首页> 外文期刊>Trends in Hearing >Evaluation of Auditory Functioning and Rehabilitation Using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures
【24h】

Evaluation of Auditory Functioning and Rehabilitation Using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

机译:使用患者报告的结果指标评估听觉功能和康复能力

获取原文
           

摘要

There is lack of a systematic approach concerning how to select an adequate hearing aid and how to evaluate its efficacy with respect to the personal needs of rehabilitation. The goal of this study was to examine the applicability and added value of two widely used self-reporting questionnaires in relation to the evaluation of hearing aid fitting. We analyzed responses, pre- and postfitting, from 1,319 subjects who completed the Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) and a slightly adapted version of the Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap (in Dutch: AVAB). Most COSI responses were at or near the maximum possible score. Results show a close relation between COSI’s degree of change and final ability (Spearman’s rho?=?0.71). Both AVAB and COSI showed a significant effect of hearing aid experience, but—in contrast to AVAB—COSI did not show a significant effect of the degree of hearing loss. In addition, a Friedman test showed significant differences between six dimensions of auditory functioning for both AVAB and COSI, although post hoc analysis revealed that for COSI, the dimension speech in quiet explained most variation between dimensions. In conclusion, the effects of hearing loss were more salient in AVAB, while both AVAB and COSI showed differences regarding hearing aid experience. Combining the advantages of both methods results in a detailed evaluation of hearing aid rehabilitation. Our results therefore suggest that both methods should be used in a complementary manner, rather than separately.
机译:对于如何选择适当的助听器以及如何根据康复的个人需求评估其功效,缺乏系统的方法。这项研究的目的是检验两个广泛使用的自我报告调查表在评估助听器配合方面的适用性和附加值。我们分析了1,319位受试者的回答(前后),这些受试者完成了以客户为导向的改善量表(COSI)和稍作修改的阿姆斯特丹听觉障碍和残障清单(荷兰语:AVAB)。大多数COSI响应均达到或接近最高评分。结果显示,COSI的变化程度与最终能力之间有密切的关系(Spearman的rho?=?0.71)。 AVAB和COSI均显示出助听器体验的显着效果,但与AVAB相比,COSI并未显示出听力丧失程度的显着影响。此外,弗里德曼测试显示,对于AVAB和COSI,听觉功能的六个维度之间存在显着差异,尽管事后分析表明,对于COSI,安静的维度语音解释了维度之间的大部分差异。总之,听力损失的影响在AVAB中更为明显,而AVAB和COSI两者在助听器体验方面均存在差异。结合这两种方法的优点,可以对助听器的康复情况进行详细评估。因此,我们的结果表明,两种方法应以互补的方式使用,而不是分别使用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号