Boettcher FA, Clock AE. In: Tratado de Audiologia. 4. Katz J., editor. Manole; São Paulo: 1998. Correlatos Neurofisiológicos da perda auditiva neurossensorial.
    1. Hosford-Dunn H, Halpern J. Clinical application of the satisfaction with amplification in daily life scale in private practice I: Statistical, content and factorial validity. J Am Acad Audiol. 2000;11(10):523–539.
    1. Hosford-Dunn H, Halpern J. Clinical application of the SADL scale in private practice II: Predictive validity of fitting variables. J Am Acad Audiol. 2001;12(1):15–36.
    1. Jerram JCK, Purdy SC. Technology, expectations and adjustment to hearing loss: Predictors of hearing aid outcome. J Am Acad Audiol. 2001;12(2):64–79.
    1. Killion MC, Fikret-Pasa S. The 3 types of sensorioneural hearing loss: loudness and intelligibility considerations. The Hearing Journal. 1993;46(11):31–36.
    1. Kochkin S., Marke Trak V. Consumer satisfaction & subjective benefit with high performance hearing aid. The Hearing Review. 1996;3(12):16–26.
    1. Menegotto IH, Iorio MCM. In: 2. Almeida K, Iorio MCM., editors. Vol. 14. Lovise; São Paulo: 2003. Processamento dos sinais sonoros nas próteses auditivas: compressão. pp. 335–355. (Próteses auditivas – Fundamentos teóricos e aplicaçõ es clínicas).
    1. Northern JL. Pacient satisfaction and hearing aid outcomes. The Hearing Journal. 2000;53(6):10–16.
    1. Purdy SC, Jerram CK. Investigation of the profile of hearing aid performance in experienced hearing aid users. Ear Hear. 1998;19(6):473–480.
    1. Russo ICP. In: Intervençã o Fonoaudiológica na Terceira Idade. Russo ICP., editor. Ed. Revinter; Rio de Janeiro: 1999. Distúrbios da audiçã o: a presbiacusia.
    1. Russo ICP, Almeida K. In: Marchesan I, Bolaffi C, Gomes I, Zorzi J., editors. Vol. 10. Ed. Lovise; São Paulo: 1995. O processo de reabilitaçã o audiológica no deficiente auditivo idoso. pp. 89–106. (Tópicos em Fonoaudiologia.).
    1. Russo ICP, Silveira KM, de M. Reabilitaçã o auditiva em idosos. Anais do XVI Encontro Internacional de Audiologia. RJ, Abr. 2001
    1. Stika C, Ross M. Hearing aid services and satisfaction: The consumer viewpoint. 2002 [on line] Available from World Wide Web:
    1. Sweetow RW. Counseling: It's the key to successful hearing aid fittings. The Hearing Journal mar. 1999;52(3):10–17.
    1. Weinstein BE. Outcome measures in the hearing aid fitting/selection process. Trends in Amplification. 1997;2(4):115–137.
    1. Wiscosin Self Help For Hard Of Hearing People Association Hearing loss statistics. 2002 [on-line] Available from World Wide Web:

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe