Evaluation of the efficacy of hearing aids in older adults: a multiparametric longitudinal study protocol

Domenico Cuda, Sara Ghiselli, Alessandra Murri, Domenico Cuda, Sara Ghiselli, Alessandra Murri

Abstract

Background: Prevalence of hearing loss increases with age. Its estimated prevalence is 40-50 % in people over 75 years of age. Recent studies agree that declinein hearing threshold contribute to deterioration in sociality, sensitivity, cognition, and quality of life for elderly subjects. The aim of the study presented in this paper is to verify whether or not rehabilitation using first time applied Hearing Aids (HA) in a cohort of old people with hearing impairment improves both speech perception in a noisy environment over time and the overall health-related quality of life.

Methods: The monocentric, prospective, repeated measurements, single-subject, clinical observational study is to recruit 100 older adults, first-time HA recipients (≥ 65 years).The evaluation protocol is designed to analyze changes in specific measurement tools a year after the first HA usage in comparison with the evaluation before HA fitting. Evaluations will consist of multiparametric details collected through self-report questionnaires completed by the recipients and a series of commonly used audiometric measures and geriatric assessment tools. The primary indicator of changes in speech perception in noise to be used is the Italian version of Oldenburg Satz (OLSA) test whereas the indicator of changes in overall quality of life will be the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) and Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE) questionnaires. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) will help in screening the cognitive state of the subjects.

Discussion: The protocol is designed to make use of measurement tools that have already been applied to the hearing-impaired population in order to compare the effects of HA rehabilitation in the older adults immediately before first HA usage (Pre) and after 1 year of experience (Post). This broad approach will lead to a greater understanding of how useful hearing influences the quality of life in older individuals, and therefore improves potentials for healthy aging. The data is to be analyzed by using an intrasubject endpoint comparison. Outcomes will be described and analyzed in detail.

Trial registration: This research was retrospectively registered underno. NCT04333043at ClinicalTrials.gov (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/) on the 26 March 2020. This research has been registered with the Ethics Committee of the Area Vasta Emilia Nord under number 104, date of approval 17/07/2017.

Keywords: Hearing aids; Hearing loss in the older adults; Hearing‐related healthy aging; Presbyacusis.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

    1. World Health Organization. Global estimates on prevalenceof hearing loss. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization2012. .
    1. Allen PD, Eddins DA. Presbycusis phenotypes form a heterogeneous continuum when ordered by degree and configuration of hearing loss. Hear Res. 2010;264:10–20. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2010.02.001.
    1. Divenyia P, Stark PB, Haupt KM. Decline of speech understanding and auditory thresholds in the elderly. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005;118(2):1089–100. doi: 10.1121/1.1953207.
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). 2018. NICE guideline 2018: Hearing loss in adults: assessment and management. Published: 21 June 2018 (accessed 08 October 2020). Available from:
    1. Fortunato Forli S, Guglielmi F, De Corso V, Paludetti E, Berrettini G, Fetoni S. AR. A review of new insights on the association between hearing loss and cognitive decline in ageing. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2016;36:155 – 66. 10.14639/0392-100X-993.
    1. Uhlmann RF, Larson EB, Rees TS, Koepsell TD, Duckert LG. Relationship of hearing impairment to dementia and cognitive dysfunction in older adults. JAMA. 1989;261:1916–19. doi: 10.1001/jama.1989.03420130084028.
    1. Moore D, Edmondson-Jones M, Dawes P, Fortnum H, McCormack A, Pierzycki RH, Munro KJ. Relation between speech-in-noise threshold, hearing loss and cognition from 40–69 years of age. PLoS One. 2014;9:e107720. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107720.
    1. Meister H, Rählmann S, Walger M, Margolf-Hackl S, Kießling J. Hearing aid fitting in older persons with hearing impairment: the influence of cognitive function, age, and hearing loss on hearing aid benefit. Clin Interv Aging. 2015;10:435–43. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S77096.
    1. Rönnberg J, Lunner T, Ng EH, Lidestam B, Zekveld AA, Sörqvist P, Lyxell B, et al. Hearing impairment, cognition and speech understanding: exploratory factor analyses of a comprehensive test battery for a group of hearing aid users, the n200 study. Int J Audiol. 2016;55:623–42. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2016.1219775.
    1. De Benedetto M, Cuda D. La terapia protesica nell’anziano. In Grande F, Leone CA, patologia dell’orecchio nell’anziano.Pisa, Pacini Editore; 1996. p. 183–201.
    1. Mulrow CD, Tuley MR, Aguilar C. Sustained benefits of hearing aids. J Speech Hear Res. 1992;35:1402–05. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3506.1402.
    1. Hanratty B, Lawlor DA. Effective management of the elderly hearing impaired: a review. J Public Health Med. 2000;22:512–17. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/22.4.512.
    1. Lunner T. Cognitive function in relation to hearing aid use. Int J Audiol. 2003;42(Suppl 1):49–58. doi: 10.3109/14992020309074624.
    1. Lunner T, Sundewall-Thorén E. Interactions between cognition, compression, and listening conditions: effects on speech-in-noise performance in a two-channel hearing aid. J Am Acad Audiol. 2007;18:604–17. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.18.7.7.
    1. Brodie A, Smith B, Ray J. The impact of rehabilitation on quality of life after hearing loss: a systematic review. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;275:2435–40. doi: 10.1007/s00405-018-5100-7.
    1. Lopez-Poveda EA, Johannesen PT, Pérez-González P, Blanco JL, Kalluri S, Edwards B. Predictors of hearing-aid outcomes. Trends Hear. 2017;21:2331216517730526. doi: 10.1177/2331216517730526.
    1. Wattamwar K, Qian ZJ, Otter J, Leskowitz MJ, Caruana FF, Siedlecki B, et al. Increases in the rate of age-related hearing loss in the older old. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;143:41–5. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2016.2661.
    1. Tognola G, Mainardi A, Vincenti V, Cuda D. Benefit of hearing aid use in the elderly: the impact of age, cognition and hearing impairment. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2019;39:409–18. doi: 10.14639/0392-100X-2165.
    1. Puglisi GE, Warzybok A, Hochmuth S, Visentin C, Astolfi A, Prodi N, et al. An Italian matrix sentence test for the evaluation of speech intelligibility in noise. Int J Audiol. 2015;54(Suppl. 2):44–50. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1061709.
    1. Santangelo G, Siciliano M, Pedone R, Vitale C, Falco F, Bisogno R, et al. Normative data for the montreal cognitive assessment in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci. 2015;36:585–91. doi: 10.1007/s10072-014-1995-y.
    1. Cocchi C.Validazione in lingua italiana dell’ Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly-Screening Version (HHIE-S) e sue correlazioni con le disabilità nella comunicazione in età geriatrica./Accessed 04 Mar 2020.
    1. Centre for Health Economics. University M. AQoL-8D Data Collection Copy. . Accessed 05 Mar 2020
    1. Hearing Aid Research Lab (HARL).APHAB Questionnaires. . Accessed 07 Oct 2020.
    1. Cox RM, Stephens D, Kramer SE. Translations of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) Int JAudiol. 2002;41:3–26.
    1. Cox RM, Alexander GC. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear. 1995;16:176–86. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199504000-00005.
    1. Hawthorne G, Richardson JR, Day NA. A comparison of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) with four other generic utility instruments. AnnMed. 2001;33:358–70.
    1. Maxwell A, Özmen M, Iezzi A, Richardson JR. Deriving population norms for the AQoL-6D and AQoL-8D multi attribute utility instruments from web-based data. Qual Life Res. 2016;25:3209–19. doi: 10.1007/s11136-016-1337-z.
    1. Mihalopoulos C, Chen G, Iezzi A, Khan MA, Richardson JR. Assessing outcomes for cost-utility analysis in depression: comparison of five multi-attribute utility instruments with two depression-specific outcome measures. BrJ Psychiatry. 2014;205:390–97. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.113.136036.
    1. Turrini M, Cutugno G, Maturi P, Prosser S, Leoni FA, Arslan E. Bisyllabic words for speech audiometry; a new Italian material. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 1993;13:63–77.
    1. Newman C, Jacbson G, Hug G, Weinstein B, Malinoff R. Pratical method for quantifying hearing aid benefit in older adults. J Am Acad Audiol. 1991;2:70–5.
    1. Ventry I, Weinstein B. Identification of elderly people with hearing problems. ASHA. 1983;25:37–42.
    1. Lichtenstein MJ, Bess FH, Logan SA. Validation of screening tools for identifying hearing-impaired elderly in primary care. JAMA. 1988;259:2875–78. doi: 10.1001/jama.1988.03720190043029.
    1. Weinstein BE, Ventry IM. Audiometric correlates of the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the elderly. J Speech Hear Disord. 1983;48:379–84. doi: 10.1044/jshd.4804.379.
    1. Cox RM, Alexander GC. The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA): psychometric properties of the English version. Int J Audiol. 2002;41:30–5. doi: 10.3109/14992020209101309.
    1. Cox R, Alexander G, Beyer C. Norms for the international outcome inventory for hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol. 2003;14:403–13. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1715761.
    1. Nasreddine Z, Phillips N, Bédirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead V, Collin I, et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53:695–99. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x.
    1. Conti S, Bonazzi S, Laiacona M, Masina M, Coralli MV. Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA)-Italian version: regression based norms and equivalent scores. Neurol Sci. 2015;36:209–14. doi: 10.1007/s10072-014-1921-3.
    1. Siciliano M, Chiorri C, Passaniti C, Sant’elia V, Trojano L, Santangelo G. Comparison of alternate and original forms of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA): an Italian normative study. Neurol Sci. 2019;40:691–702. doi: 10.1007/s10072-019-3700-7.
    1. Dupuis K, Pichora-Fuller MK, Chasteen AL, Marchuk V, Singh G, Smith SL. Effects of hearing and vision impairments on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2015;22(4):413–37. doi: 10.1080/13825585.2014.968084.
    1. Houben R, Koopman J, Luts H, Wagener KC, VanWieringen A, Verschuure H, et al. Development of a Dutch matrix sentence test to assess speech intelligibility in noise. Int J Audiol. 2014;53:760–63. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2014.920111.
    1. Manrique-Huarte R, Calavia D, Huarte Irujo A, Girón L, Manrique-Rodríguez M. Treatment for Hearing Loss among the Elderly: Auditory Outcomes and Impact on Quality of Life. Audiol Neurootol. 2016;21(Suppl 1):29–35. doi: 10.1159/000448352.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit