Hearing Health Care Utilization Following Automated Hearing Screening.


Journal

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology
ISSN: 2157-3107
Titre abrégé: J Am Acad Audiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9114646

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 2021
Historique:
pubmed: 2 6 2021
medline: 25 11 2021
entrez: 1 6 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The study examined follow-up rates for pursuing hearing health care (HHC) 6 to 8 months after participants self-administered one of three hearing screening methods: an automated method for testing of auditory sensitivity (AMTAS), a four-frequency pure-tone screener (FFS), or a digits-in-noise test (DIN), with and without the presentation of a 2-minute educational video about hearing. The study aims to determine if the type of self-administered hearing screening method (with or without an educational video) affects HHC follow-up rates. The study is a randomized controlled trial of three automated hearing screening methods, plus control group, with and without an educational video. The control group completed questionnaires and provided follow-up data but did not undergo a hearing screening test. The study sample includes 1,665 participants (mean age 50.8 years; 935 males) at two VA Medical Centers and at university and community centers in Portland, OR; Bay Pines, FL; Minneapolis, MN; Mauston, WI; and Columbus, OH. HHC follow-up data at 6 to 8 months were obtained by contacting participants by phone or mail. Screening methods and participant characteristics were compared in relation to the probability of participants pursuing HHC during the follow-up period. The 2-minute educational video did not have a significant effect on HHC follow-up rates. When The FFS resulted in a greater HHC follow-up rate compared with the other screening methods. This self-administered test may be more motivational for HHC follow-up because participants who fail the screening are aware of sounds they could not hear which does not occur with adaptive assessments like AMTAS or the DIN test. It is likely that access to and reduced personal cost of audiological services for veterans contributed to higher HHC follow-up rates in this group compared with non-veteran participants.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The study examined follow-up rates for pursuing hearing health care (HHC) 6 to 8 months after participants self-administered one of three hearing screening methods: an automated method for testing of auditory sensitivity (AMTAS), a four-frequency pure-tone screener (FFS), or a digits-in-noise test (DIN), with and without the presentation of a 2-minute educational video about hearing.
PURPOSE
The study aims to determine if the type of self-administered hearing screening method (with or without an educational video) affects HHC follow-up rates.
RESEARCH DESIGN
The study is a randomized controlled trial of three automated hearing screening methods, plus control group, with and without an educational video. The control group completed questionnaires and provided follow-up data but did not undergo a hearing screening test.
STUDY SAMPLE
The study sample includes 1,665 participants (mean age 50.8 years; 935 males) at two VA Medical Centers and at university and community centers in Portland, OR; Bay Pines, FL; Minneapolis, MN; Mauston, WI; and Columbus, OH.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
HHC follow-up data at 6 to 8 months were obtained by contacting participants by phone or mail. Screening methods and participant characteristics were compared in relation to the probability of participants pursuing HHC during the follow-up period.
RESULTS
The 2-minute educational video did not have a significant effect on HHC follow-up rates. When
CONCLUSION
The FFS resulted in a greater HHC follow-up rate compared with the other screening methods. This self-administered test may be more motivational for HHC follow-up because participants who fail the screening are aware of sounds they could not hear which does not occur with adaptive assessments like AMTAS or the DIN test. It is likely that access to and reduced personal cost of audiological services for veterans contributed to higher HHC follow-up rates in this group compared with non-veteran participants.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34062603
doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1723041
pmc: PMC8355007
mid: NIHMS1643286
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

235-245

Subventions

Organisme : NIDCD NIH HHS
ID : R33 DC011769
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

None declared.

Références

Br J Psychiatry. 1964 Sep;110:668-82
pubmed: 14199809
Age Ageing. 1996 Mar;25(2):89-96
pubmed: 8670534
Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Nov 1;148(9):879-86
pubmed: 9801018
J Aging Health. 2016 Sep;28(6):979-94
pubmed: 26597841
Br Med J. 1980 Oct 4;281(6245):903-5
pubmed: 7427503
Ear Hear. 2015 Jan;36(1):92-101
pubmed: 25158981
Am J Audiol. 2013 Jun;22(1):183-5
pubmed: 23800816
Ear Hear. 1990 Jun;11(3):176-80
pubmed: 2192930
Milbank Mem Fund Q. 1966 Jul;44(3):Suppl:94-127
pubmed: 5967464
Int J Audiol. 2010 Mar;49(3):185-94
pubmed: 20109081
Ear Hear. 2010 Feb;31(1):2-6
pubmed: 20040828
JAMA. 1989 Apr 7;261(13):1916-9
pubmed: 2926927
Ear Hear. 1982 May-Jun;3(3):128-34
pubmed: 7095321
Arch Neurol. 2011 Feb;68(2):214-20
pubmed: 21320988
Int J Audiol. 2013 Aug;52(8):558-67
pubmed: 23682849
J Am Geriatr Soc. 1993 Apr;41(4):401-7
pubmed: 8463527
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2021 Feb 17;76(3):518-523
pubmed: 31628485
Clin Otolaryngol. 2006 Oct;31(5):436-40
pubmed: 17014457
Int J Audiol. 2016 Jul;55 Suppl 3:S52-8
pubmed: 27206679
J Am Acad Audiol. 2017 Feb;28(2):161-169
pubmed: 28240983
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010 Mar;58(3):427-34
pubmed: 20398111
Ear Hear. 2016 May-Jun;37(3):324-33
pubmed: 26765286
Ear Hear. 2011 Nov-Dec;32(6):720-31
pubmed: 21697715
Am J Audiol. 2012 Dec;21(2):331-7
pubmed: 23233518
Ear Hear. 1990 Aug;11(4):247-56
pubmed: 2210098
Ear Hear. 1990 Dec;11(6):430-3
pubmed: 2073976

Auteurs

Robert L Folmer (RL)

VA National Center for Rehabilitative Auditory Research, VA Portland Medical Center, Portland, Oregon.
Department of Otolaryngology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.

Gabrielle H Saunders (GH)

VA National Center for Rehabilitative Auditory Research, VA Portland Medical Center, Portland, Oregon.
Manchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.

Jay J Vachhani (JJ)

VA National Center for Rehabilitative Auditory Research, VA Portland Medical Center, Portland, Oregon.

Robert H Margolis (RH)

Audiology Incorporated, Arden Hills, Minnesota.

George Saly (G)

Audiology Incorporated, Arden Hills, Minnesota.

Bevan Yueh (B)

Department of Otolaryngology/Head & Neck Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Rachel A McArdle (RA)

Office of Patient Care Services, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC.

Lawrence L Feth (LL)

Department of Speech and Hearing Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.

Christina M Roup (CM)

Department of Speech and Hearing Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.

M Patrick Feeney (MP)

VA National Center for Rehabilitative Auditory Research, VA Portland Medical Center, Portland, Oregon.
Department of Otolaryngology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH