Download PDF
Sprache · Stimme · Gehör 2021; 45(03): 124-129
DOI: 10.1055/a-1472-3146
Schwerpunktthema

Bewertung der Lebensqualität im Rahmen einer Hörsystemversorgung

Quality of Life Assessment in the Context of Hearing System Supply
Mareike Grundmann
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Medizinische Versorgungsqualität definiert sich nicht mehr rein aus der klinischen Wirksamkeit, sondern betrachtet zusätzlich den individuellen, alltäglichen Nutzen. Die Erfassung der Lebensqualität spielt hierbei eine zentrale Rolle. In diesem Beitrag wird der Begriff der Lebensqualität insbesondere im Kontext von Hörschädigungen definiert, Möglichkeiten und Grenzen ihrer Messung sowie die Bedeutung der Gesundheitskompetenz werden diskutiert.

Abstract

Hearing impairment often have a negative impact on the quality of life, especially due to the problems that arise in communication. In addition to clinical measurement parameters, the subjective benefit in everyday life is gaining in importance as a factor for evaluating the outcome of healthcare. This article provides an overview of the factors known to influence well-being and health-related quality of life, as well as current developments in individual assessment in the context of hearing system supply.

Schlüsselwörter

Lebensqualität - Rehabilitation - Wohlbefinden - Gesundheitskompetenz - EMA

Keywords

Quality of Life - Healthcare - Wellbeing - Health Literacy - EMA


Publication History

Article published online:
13 September 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Diener E. Guidelines for National Indicators of Subjective Well-Being and Ill-Being. Appl Res Qual Life 2006; 1: 151-157 DOI: 10.1007/s11482-006-9007-x.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Dodge R, Daly A, Huyton J. et al. The challenge of defining wellbeing. Int J Wellbeing 2012; 2: 222-235 DOI: 10.5502/ijw.v2i3.4.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Miller T. Inklusion – Teilhabe – Lebensqualität. Tragfähige Beziehungen gestalten. Stuttgart: Lucius und Lucius 2012
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 WHOQOL Group. Study protocol for the World Health Organization project to develop a Quality of Life assessment instrument (WHOQOL). Qual Life Res 1993; 2: 153-159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Bullinger M. Lebensqualität – Aktueller Stand und neuere Entwicklungen der internationalen Lebensqualitätsforschung. Ravens-Sieberer U, Cieza A. Lebensqualität und Gesundheitsökonomie in der Medizin. Landsberg: ecomed; 2000: 13-24
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, 19–22 June, 1946; signed on 22 July 1946 by the representatives of 61 States (Official Records of the World Health Organization, no. 2, p. 100) and entered into force on 7 April 1948.
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Schumacher J, Klaiberg A, Brähler E. Diagnostische Verfahren zu Lebensqualität und Wohlbefinden. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Growson M, Semenov Y, Tucci D. et al. Quality of Life and Cost-Effectiveness of Cochlear Implants: A Narrative Review. Audiol Neurotol 2017; 22: 236-258 DOI: 10.1159/000481767.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Finke M, Bönitz H, Lyxell B. et al. Cochlear implant effectiveness in postlingual single-sided deaf individuals: What’s the point?. Int J Audiol 2017; 56: 417-423
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Zhao F, Bai Z, Stephens D. The relationship between changes in self-rated quality of life after cochlear implantation and changes in individual complaints. Clin Otolaryngol 2008; 33: 427-434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Mo B, Lindaek M, Harris S. Cochlear implants and quality of life: A prospective study. Ear Hear 2005; 26: 186-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 McRackan T. Bauschard M, Hatch J et al. Meta-analysis of quality of life improvement after cochlear implantation an associations with speech recognition abilities. Laryngoscope 2018; 128: 982-990 DOI: 10.1002/lary.26738.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Andries E, Gilles A, Topsakal V. et al. Systematic Review of Quality of Life Assessemtn after Cochlear Implantation in Older Adults. Audiol Neurotol 2021; 26 : 61-75 DOI: 10.1159/000508433.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Nuesse T, Schlueter A, Lemke U. et al. Self-reported hearing handicap in adults aged 55 to 81 years is modulated by hearing abilities, frailty, mental health, and willingness to use hearing aids. Int J Audiol 2021; 1-9 DOI: 10.1080/14992027.2020.1858237.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Francis H, Yeagle J, Thompson C. Clinical and psychosocial risk factors of hearing outcome in older adults with cochlear implants. Laryngoscope 2015; 125: 695-702
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kobosko J, Jedrzejczak W, Pilka E. et al. Satisfaction with cohlear implants in postlingually deaf adults and its no- naudiological predictors: Psychological distress, coping strategies, and self-esteem. Ear Hear 2015; 36: 605-618
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Eisenwort B, Schlanitz F, Niederkrotenthaler T. Schwerhörigkeit. Gelungene Kommunikation als Hauptquelle positiver Erfahrungen. HNO 2010; 58: 459-464
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Mandel A, Mandel K, Stadler E. et al. Einübung in Partnerschaft durch Kommunikationstherapie und Verhaltenstherapie. München: Pfeiffer; 1979
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Vernooij M. Kommunikation. Zur kontextgebundenen Komplexität eines Prozesses. Wittrock M, Lütgenau B. Wege zur Partizipation. Oldenburg: Universitätsverlag; 2004: 9-25
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Thoutenhoofd E, Knot-Dickscheit J, Rogge J. et al. The sound of study: Student experiences of listening in the university soundscape. J Further Higher Educ 2016; 40: 804-823
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Keidser G, Naylor G, Brungart D. et al. The Quest for Ecological Validity in Hearing Science: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How to Advance It. Ear Hear 2020; 41: 5-19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Shiffman S, Stone A, Hufford M. Ecological Momentary Assessment. Ann Rev Clin Psychol 2008; 4: 1-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Sørensen K, van den Broucke S, Fullam J. et al. Health literacy and public health: a systematic review and integration of definitions and models. BMC public health 2012; DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-80.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Grundmann M, Plotz K, Radeloff A. et al. Psychometry and test of a questionnaire tool for evaluationg the patients’ Health related Quality of Life in the realm of bimodal hearing system supply. Z Audiol 2019; 58 : 50-56
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Nationaler Aktionsplan Gesundheitskompetenz. Die Gesundheitskompetenz in Deutschland stärken. Schaeffer D, Hurrelmann K, Bauer U, Kolpatzik K. Berlin: KomPart; 2018
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Schaeffer D, Berens EM, Gille S. et al. Gesundheitskompetenz der Bevölkerung in Deutschland – vor und während der Corona Pandemie: Ergebnisse des HLS-GER 2. Bielefeld: Interdisziplinäres Zentrum für Gesundheitskompetenzforschung (IZGK), Universität Bielefeld. 2021 DOI: 10.4119/unibi/2950305
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Gilligan J, Weinstein B. Health Literacy and Patient-Centered Care in Audiology – Implications for Adult Aural Rehabilitation. Commun Disord Deaf Stud Hearing Aids 2014; 2: 2 DOI: 10.4172/2375-4427.1000110.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Institute of Medicine. Health Literacy: A Prescription to End Confusion. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press 2004. DOI: 10.17226/10883 (Stand: 09.03.2021)
    Google Scholar