Download PDF
Semin Hear 2019; 40(01): 068-084
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1676784
Review Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Evidence-Based Interventions for Adult Aural Rehabilitation: That Was Then, This Is Now

Melanie Ferguson
1   National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, United Kingdom
2   Hearing Sciences, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
3   Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom
,
David Maidment
1   National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, United Kingdom
2   Hearing Sciences, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
,
Helen Henshaw
1   National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, United Kingdom
2   Hearing Sciences, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
,
Eithne Heffernan
1   National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, United Kingdom
2   Hearing Sciences, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
05 February 2019 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

More than a decade after Arthur Boothroyd published “Adult Aural Rehabilitation: What Is It and Does It Work?,” the four cornerstones of adult aural rehabilitation are re-examined in terms of research that we and others in the field have undertaken. The focus is on novel advances in high-quality research relating to interventions to support self-management for hearing aids and other listening devices (sensory management), knowledge and skill (instruction), auditory and cognitive training (perceptual training), and motivational engagement (counseling). Much of this new research has a theoretical underpinning (e.g., behavior change theory) to better guide the development and evaluation of interventions, with a focus on self-management and patient-centered approaches. New and emerging technologies that support e- and m-health delivery of interventions provide greater personalization and interactivity to promote self-management of hearing loss. Looking to the future, there remains a requirement for a set of relevant and appropriate outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions trialed in clinical studies. There is a continuing need for high-quality evidence, underpinned by contemporary theory, to increase the likelihood that translational adult aural rehabilitation research that aims to benefit patients will be applied in future clinical practice.

Keywords

hearing aids - multimedia education - auditory training - cognition - motivational engagement - outcome measures
 

  • References

  • 1 Boothroyd A. Adult aural rehabilitation: what is it and does it work?. Trends Amplif 2007; 11 (02) 63-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Press; 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Vos T, Allen C, Arora M. , et al; GBD 2015 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 310 diseases and injuries, 1990-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet 2016; 388 (10053): 1545-1602
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 World Health Organization. World Health Organization Deafness and Hearing Loss Factsheet. 2018. Available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/deafness-and-hearing-loss . Accessed December 17, 2018
    PubMed
  • 5 Davis A, McMahon CM, Pichora-Fuller KM. , et al. Aging and hearing health: the life-course approach. Gerontologist 2016; 56 (Suppl. 02) S256-S267
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Pearce G, Parke HL, Pinnock H. , et al. The PRISMS taxonomy of self-management support: derivation of a novel taxonomy and initial testing of its utility. J Health Serv Res Policy 2016; 21 (02) 73-82
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Mosen DM, Schmittdiel J, Hibbard J, Sobel D, Remmers C, Bellows J. Is patient activation associated with outcomes of care for adults with chronic conditions?. J Ambul Care Manage 2007; 30 (01) 21-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 [Anonymous] . Patient self-management support. In: Adams K, Greiner AC, Corrigan JM. , eds. Committee on the Crossing the Quality Chasm: Next Steps Toward a New Health Care System, The 1st Annual Crossing the Quality Chasm Summit: A Focus on Communities. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2004
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Taylor SJ, Pinnock H, Epiphaniou E. , et al. A rapid synthesis of the evidence on interventions supporting self-management for people with long-term conditions: PRISMS–Practical systematic Review of Self-Management Support for long-term conditions. NIHR Journals Library. Health Services and Delivery Research, No. 2.53. 2014
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Ferguson M. Knowledge is power: the power of mobile technologies to enhance hearing-related knowledge. ENT and Audiology News; 2017: 82-84
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JM. Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996; 312 (7023): 71-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Wong LL, Hickson L. Evidence-Based Practice in Audiology: Evaluating Interventions for Children and Adults with Hearing Impairment. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 13 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Hearing Loss in Adults: Assessment and Management. 2018. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng98 accessed. December 17, 2018
    PubMed
  • 14 Medical Research Council. Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions: New Guidance. London, United Kingdom: . 2006
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Ferguson M, Brandreth M, Brassington W, Leighton P, Wharrad H. A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the benefits of a multimedia educational programme for first-time hearing aid users. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (02) 123-136
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Maidment DW, Ferguson MA. An application of the UK Medical Research Council’s guidelines for evaluating complex interventions: a usability study assessing Smartphone-connected listening devices in adults with hearing loss. Am J Audiol 2018; 27 (3S): 474-481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Coulson NS, Ferguson MA, Henshaw H, Heffernan E. Applying theories of health behaviour and change to hearing health research: time for a new approach. Int J Audiol 2016; 55 (Suppl. 03) S99-S104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Rosenstock IM. Historical origins of the health belief model. Health Educ Monogr 1974; 2: 328-335
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. J Consult Clin Psychol 1983; 51 (03) 390-395
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. Kuhl Beckman. , eds. Action-Control: From Cognition to Behavior. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 1985: 11-39
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Ferguson MA, Coulson NS, Henshaw H, Heffernan E. Application of health behaviour theory to hearing healthcare research: The state of play and beyond. International journal of audiology 2016; 15 (55) (sup3): S1-2
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci 2011; 6: 42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Cane J, O'Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement Sci 2012; 7: 37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Michie S, Richardson M, Johnston M. , et al. The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Ann Behav Med 2013; 46 (01) 81-95
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Barker F, Atkins L, de Lusignan S. Applying the COM-B behaviour model and behaviour change wheel to develop an intervention to improve hearing-aid use in adult auditory rehabilitation. Int J Audiol 2016; 55 (Suppl. 03) S90-S98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Barker F, Mackenzie E, de Lusignan S. Current process in hearing-aid fitting appointments: an analysis of audiologists' use of behaviour change techniques using the behaviour change technique taxonomy (v1). Int J Audiol 2016; 55 (11) 643-652
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Maidment DW, Ferguson MA. Improving hearing aid take-up, use and adherence: are smartphones the answer?. Innovations (Phila) 2017; 7: 26-32
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Ferguson MA, Kitterick PT, Chong LY, Edmondson-Jones M, Barker F, Hoare DJ. Hearing aids for mild to moderate hearing loss in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 9: CD012023
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak VIII: 25-year trends in the hearing health market. Hear Rev 2009; 16: 12-31
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Danermark B, Granberg S, Kramer SE, Selb M, Möller C. The creation of a comprehensive and a brief core set for hearing loss using the international classification of functioning, disability and health. Am J Audiol 2013; 22 (02) 323-328
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Kiessling J, Pichora-Fuller MK, Gatehouse S. , et al. Candidature for and delivery of audiological services: special needs of older people. Int J Audiol 2003; 42 (Suppl. 02) S92-S101
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Chisolm TH, Johnson CE, Danhauer JL. , et al. A systematic review of health-related quality of life and hearing aids: final report of the American Academy of Audiology Task Force on the Health-Related Quality of Life Benefits of Amplification in Adults. J Am Acad Audiol 2007; 18 (02) 151-183
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Mulrow CD, Aguilar C, Endicott JE. , et al. Quality-of-life changes and hearing impairment. A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 1990; 113 (03) 188-194
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Ferguson MA, Kitterick PT, Edmondson-Jones M, Hoare DJ. Hearing aids for mild to moderate hearing loss in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015; 22 (12) CD012023-1
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Barker F, Mackenzie E, Elliott L, Jones S, de Lusignan S. Interventions to improve hearing aid use in adult auditory rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; (08) CD010342
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Davis A, Smith P, Ferguson M, Stephens D, Gianopoulos I. Acceptability, benefit and costs of early screening for hearing disability: a study of potential screening tests and models. Health Technol Assess 2007; 11 (42) 1-294
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Chien W, Lin FR. Prevalence of hearing aid use among older adults in the United States. Arch Intern Med 2012; 172 (03) 292-293
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Gopinath B, Schneider J, Hartley D. , et al. Incidence and predictors of hearing aid use and ownership among older adults with hearing loss. Ann Epidemiol 2011; 21 (07) 497-506
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 McCormack A, Fortnum H. Why do people fitted with hearing aids not wear them?. Int J Audiol 2013; 52 (05) 360-368
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Deloitte. State of the smart: seventh annual mobile consumer survey. United Kingdom; 2017. Available at: https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pages/technology-media-and-telecommunications/articles/mobile-consumer-survey.html . Accessed March 23, 2018
    PubMed
  • 41 Donahue A, Dubno JR, Beck L. Guest editorial: accessible and affordable hearing health care for adults with mild to moderate hearing loss. Ear Hear 2010; 31 (01) 2-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Hearing Health Care for Adults: Priorities for Improving Access and Affordability. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 43 Humes LE, Rogers SE, Quigley TM, Main AK, Kinney DL, Herring C. The effects of service-delivery model and purchase price on hearing-aid outcomes in older adults: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial. Am J Audiol 2017; 26 (01) 53-79
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Maidment DW, Barker AB, Xia J, Ferguson MA. Effectiveness of alternative listening devices to conventional hearing aids for adults with hearing loss: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open 2016; 6 (10) e011683
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998; 52 (06) 377-384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Maidment DW, Barker AB, Xia J, Ferguson MA. A systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness of alternative listening devices to conventional hearing aids in adults with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2018; 57 (10) 721-729
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Institute of Medicine. Finding what works in health care: standards for Systematic Reviews. Available at: https://iom.nationalacademies.org/Reports/2011/Finding-What-Works-in-Health-Care-Standards-for-Systematic-Reviews/Standards.aspx . Washington, DC; 2011. Accessed February 9, 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Keidser G, Convery E. Self-fitting hearing aids status quo and future predictions. Trends Hear 2016; 20: 1-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Greengross S. Commission on Hearing Loss: Final Report. London, United Kingdom: International Longevity Centre; 2014: 1-38
    Google Scholar
  • 50 Action on Hearing Loss. Hear Me Out: Audiology Services in Scotland - Services Provided, Patients' Experience and Needs. London, UK: RNID; 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 51 Desjardins JL, Doherty KA. Do experienced hearing aid users know how to use their hearing aids correctly?. Am J Audiol 2009; 18 (01) 69-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 British Society of Audiology. Practice guidance: common principles of rehabilitation for adults in audiology services. United Kingdom; 2016. Available at: http://www.thebsa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Practice-Guidance-Common-Principles-of-Rehabilitation-for-Adults-in-Audiology-Services-2016.pdf . Accessed March 23, 2018
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Hickson L, Worrall L, Scarinci N. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the active communication education program for older people with hearing impairment. Ear Hear 2007; 28 (02) 212-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Caposecco A, Hickson L, Meyer C. Assembly and insertion of a self-fitting hearing aid: design of effective instruction materials. Trends Amplif 2011; 15 (04) 184-195
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Caposecco A, Hickson L, Meyer C. Hearing aid user guides: suitability for older adults. Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (Suppl. 01) S43-S51
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Lundberg M, Andersson G, Lunner T. A randomized, controlled trial of the short-term effects of complementing an educational program for hearing aid users with telephone consultations. J Am Acad Audiol 2011; 22 (10) 654-662
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Thorén ES, Öberg M, Wänström G, Andersson G, Lunner T. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the effects of online rehabilitative intervention for adult hearing-aid users. Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (07) 452-461
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Ciciriello S, Johnston RV, Osborne RH. , et al. Multimedia educational interventions for consumers about prescribed and over-the-counter medications. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; (04) CD008416
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Ferguson M, Brandreth M, Leighton P. , et al. Development of a multimedia educational programme for first-time hearing aid users: a participatory design. International Journal of Audiology 2018; 57 (08) 600-609
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Zhang D, Zhou L, Briggs RO. , et al. Instructional video in e-learning: assessing the impact of interactive video on learning effectiveness. Inf Manage 2006; 43: 15-27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Windle RJ, Wharrad H. Reusable learning objects in health care education. In: Bromage A, Clouder L, Gordon F. , et al, eds. Interprofessional E-Learning and Collaborative Work: Practices and Technologies. Hershey, PA: IGI-Global; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 62 Ferguson M, Brandreth M, Brassington W, Wharrad H. Information retention and overload in first-time hearing aid users: an interactive multimedia educational solution. Am J Audiol 2015; 24 (03) 329-332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Henshaw H, Barker A, Maidment DW. , et al. ‘Thinking Aloud’ to examine usability, relevance and impact of mHealth tailored to communication partners. British Society of Audiology Annual Conference; Harrogate, UK; 2017
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Rocks T, Ferguson M. Does training care-staff using interactive videos improve their hearing aid practical skills, understanding and perception of the importance of hearing aids?. British Academy of Audiology Annual Conference; Manchester; November 2013
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Gomez R, Wilson E, Ferguson M. Early delivery of C2Hear increases self-efficacy for hearing aids in first-time hearing aid users. British Academy of Audiology Conference, Bournemouth, UK
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Pichora-Fuller MK, Kramer SE, Eckert MA. , et al. Hearing impairment and cognitive energy: the framework for understanding effortful listening (FUEL). Ear Hear 2016; 37 (Suppl. 01) 5S-27S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Anderson S, White-Schwoch T, Parbery-Clark A, Kraus N. A dynamic auditory-cognitive system supports speech-in-noise perception in older adults. Hear Res 2013; 300: 18-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Henshaw H, Ferguson MA. Efficacy of individual computer-based auditory training for people with hearing loss: a systematic review of the evidence. PLoS One 2013; 8 (05) e62836
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Saunders GH, Smith SL, Chisolm TH, Frederick MT, McArdle RA, Wilson RH. A randomized control trial: supplementing hearing aid use with listening and communication enhancement (LACE) auditory training. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (04) 381-396
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Anderson S, White-Schwoch T, Parbery-Clark A, Kraus N. Reversal of age-related neural timing delays with training. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2013; 110 (11) 4357-4362
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Ferguson MA, Henshaw H, Clark DP, Moore DR. Benefits of phoneme discrimination training in a randomized controlled trial of 50- to 74-year-olds with mild hearing loss. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (04) e110-e121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Henshaw H, Reis M, Boisvert I. , et al. Efficacy of individual computer-based auditory training for people with hearing loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO 2017;CRD42017076817
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Shaw CA, McEachern JC. , eds. Toward a Theory of Neuroplasticity. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press; 2001
    Google Scholar
  • 74 Recanzone GH, Schreiner CE, Merzenich MM. Plasticity in the frequency representation of primary auditory cortex following discrimination training in adult owl monkeys. J Neurosci 1993; 13 (01) 87-103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Denckla MB. Measurement of executive function. In: Lyons GR. , ed. Frames of Reference for the Assessment of Learning Disabilities: New Views on Measurement Issues. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing; 1994: 117-142
    Google Scholar
  • 76 Deci E, Ryan R. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Regulation in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press; 1985
    Google Scholar
  • 77 Henshaw H, McCormack A, Ferguson MA. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is associated with computer-based auditory training uptake, engagement, and adherence for people with hearing loss. Front Psychol 2015; 6: 1067
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Henshaw H, Ferguson MA. Assessing the benefits of auditory training to real-world listening: identifying appropriate and sensitive outcomes. In: Dau T, Santurette S, Dalsgaard JC. , et al, eds. Proceedings of ISAAR 2013: Auditory Plasticity - Listening with the Brain 4th Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research. Nyborg, Denmark: The Danavox Jubilee Foundation; 2014: 45-52
    Google Scholar
  • 79 Henshaw H, Ferguson MA. Working memory training for adult hearing aid users: study protocol for a double-blind randomized active controlled trial. Trials 2013; 14: 417
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Kronenberger WG, Pisoni DB, Henning SC, Colson BG, Hazzard LM. Working memory training for children with cochlear implants: a pilot study. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2011; 54 (04) 1182-1196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Ferguson MA, Henshaw H. Auditory training can improve working memory, attention, and communication in adverse conditions for adults with hearing loss. Front Psychol 2015; 6: 556
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Anderson S, White-Schwoch T, Choi HJ, Kraus N. Training changes processing of speech cues in older adults with hearing loss. Front Syst Neurosci 2013; 7: 97
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Lawrence BJ, Jayakody DMP, Henshaw H. , et al. Auditory and cognitive training for cognition in older adults with hearing loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Trends Hear 2018; 22: 2331216518792096
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Ingvalson EM, Young NM, Wong PC. Auditory-cognitive training improves language performance in prelingually deafened cochlear implant recipients. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2014; 78 (10) 1624-1631
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 DiClemente CC, Bellino LE, Neavins TM. Motivation for change and alcoholism treatment. Alcohol Res Health 1999; 23 (02) 86-92
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 De Leon G, Melnick G, Kressel D. Motivation and readiness for therapeutic community treatment among cocaine and other drug abusers. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 1997; 23 (02) 169-189
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Clark J. Listening from the heart: Improving connections with our patients. Audiology Online; 2008. Available at: https://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/listening-from-heart-improving-connections-908 . Accessed December 17, 2018
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 88 Ferguson M, Maidment D, Russell N, Gregory M, Nicholson R. Motivational engagement in first-time hearing aid users: a feasibility study. Int J Audiol 2016; 55 (Suppl. 03) S23-S33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 89 Ferguson MA, Woolley A, Munro KJ. The impact of self-efficacy, expectations, and readiness on hearing aid outcomes. Int J Audiol 2016; 55 (Suppl. 03) S34-S41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 90 Heinrich A, Henshaw H, Ferguson MA. The relationship of speech intelligibility with hearing sensitivity, cognition, and perceived hearing difficulties varies for different speech perception tests. Front Psychol 2015; 6: 782
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 91 Ferguson MA, Henshaw H. How does auditory training work? Joined up thinking and listening. Semin Hear 2015; 36: 237-249
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 92 Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL. , et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010; 10: 22
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 93 Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ. , et al. Content validity--establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1--eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value Health 2011; 14 (08) 967-977
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 94 Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR. , et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60 (01) 34-42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 95 Granberg S, Dahlström J, Möller C, Kähäri K, Danermark B. The ICF Core Sets for hearing loss--researcher perspective. Part I: Systematic review of outcome measures identified in audiological research. Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (02) 65-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 96 Hall DA, Kitterick PT, Heffernan E. , et al. How do we know that our patients have benefitted from our ENT/Audiological interventions?. Otol Neurotol; In press
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 97 Boeschen Hospers JM, Smits N, Smits C, Stam M, Terwee CB, Kramer SE. Reevaluation of the Amsterdam inventory for auditory disability and handicap using item response theory. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2016; 59 (02) 373-383
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 98 Heffernan E, Coulson NS, Henshaw H, Barry JG, Ferguson MA. Understanding the psychosocial experiences of adults with mild-moderate hearing loss: an application of Leventhal's self-regulatory model. Int J Audiol 2016; 55 (Suppl. 03) S3-S12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 99 Heffernan E, Coulson NS, Ferguson MA. Development of the Social Participation Restrictions Questionnaire (SPaRQ) through consultation with adults with hearing loss, researchers, and clinicians: a content evaluation study. Int J Audiol 2018; 57 (19) 791-799
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 100 Heffernan E, Maidment DW, Barry JG, Ferguson MA. Refinement and Validation of the Social Participation Restrictions Questionnaire: an application of Rasch analysis and traditional psychometric analysis techniques. Ear Hear 2018 ; [Epub ahead of print]. Doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000618
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 101 Williamson PR, Altman DG, Blazeby JM. , et al. Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider. Trials 2012; 13: 132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 102 Hall DA, Haider H, Kikidis D. , et al. Toward a global consensus on outcome measures for clinical trials in tinnitus: report from the First International Meeting of the COMiT Initiative, November 14, 2014, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Trends Hear 2015; 19: 2331216515580272
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 103 Tysome JR, Hill-Feltham P, Hodgetts WE. , et al. The Auditory Rehabilitation Outcomes Network: an international initiative to develop core sets of patient-centred outcome measures to assess interventions for hearing loss. Clin Otolaryngol 2015; 40 (06) 512-515
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar