PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Semin Hear 2020; 41(03): 141-246
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1714744
Review Article

Guidelines for Best Practice in the Audiological Management of Adults with Severe and Profound Hearing Loss

Laura Turton
1   Department of Audiology, South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust, Warwick, United Kingdom
,
Pamela Souza
2   Communication Sciences and Disorders and Knowles Hearing Center, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois
,
Linda Thibodeau
3   University of Texas at Dallas, Callier Center for Communication Disorders, Dallas, Texas
,
Louise Hickson
10   School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Australia
,
René Gifford
5   Department of Hearing and Speech Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
,
Judith Bird
6   Cambridge University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom
,
Maren Stropahl
7   Department of Science and Technology, Sonova AG, Stäfa, Switzerland
,
Lorraine Gailey
8   Hearing Link, United Kingdom
,
Bernadette Fulton
9   Phonak Communications AG, Switzerland
,
Nerina Scarinci
10   School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Australia
,
Katie Ekberg
10   School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Australia
,
Barbra Timmer
10   School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Australia
› Institutsangaben Funding Disclosure The Open Access article publication charge is supported by Phonak. The funder was instrumental in organizing the working group, provided honoraria to the authors, and facilitated the review process and preparation of the manuscripts.
› Weitere Informationen
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Individuals with severe to profound hearing loss are likely to present with complex listening needs that require evidence-based solutions. This document is intended to inform the practice of hearing care professionals who are involved in the audiological management of adults with a severe to profound degree of hearing loss and will highlight the special considerations and practices required to optimize outcomes for these individuals.

Keywords

severe to profound hearing loss - hearing aids - cochlear implants - guideline


Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
16. Dezember 2020

© 2020. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References for Entire Edition

  • 1 Souza P. Severe hearing loss - recommendations for fitting amplification. AudiologyOnline.com. Published 2009. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: http://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/severe-hearing-loss-recommendations-for-893
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Grenness C, Hickson L, Laplante-Lévesque A, Davidson B. Patient-centred care: a review for rehabilitative audiologists. Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (01) (Suppl. 01) S60-S67
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Scarinci N, Worrall L, Hickson L. Factors associated with third-party disability in spouses of older people with hearing impairment. Ear Hear 2012; 33 (06) 698-708
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Singh BG, Hickson L, Scherpiet S, Lemke U, Timmer B. Family-centered adult audiologic care: a Phonak position statement. Hear Rev 2016; 23 (04) 16-25
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hallam R, Ashton P, Sherbourne K, Gailey L. Acquired profound hearing loss: mental health and other characteristics of a large sample. Int J Audiol 2006; 45 (12) 715-723
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Grimby A, Ringdahl A. Does having a job improve the quality of life among post-lingually deafened Swedish adults with severe-profound hearing impairment?. Br J Audiol 2000; 34 (03) 187-195
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Cameron B, Cunningham E, Lindner A, Luella N. Hearing aid use and satisfaction in young Australian adults with severe to profound hearing loss. Aust N Z J Audiol 2008; 30 (01) 59-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Carlsson P-I, Hjaldahl J, Magnuson A. et al. Severe to profound hearing impairment: quality of life, psychosocial consequences and audiological rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2015; 37 (20) 1849-1856
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Gopinath B, Schneider J, McMahon CM, Burlutsky G, Leeder SR, Mitchell P. Dual sensory impairment in older adults increases the risk of mortality: a population-based study. PLoS One 2013; 8 (03) e55054
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Turton L, Smith P. Prevalence & characteristics of severe and profound hearing loss in adults in a UK National Health Service clinic. Int J Audiol 2013; 52 (02) 92-97
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Turunen-Taheri S, Carlsson PI, Johnson AC, Hellström S. Severe-to-profound hearing impairment: demographic data, gender differences and benefits of audiological rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2019; 41 (23) 2766-2774
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 World Health Organization (WHO). WHO Fact sheet deafness and hearing loss. . Accessed July 26, 2019 at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/deafness-and-hearing-loss
  • 13 Stevens G, Flaxman S, Brunskill E, Mascarenhas M, Mathers CD, Finucane M. Global Burden of Disease Hearing Loss Expert Group. Global and regional hearing impairment prevalence: an analysis of 42 studies in 29 countries. Eur J Public Health 2013; 23 (01) 146-152
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Cruickshanks KJ, Wiley TL, Tweed TS. et al; The Epidemiology of Hearing Loss Study. Prevalence of hearing loss in older adults in Beaver Dam, Wisconsin. Am J Epidemiol 1998; 148 (09) 879-886
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Sindhusake D, Mitchell P, Smith W. et al. Validation of self-reported hearing loss. The Blue Mountains Hearing Study. Int J Epidemiol 2001; 30 (06) 1371-1378
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hughes GB, Pensak M. Clinical Otology. 4th ed. New York: Thieme Publishing Group; 2015
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Lesica N. Why do hearing aids fail to restore normal auditory perception?. Trends Neurosci 2018; 41 (04) 174-185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Convery E, Keidser G. Transitioning hearing aid users with severe and profound loss to a new gain/frequency response: benefit, perception, and acceptance. J Am Acad Audiol 2011; 22 (03) 168-180
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Munro KJ, Puri R, Bird J, Smith M. Using probe-microphone measurements to improve the match to target gain and frequency response slope, as a function of earmould style, frequency, and input level. Int J Audiol 2016; 55 (04) 215-223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Thibodeau LM, Schaper L. Benefits of digital wireless technology for persons with hearing aids. Semin Hear 2014; 35 (03) 168-176
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Thibodeau L. Benefits in speech recognition in noise with remote wireless microphones in group settings. J Am Acad Audiol 2019; (epub ahead of print). DOI: 10.3766/jaaa19060.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Holder JT, Reynolds SM, Sunderhaus LW, Gifford RH. Current profile of adults presenting for preoperative cochlear implant evaluation. Trends Hear 2018; 22: 2331216518755288
    Google Scholar
  • 23 National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). Standards l NHMRC. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelinesforguidelines/standards
  • 24 Rosenfeld RM, Shiffman RN, Robertson P. Clinical practice guideline development manual, third edition: a quality-driven approach for translating evidence into action. Otolaryngol Neck Surg 2013; 148 (01) S1-S55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 American Academy of Audiology (AAA) Clinical Practice Guidelines: Pediatric Amplification 2013. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.audiology.org/sites/default/files/publications/PediatricAmplificationGuidelines.pdf
  • 26 Cox R. Choosing a self-report measure for hearing aid fitting outcomes. Semin Hearing 2005; 26 (03) 149-156
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Boothroyd A. Developments in speech audiometry. Br J Audiol 1968; 2 (01) 3-10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Spahr AJ, Dorman MF, Litvak LM. et al. Development and validation of the AzBio sentence lists. Ear Hear 2012; 33 (01) 112-117
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Bench J, Kowal A, Bamford J. The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) sentence lists for partially-hearing children. Br J Audiol 1979; 13 (03) 108-112
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Niquette P, Arcaroli J, Revit L. et al. Development of the BKB-Sin Test. In: Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Auditory Society. Scottsdale, AZ: 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Boothroyd A, Hanin L, Hnath T. A sentence test of speech perception: reliability, set equivalence, and short term learning. CUNY Academic Works. Published 1985. Accessed February 9, 2019 at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1443&context=gc_pubs
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Peterson GE, Lehiste I. Revised CNC lists for auditory tests. J Speech Hear Disord 1962; 27 (01) 62-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Nilsson M, Soli SD, Sullivan JA. Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 95 (02) 1085-1099
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Etymotic Research. Quick Speech-in-Noise Test (Version 1.3) - User manual. Published 2001. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.etymotic.com/downloads/dl/file/id/259/product/159/quicksin_user_manual.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Wilson RH, Carnell CS, Cleghorn AL. The Words-in-Noise (WIN) test with multitalker babble and speech-spectrum noise maskers. J Am Acad Audiol 2007; 18 (06) 522-529
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Henry JA, Stewart BJ, Abrams HB. et al. Tinnitus Functional Index - development and clinical application. Audiol Today 2014; 26 (06) 40-48
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Wilson PH, Henry J, Bowen M, Haralambous G. Tinnitus reaction questionnaire: psychometric properties of a measure of distress associated with tinnitus. J Speech Hear Res 1991; 34 (01) 197-201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Newman CW, Jacobson GP, Spitzer JB. Development of the tinnitus handicap inventory. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1996; 122 (02) 143-148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Hallam RS, Jakes SC, Hinchcliffe R. Cognitive variables in tinnitus annoyance. Br J Clin Psychol 1988; 27 (03) 213-222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Henry JA, Griest S, Zaugg TL. et al. Tinnitus and hearing survey: a screening tool to differentiate bothersome tinnitus from hearing difficulties. Am J Audiol 2015; 24 (01) 66-77
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 EuroQol Research Foundation. EQ-5D-5L User Guide. Published 2019. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://euroqol.org/publications/user-guides
  • 42 Horsman J, Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance G. The Health Utilities Index (HUI): concepts, measurement properties and applications. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1: 54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Hunt SM, McKenna SP, McEwen J, Williams J, Papp E. The Nottingham Health Profile: subjective health status and medical consultations. Soc Sci Med A 1981; 15 (3, Pt 1): 221-229
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Ware Jr. JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30 (06) 473-483
    Google Scholar
  • 45 Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, Gilson BS. The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 1981; 19 (08) 787-805
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 World Health Organization (WHO). WHOQOL-100. Published 1995. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.who.int/mental_health/evidence/WHOQOL_100.pdf?ua=1
  • 47 Brooke P, Bullock R. Validation of a 6 item cognitive impairment test with a view to primary care usage. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 1999; 14 (11) 936-940
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Beck AT, Steer RA, Ball R, Ranieri W. Comparison of Beck depression inventories -IA and -II in psychiatric outpatients. J Pers Assess 1996; 67 (03) 588-597
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Huppert FA, Brayne C, Gill C, Paykel ES, Beardsall L. CAMCOG--a concise neuropsychological test to assist dementia diagnosis: socio-demographic determinants in an elderly population sample. Br J Clin Psychol 1995; 34 (04) 529-541
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Cambridge Cognition Ltd. CANTAB. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: www.camcog.com
  • 51 Roth M, Tym E, Mountjoy CQ. et al. CAMDEX. A standardised instrument for the diagnosis of mental disorder in the elderly with special reference to the early detection of dementia. Br J Psychiatry 1986; 149 (DEC) 698-709
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Schwamm LH, Van Dyke C, Kiernan RJ, Merrin EL, Mueller J. The neurobehavioral cognitive status examination: comparison with the cognitive capacity screening examination and the mini-mental state examination in a neurosurgical population. Ann Intern Med 1987; 107 (04) 486-491
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Lin VYW, Chung J, Callahan BL. et al. Development of cognitive screening test for the severely hearing impaired: hearing-impaired MoCA. Laryngoscope 2017; 127 (Suppl. 01) S4-S11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983; 67 (06) 361-370
    Google Scholar
  • 55 Kane R, Kane R. Assessing the Elderly: A Practical Guide to Measurement. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books; 1981
    Google Scholar
  • 56 Powell DH, Kaplan EF, Whitla D, Weintraub S, Catlin R, Funkenstein HH. MicroCog: Assessment of Cognitive Functioning (Version 2.1) [Computer software]. The Psychological Corporation; San Antonio, TX: 1993
    Google Scholar
  • 57 Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12 (03) 189-198
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V. et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005; 53 (04) 695-699
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med 2001; 16 (09) 606-613
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Pfeiffer E. A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 1975; 23 (10) 433-441
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Wechsler D. The Measurement and Appraisal of Adult Intelligence. 4th ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1958
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Delis DC, Kramer JH, Kaplan E, Ober B. The California Verbal Learning Test: Research Edition, Adult Version. San Antonio, TX: 1987
    Google Scholar
  • 63 Ramsay MC, Reynolds CR. Separate digits tests: a brief history, a literature review, and a reexamination of the factor structure of the Test of Memory and Learning (TOMAL). Neuropsychol Rev 1995; 5 (03) 151-171
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Daneman M, Carpenter P. Individual differences in working memory and reading. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav 1980; 19 (04) 450-466
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Schmidt M. Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test: A Handbook. Las Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services; 1996
    Google Scholar
  • 66 Wechsler D. A standardized memory scale for clinical use. J Psychol Interdiscip Appl 1945; 19 (01) 87-95
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Conway ARA, Kane MJ, Bunting MF, Hambrick DZ, Wilhelm O, Engle RW. Working memory span tasks: a methodological review and user’s guide. Psychon Bull Rev 2005; 12 (05) 769-786
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Sandridge S, Newman C. Improving the efficiency and accountability of the hearing aid selection process - use of the COAT. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: AudiologyOnline.com
    Google Scholar
  • 69 Feys P, Lamers I, Francis G. et al; Multiple Sclerosis Outcome Assessments Consortium. The Nine-Hole Peg Test as a manual dexterity performance measure for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2017; 23 (05) 711-720
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Robbins R. Purdue Pegboard Manual Dexterity Test. Available at: 71. Published 2010. Accessed February 13, 2020
    Google Scholar
  • 71 Doherty KA, Desjardins JL. The practical hearing aids skills test-revised. Am J Audiol 2012; 21 (01) 100-105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 How Do You Use a Snellen Chart to Test Near and Far Vision? | Reference.com. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.reference.com/world-view/use-snellen-chart-test-near-far-vision-908fde7db0548ff
  • 73 Ebner NC, Frazier I, Ellis D. Visual search and attention test. In: Kreutzer JS, DeLuca J, Caplan B. eds. Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology (1-4). New York, London: Springer; 2017
    Google Scholar
  • 74 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Hearing loss in adults: assessment and management. Published 2018. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng98
  • 75 Cox RM, Alexander GC. Expectations about hearing aids and their relationship to fitting outcome. J Am Acad Audiol 2000; 11 (07) 368-382 , quiz 407
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Dillon H, James A, Ginis J. Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) and its relationship to several other measures of benefit and satisfaction provided by hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol 1997; 8 (01) 27-43
    Google Scholar
  • 77 Gatehouse S. Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile: derivation and validation of a client-centered outcome measure for hearing aid services. J Am Acad Audiol 1999; 10: 80-103
    Google Scholar
  • 78 Ventry IM, Weinstein BE. The hearing handicap inventory for the elderly: a new tool. Ear Hear 1982; 3 (03) 128-134
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Newman CW, Weinstein BE, Jacobson GP, Hug GA. The Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults: psychometric adequacy and audiometric correlates. Ear Hear 1990; 11 (06) 430-433
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Noble W, Jensen NS, Naylor G, Bhullar N, Akeroyd MA. A short form of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale suitable for clinical use: the SSQ12. Int J Audiol 2013; 52 (06) 409-412
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Preminger JE, Meeks S. The Hearing Impairment Impact-Significant Other Profile (HII-SOP): a tool to measure hearing loss-related quality of life in spouses of people with hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 2012; 23 (10) 807-823
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Scarinci N, Worrall L, Hickson L. The effect of hearing impairment in older people on the spouse: development and psychometric testing of the significant other scale for hearing disability (SOS-HEAR). Int J Audiol 2009; 48 (10) 671-683
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Crowhen D, Turnbull B. FOCAS: family oriented communication assessment and solutions. Published 2018. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: Hearing Review. https://www.hearingreview.com/practice-building/focas-family-oriented-communication-assessment-solutions
    Google Scholar
  • 84 IDA Institute. Motivation Tools. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://idainstitute.com/tools/motivation_tools/?tx_idatoolbox_toolboxpagelist%5Bcontroller%5D=Toolbox&cHash=0d5d18956ebeaf1aef89cf06d78f3350
  • 85 IDA Institute. Communication Partners. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://idainstitute.com/tools/communication_partners/?tx_idatoolbox_toolboxpagelist%5Bcontroller%5D=Toolbox&cHash=b0753dadbeb8cb94fd02cb5294fd3407
  • 86 IDA Institute. Living Well. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://idainstitute.com/tools/living_well/?tx_idatoolbox_toolboxpagelist%5Bcontroller%5D=Toolbox&cHash=9751b11308f242e60f8a2bebe98c2706
  • 87 IDA Institute. Explain hearing test results in a simple way. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://idainstitute.com/tools/my_hearing_explained/?tx_idatoolbox_toolboxpagelist%5Bcontroller%5D=Toolbox&cHash=e006f3d399455466d5f4c07f9d983179
  • 88 National Health Service (NHS) Scotland. Quality standards for adult hearing rehabilitation services. Published 2008. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: http://www.knowledge.scot.nhs.uk/media/CLT/ResourceUploads/4076053/26fbc595-da89-4938-8c3d-a0511b747c2e.pdf
  • 89 British Academy of Audiology (BAA) and British Society of Audiology (BSA). Definition of ‘optimally aided’ for experienced adult hearing aid users with severe-to profound-deafness. Published 2019. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.baaudiology.org/app/uploads/2020/04/Definition_optimally-aided_FINAL_logo.pdf
  • 90 Boys Town National Research Hospital. Situational Hearing Aid Response Profile (SHARP). 2014. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: http://audres.org/rc/sharp/
  • 91 Experimental Amplification Research (EAR) Lab. Frequency Lowering Fitting Assistants. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://web.ics.purdue.edu/~alexan14/fittingassistants.html
  • 92 Child Amplification Lab; National Centre for Audiology. DSLio - UWO Plurals. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.dslio.com/?page_id=166
  • 93 Child Amplification Lab; National Centre for Audiology. DSLio - Frequency Lowering Verification. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.dslio.com/?page_id=166
  • 94 British Society of Audiology (BSA). Guidance on the verification of hearing devices using probe microphone measurements. Published 2018. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.thebsa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/REMS-2018.pdf
  • 95 Phonak. Phoneme Perception Test Overview. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.phonakpro.com/au/en/resources/fitting-and-tests/phoneme-perception-test/overview-phoneme.html
  • 96 National Acoustic Laboratories (NAL). Hearing Aid Fitting Prescriptions. Available at: https://shop.nal.gov.au/epages/nal.sf/en_AU/?ObjectPath=/Shops/nal/Categories/Products/Hearing_Aid_Fitting_Prescriptions
  • 97 American Academy of Audiology (AAA). Clinical Practice Guidelines: Adult Patients with Severe-to-Profound Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss. Published 2015. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.audiology.org/sites/default/files/PractGuidelineAdultsPatientsWithSNHL.pdf
  • 98 National Acoustic Laboratories (NAL). Soundlog. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.nal.gov.au/products/downloadable-software/soundlog/
  • 99 Scarinci N, Nickbakht M, Timmer B, Ekberg K, Cheng B, Hickson L. A qualitative investigation of clients, significant others, and clinicians’ experiences of using wireless microphone systems. J Am Acad Audiol 2017; 28: 506-521
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 100 IDA Institute. Goal Sharing for Partners. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://idainstitute.com/tools/communication_partners/goal_sharing_for_partners/
  • 101 Thibodeau L. Maximizing communication via hearing assistance technology: plotting beyond the audiogram. Hear J 2004; 57 (11) 46-51
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 102 American Academy of Audiology (AAA) Clinical Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth from Birth to 21 Years (Includes Supplement A).; 2011. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.audiology.org/publications-resources/document-library/hearing-assistance-technologies
  • 103 American National Standards Institute (ANSI). ANSI/ASA S3.47. Published 2014 at: https://global.ihs.com/doc_detail.cfm?gid=INBPHFAAA104
  • 104 European Union of Hearing Aid Acousticians eV (EUHA). Wireless remote microphone systems - configuration, verification, and measurement of individual benefit Guideline 04-06 - v1.0. Published 2017. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: http://www.euha.org/assets/Uploads/Leitlinien/Expertenkreis-04-Hoerakustik/EUHA-Guideline-04-06-en.pdf
  • 105 American National Standards Institute (ANSI). ANSI/ASA S3.22. Published 2014 at: https://global.ihs.com/doc_detail.cfm?&document_name=ANSI%2FASAS3.22&item_s_key&=&00009554&item_key_date&=&851231&
  • 106 Thibodeau LM, Wallace S. Guidelines and standards for wireless technology for individuals with hearing loss. Semin Hear 2014; 35 (03) 159-167
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 107 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA). Guidelines for Fitting and Monitoring FM Systems. Published 2002. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.asha.org/policy/GL2002-00010.htm
  • 108 Salehi H, Parsa V, Folkeard P. Electroacoustic assessment of wireless remote microphone systems. Audiology Res 2018; 8 (01) 204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 109 Dickinson A, Howe S. It is time to talk about Cochlear Implants. British Academy of Audiology (BAA), Service Quality Committee. Published 2020. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.baaudiology.org/app/uploads/2020/04/CI_BAA_Dickinson_FINAL_BAAtitle4.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • 110 British Cochlear Implant Group (BCIG). Welcome to the British Cochlear Implant Group web site - BCIG. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.bcig.org.uk/
  • 111 National Cochlear Implant Users Association (NCIUA). User Experiences - National Cochlear Implant Users Association. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.nciua.org.uk/your-implant/user-experiences/
  • 112 HearingSuccess Portal Advanced Bionics and Phonak. Advanced Bionics Login. Accessed August 26, 2020 at: www.Hearingsuccessportal.com
  • 113 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
  • 114 University of Queensland. Active Communication Education (ACE). Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://shrs.uq.edu.au/active-communication-education-ace
  • 115 Ida Institute. Group Aural Rehabilitation. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://idainstitute.com/tools/group_ar/?tx_idatoolbox_toolboxpagelist%5Bcontroller%5D=Toolbox&cHash=cae163518219f0d96686399844027fbf
  • 116 Online lip reading training course and games - Lipreading.org. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.lipreading.org/
  • 117 Stories for Lipreading. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: http://storiesforlipreading.org.uk/
  • 118 Lipreading Practice. Available at: https://www.lipreadingpractice.co.uk/
  • 119 How to Read Lips. 12 Steps (with Pictures) - wikiHow. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.wikihow.com/Read-Lips
  • 120 Read Our Lips | Learn to Lipread Online. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.readourlips.ca/
  • 121 Hear-it.org | The world’s #1 website on hearing. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.hear-it.org/
  • 122 National Association of Deafened People (NADP). Welcome to the National Association of Deafened People. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.nadp.org.uk/
  • 123 Hearing Link - UK Hearing Loss Charity. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.hearinglink.org/
  • 124 Action on Hearing Loss | Action on Hearing Loss. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.actiononhearingloss.org.uk/
  • 125 International Federation of Hard of Hearing People (IFHOH). IFHOH - International Federation of Hard of Hearing People. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.ifhoh.org/
  • 126 Hearing Loss Association of America (HLAA). Homepage - Hearing Loss Association of America. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.hearingloss.org/
  • 127 Better Hearing Australia (BHA). Hello - BHA. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: http://www.betterhearingaustralia.org.au/
  • 128 Audicus. Hearing Loss Support Groups | Audicus. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.audicus.com/hearing-loss-support-groups/
  • 129 Time 2 Loop America. Loop Locator: Loop America. Published 2020. Accessed December 4, 2019 at: https://time2loopamerica.com/loop-locator/
  • 130 AbleData | Tools & Technologies to Enhance Life. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://abledata.acl.gov/
  • 131 EASTIN - Searches - Assistive Products. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: http://www.eastin.eu/en/searches/Products/Index
  • 132 Home - Independent Living Centres Australia. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://ilcaustralia.org.au/
  • 133 Captions, subtitles and surtitles | Stagetext. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: http://www.stagetext.org/about-stagetext/info-and-services/captions-subtitles-and-surtitles
  • 134 Hearing Dogs for Deaf People. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.hearingdogs.org.uk/
  • 135 HEARING DOGS - PAWS WITH A CAUSE. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.pawswithacause.org/what-we-do/assistance-dogs/hearing-dogs/
  • 136 Hearing Dogs: Service Dogs for the Deaf or Hearing Impaired. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.akc.org/expert-advice/training/hearing-dogs/
  • 137 Service dog for the deaf and hearing impaired. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.healthyhearing.com/report/52110-Assistance-dogs-for-the-deaf
  • 138 Meikle MB, Henry JA, Griest SE. et al. The tinnitus functional index: development of a new clinical measure for chronic, intrusive tinnitus. Ear Hear 2012; 33 (02) 153-176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 139 Cima RFF, Mazurek B, Haider H. et al. A multidisciplinary European guideline for tinnitus: diagnostics, assessment, and treatment. HNO 2019; 67 (01) (Suppl. 01) 10-42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 140 Noble W. Extending the IOI to significant others and to non-hearing-aid-based interventions. Int J Audiol 2002; 41 (01) 27-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 141 Cox R, Hyde M, Gatehouse S. et al. Optimal outcome measures, research priorities, and international cooperation. Ear Hear 2000; 21 (04) 106S-115S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 142 Hearing Matters report | Action on Hearing Loss. Accessed July 14, 2019 at: https://www.actiononhearingloss.org.uk/about-us/our-research-and-evidence/research-reports/hearing-matters-report/
  • 143 Manchaiah VKC, Stephens D, Meredith R. The patient journey of adults with hearing impairment: the patients’ views. Clin Otolaryngol 2011; 36 (03) 227-234
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 144 Chandrasekhar SS, Tsai Do BS, Schwartz SR. et al. Clinical practice guideline: sudden hearing loss (update). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2019; 161 (01) 1-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 145 Gottermeier L, De Filippo C. Patterns of aided loudness growth in experienced adult listeners with early-onset severe-profound hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 2018; 29 (06) 457-476
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 146 Most T, Rothem H, Luntz M. Auditory, visual, and auditory-visual speech perception by individuals with cochlear implants versus individuals with hearing aids. Am Ann Deaf 2009; 154 (03) 284-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 147 Souza P, Hoover E. The physiologic and psychophysical consequences of severe-to-profound hearing loss. Semin Hear 2018; 39 (04) 349-363
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 148 Cox RM, Alexander GC, Johnson J, Rivera I. Cochlear dead regions in typical hearing aid candidates: prevalence and implications for use of high-frequency speech cues. Ear Hear 2011; 32 (03) 339-348
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 149 Kluk K, Moore BCJ. Factors affecting psychophysical tuning curves for hearing-impaired subjects with high-frequency dead regions. Hear Res 2005; 200 (1-2): 115-131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 150 Moore BCJ, Huss M, Vickers DA, Glasberg BR, Alcántara JI. A test for the diagnosis of dead regions in the cochlea. Br J Audiol 2000; 34 (04) 205-224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 151 Aazh H, Moore BCJ. Dead regions in the cochlea at 4 kHz in elderly adults: relation to absolute threshold, steepness of audiogram, and pure-tone average. J Am Acad Audiol 2007; 18 (02) 97-106
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 152 Olze H, Szczepek AJ, Haupt H. et al. Cochlear implantation has a positive influence on quality of life, tinnitus, and psychological comorbidity. Laryngoscope 2011; 121 (10) 2220-2227
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 153 Andersson G, Freijd A, Baguley DM, Idrizbegovic E. Tinnitus distress, anxiety, depression, and hearing problems among cochlear implant patients with tinnitus. J Am Acad Audiol 2009; 20 (05) 315-319
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 154 Kompis M, Pelizzone M, Dillier N, Allum J, De Min N, Senn P. Tinnitus before and 6 months after cochlear implantation. Audiol Neurotol 2012; 17 (03) 161-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 155 Davies S. Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer, Surveillance Volume, 2012: On the State of the Public’s Health. London: 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 156 Davis A. National Survey of Hearing and Communication. 2011 in Cima et al (2019)
    Google Scholar
  • 157 Lin FR, Yaffe K, Xia J. et al; Health ABC Study Group. Hearing loss and cognitive decline in older adults. JAMA Intern Med 2013; 173 (04) 293-299
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 158 Livingston G, Sommerlad A, Orgeta V. et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care. Lancet 2017; 67736 (17) 31363-31366
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 159 Livingston G, Sommerlad A, Orgeta V. et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care. Lancet 2020;10248 (396) Published: July 30
    Google Scholar
  • 160 de Graaf R, Bijl RV. Determinants of mental distress in adults with a severe auditory impairment: differences between prelingual and postlingual deafness. Psychosom Med 2002; 64 (01) 61-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 161 Kvam MH, Loeb M, Tambs K. Mental health in deaf adults: symptoms of anxiety and depression among hearing and deaf individuals. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2007; 12 (01) 1-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 162 Schneider JM, Gopinath B, McMahon CM, Leeder SR, Mitchell P, Wang JJ. Dual sensory impairment in older age. J Aging Health 2011; 23 (08) 1309-1324
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 163 Turunen-Taheri S, Skagerstrand Å, Hellström S, Carlsson P-I. Patients with severe-to-profound hearing impairment and simultaneous severe vision impairment: a quality-of-life study. Acta Otolaryngol 2017; 137 (03) 279-285
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 164 Leroi I, Himmelsbach I, Wolski L. et al; (SENSE-Cog Expert Reference Group). Assessing and managing concurrent hearing, vision and cognitive impairments in older people: an international perspective from healthcare professionals. Age Ageing 2019; 48 (04) 580-587
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 165 National Health Service (NHS) Scotland. Guidelines for meeting audiological needs of adults with learning disabilities. Published 2009. Accessed July 16, 2019 at: http://www.knowledge.scot.nhs.uk/media/CLT/ResourceUploads/4076353/6a389ff0-71ad-4f54-a200-7469c7b23e14.doc
  • 166 Desjardins JL, Alicea CA, Doherty KA. The effect of memory span and manual dexterity on hearing aid handling skills in new and experienced hearing aid users. Am J Audiol 2019; 28 (01) 37-47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 167 Singh G, Pichora-Fuller MK, Hayes D, von Schroeder HP, Carnahan H. The aging hand and the ergonomics of hearing aid controls. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (01) e1-e13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 168 Valente M, Abrams H, Benson D. et al. Guidelines for the audiologic management of adult hearing impairment. Audiol Today 2006; 18 (05) 1-44
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 169 Bentler RA, Kramer SE. Guidelines for choosing a self-report outcome measure. Ear Hear 2000; 21 (04) 37S-49S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 170 Stephens D, Jones G, Gianopoulos I. The use of outcome measures to formulate intervention strategies. Ear Hear 2000; 21 (04) 15S-23S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 171 Meyer C, Scarinci N, Ryan B, Hickson L. “This is a partnership between all of us”: audiologists’ perceptions of family member involvement in hearing rehabilitation. Am J Audiol 2015; 24 (04) 536-548
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 172 Ekberg K, Meyer C, Scarinci N, Grenness C, Hickson L. Family member involvement in audiology appointments with older people with hearing impairment. Int J Audiol 2015; 54 (02) 70-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 173 Sprinzl GM, Riechelmann H. Current trends in treating hearing loss in elderly people: a review of the technology and treatment options - a mini-review. Gerontology 2010; 56 (03) 351-358
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 174 Action on Hearing Loss. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.actiononhearingloss.org.uk/about-us/our-research-and-evidence/research-reports/hearing-matters-report/
  • 175 Raine C, Atkinson H, Strachan DR, Martin JM. Access to cochlear implants: Time to reflect. Cochlear Implants Int 2016; 17 (01) (Suppl. 01) 42-46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 176 Turunen-Taheri SK, Edén M, Hellström S, Carlsson P-I. Rehabilitation of adult patients with severe-to-profound hearing impairment - why not cochlear implants?. Acta Otolaryngol 2019; 139 (07) 604-611
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 177 National Health Service (NHS) England. The NHS Long Term Plan. Accessed July 16, 2019 at https://www.longtermplan.nhs.uk/Published2019
  • 178 Barker C, Dillon H, Newall P. Fitting low ratio compression to people with severe and profound hearing losses. Ear Hear 2001; 22 (02) 130-141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 179 Kuk FK, Potts L, Valente M, Lee L, Picirrillo J. Evidence of acclimatization in persons with severe-to-profound hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 2003; 14 (02) 84-99
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 180 Souza PE, Bishop RD. Improving speech audibility with wide dynamic range compression in listeners with severe sensorineural loss. Ear Hear 1999; 20 (06) 461-470
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 181 Ringdahl A, Magnusson L, Edberg P, Thelin L. Clinical evaluation of a digital power hearing instrument. Hear Rev 2000; 7: 59-64
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 182 Villchur E. Multichannel compression processing for profound deafness. J Rehabil Res Dev 1987; 24 (04) 135-148
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 183 Keidser G, Dillon H, Dyrlund O, Carter L, Hartley D. Preferred low- and high-frequency compression ratios among hearing aid users with moderately severe to profound hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 2007; 18 (01) 17-33
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 184 De Gennaro S, Braida LD, Durlach NI. Multichannel syllabic compression for severely impaired listeners. J Rehabil Res Dev 1986; 23 (01) 17-24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 185 Drullman R, Smoorenburg GF. Audio-visual perception of compressed speech by profoundly hearing-impaired subjects. Audiology 1997; 36 (03) 165-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 186 Woods WS, Van Tasell DJ, Rickert ME, Trine TD. SII and fit-to-target analysis of compression system performance as a function of number of compression channels. Int J Audiol 2006; 45 (11) 630-644
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 187 Souza P, Wright R, Bor S. Consequences of broad auditory filters for identification of multichannel-compressed vowels. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2012; 55 (02) 474-486
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 188 Shen J, Rallapalli V, Souza P. Effects of multichannel compression on spectral contrast of vowels processed by real hearing aids. In: International Hearing Aid Conference. Tahoe City, CA: 2018
    Google Scholar
  • 189 Boothroyd A. Signal processing for the profoundly deaf. Acta Otolaryngol 1990; 109 (Suppl. 469) 166-171
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 190 Souza PE, Jenstad LM, Folino R. Using multichannel wide-dynamic range compression in severely hearing-impaired listeners: effects on speech recognition and quality. Ear Hear 2005; 26 (02) 120-131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 191 Boothroyd A, Springer N, Smith L, Schulman J. Amplitude compression and profound hearing loss. J Speech Hear Res 1988; 31 (03) 362-376
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 192 Davies-Venn E, Souza P. The role of spectral resolution, working memory, and audibility in explaining variance in susceptibility to temporal envelope distortion. J Am Acad Audiol 2014; 25 (06) 592-604
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 193 Davies-Venn E, Souza P, Brennan M, Stecker GC. Effects of audibility and multichannel wide dynamic range compression on consonant recognition for listeners with severe hearing loss. Ear Hear 2009; 30 (05) 494-504
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 194 Weile JN, Behrens T, Wagener K. An improved option for people with severe to profound hearing losses. Hear Rev 2011; 18: 32-45
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 195 Convery E, Keidser G, Carter L. Transitioning hearing aid users with severe and profound hearing loss from linear to nonlinear amplification: three case studies. Aust N Z J Audiol 2008; 30 (01) 73-85
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 196 Ricketts TA, Picou EM, Shehorn J, Dittberner AB. Degree of hearing loss affects bilateral hearing aid benefits in ecologically relevant laboratory conditions. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2019; 62 (10) 3834-3850
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 197 Lee HJ, Lee JM, Na G, Moon YM, Lee C, Jung J. Which patients with a unilateral hearing aid for symmetric sensorineural hearing loss have auditory deprivation?. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 2020; 13 (01) 23-28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 198 Aghsoleimani M, Jalilvand H, Mahdavi ME, Nazeri AR, Kamali M. The acceptable noise level benefit from directionality for listeners with severe hearing loss. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 2018; 11 (03) 166-173
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 199 Ricketts TA, Hornsby BWY. Directional hearing aid benefit in listeners with severe hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2006; 45 (03) 190-197
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 200 Kühnel V, Margolf-Hackl S, Kiessling J. Multi-microphone technology for severe-to-profound hearing loss. Scand Audiol Suppl 2001; (52) 65-68
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 201 Picou EM, Aspell E, Ricketts TA. Potential benefits and limitations of three types of directional processing in hearing aids. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (03) 339-352
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 202 Picou EM, Ricketts TA. An evaluation of hearing aid beamforming microphone arrays in a noisy laboratory setting. J Am Acad Audiol 2019; 30 (02) 131-144
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 203 Wolfe J. Evaluation of modern remote microphone technologies. AudiologyOnline.com. Published 2018. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.audiologyonline.com/audiology-ceus/course/evaluation-modern-remote-microphone-technologies-31943
    Google Scholar
  • 204 Chung K. Challenges and recent developments in hearing aids. Part II. Feedback and occlusion effect reduction strategies, laser shell manufacturing processes, and other signal processing technologies. Trends Amplif 2004; 8 (04) 125-164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 205 Killion M. Earmold acoustics. Semin Hear 2003; 24 (04) 299-312
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 206 Picou EM, Ricketts TA. Efficacy of hearing-aid based telephone strategies for listeners with moderate-to-severe hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 2013; 24 (01) 59-70
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 207 Perreau AE, Bentler RA, Tyler RS. The contribution of a frequency-compression hearing aid to contralateral cochlear implant performance. J Am Acad Audiol 2013; 24 (02) 105-120
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 208 Sakamoto S, Goto K, Tateno M, Kaga K. Frequency compression hearing aid for severe-to-profound hearing impairments. Auris Nasus Larynx 2000; 27 (04) 327-334
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 209 Hotton M, Bergeron F. Effectiveness of frequency-lowering hearing aids and electric acoustic stimulation cochlear implant for treating people with a severe-to-profound high-frequency hearing loss. J Otolaryngol Res 2017; 6 (03) 1-13
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 210 McDermott H. A technical comparison of digital frequency-lowering algorithms available in two current hearing aids. PLoS One 2011; 6 (07) e22358
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 211 Glista D, Scollie S. The use of frequency lowering technology in the treatment of severe-to-profound hearing loss: a review of the literature and candidacy considerations for clinical application. Semin Hear 2018; 39 (04) 377-389
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 212 Abrams HB, Chisolm TH, McManus M, McArdle R. Initial-fit approach versus verified prescription: comparing self-perceived hearing aid benefit. J Am Acad Audiol 2012; 23 (10) 768-778
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 213 Ching TYC, Quar TK, Johnson EE, Newall P, Sharma M. Comparing NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 in hearing aids fit to children with severe or profound hearing loss: Goodness of fit-to-targets, impacts on predicted loudness and speech intelligibility. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (03) 260-274
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 214 Kochkin S, Beck DL, Christensen LA. et al. MarkeTrack VIII: the impact of the hearing healthcare professional on hearing aid user success. Hear Rev 2010; 17: 12-34
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 215 Stelmachowicz PG, Lewis DE, Seewald RC, Hawkins DB. Complex and pure-tone signals in the evaluation of hearing-aid characteristics. J Speech Hear Res 1990; 33 (02) 380-385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 216 Berger K. Gain requirements of conductive hearing losses. Br J Audiol 1980; 14 (04) 137-141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 217 Johnson E. Prescriptive amplification recommendations for hearing losses with a conductive component and their impact on the required maximum power output: an update with accompanying clinical explanation. J Am Acad Audiol 2013; 24 (06) 452-460
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 218 Mackersie CL, Crocker TL, Davis RA. Limiting high-frequency hearing aid gain in listeners with and without suspected cochlear dead regions. J Am Acad Audiol 2004; 15 (07) 498-507
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 219 Cox RM, Johnson JA, Alexander GC. Implications of high-frequency cochlear dead regions for fitting hearing aids to adults with mild to moderately severe hearing loss. Ear Hear 2012; 33 (05) 573-587
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 220 Vickers DA, Moore BCJ, Baer T. Effects of low-pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in quiet for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am 2001; 110 (02) 1164-1175
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 221 Hill III SL, Marcus A, Digges ENB, Gillman N, Silverstein H. Assessment of patient satisfaction with various configurations of digital CROS and BiCROS hearing aids. Ear Nose Throat J 2006; 85 (07) 427-430 , 442
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 222 Del Dot J, Hickson LM, O'Connell B. Speech perception in noise with BICROS hearing aids. Scand Audiol 1992; 21 (04) 261-264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 223 Williams VA, McArdle RA, Chisolm TH. Subjective and objective outcomes from new BiCROS technology in a veteran sample. J Am Acad Audiol 2012; 23 (10) 789-806
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 224 Oeding K, Valente M. Sentence recognition in noise and perceived benefit of noise reduction on the receiver and transmitter sides of a BICROS hearing aid. J Am Acad Audiol 2013; 24 (10) 980-991
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 225 Kuk F, Korhonen P, Crose B, Lau C. CROS your heart: renewed hope for people with asymmetric hearing losses. Hear Rev 2014; 21: 24-29
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 226 Kuk F, Seper E, Lau C, Crose B, Korhonen P. Effects of training on the use of a manual microphone shutoff on a BiCROS device. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (05) 478-493
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 227 Hayes D, Pumford J, Dorscher M. Advantages of DSP instruments for wireless CROS fittings. Hear J 2005; 58 (03) 44-46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 228 Valente M, Oeding K. Evaluation of a BICROS system with a directional microphone in the receiver and transmitter. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (10) 856-871
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 229 Pumford J. Benefits of probe-mic measures with CROS/BiCROS fittings. Hear J 2005; 58 (10) 34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 230 Ching TYC, Johnson EE, Seeto M, Macrae JH. Hearing-aid safety: a comparison of estimated threshold shifts for gains recommended by NAL-NL2 and DSL m[i/o] prescriptions for children. Int J Audiol 2013; 52 (02) (Suppl. 02) S39-S45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 231 Humes LE, Bess FH. Tutorial on the potential deterioration in hearing due to hearing aid usage. J Speech Hear Res 1981; 24 (01) 3-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 232 Johnson E. Safety limit warning levels for the avoidance of excessive sound amplification to protect against further hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2017; 56 (11) 829-836
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 233 Savage I, Dillon H, Byrne D, Bächler H. Experimental evaluation of different methods of limiting the maximum output of hearing aids. Ear Hear 2006; 27 (05) 550-562
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 234 Preminger JE, Neuman AC, Cunningham DR. The selection and validation of output sound pressure level in multichannel hearing aids. Ear Hear 2001; 22 (06) 487-500
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 235 Taylor B. The essential building blocks of hearing aid selection and fitting: a beginner’s guide to applying evidence-based thinking. AudiologyOnline.com. Published 2008. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/essential-building-blocks-hearing-aid-914
    Google Scholar
  • 236 Macrae J. Permanent threshold shift associated with overamplification by hearing aids. J Speech Hear Res 1991; 34 (02) 403-414
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 237 Macrae J. Temporary and permanent threshold shift caused by hearing aid use. J Speech Hear Res 1995; 38 (04) 949-959
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 238 Boothroyd A. Hearing aid accessories for adults: the remote FM microphone. Ear Hear 2004; 25 (01) 22-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 239 Chisolm TH, Noe CM, McArdle R, Abrams H. Evidence for the use of hearing assistive technology by adults: the role of the FM system. Trends Amplif 2007; 11 (02) 73-89
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 240 De Ceulaer G, Bestel J, Mülder HE, Goldbeck F, de Varebeke SPJ, Govaerts PJ. Speech understanding in noise with the Roger Pen, Naida CI Q70 processor, and integrated Roger 17 receiver in a multi-talker network. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016; 273 (05) 1107-1114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 241 Fitzpatrick EM, Séguin C, Schramm DR, Armstrong S, Chénier J. The benefits of remote microphone technology for adults with cochlear implants. Ear Hear 2009; 30 (05) 590-599
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 242 Fitzpatrick EM, Fournier P, Séguin C, Armstrong S, Chénier J, Schramm D. Users’ perspectives on the benefits of FM systems with cochlear implants. Int J Audiol 2010; 49 (01) 44-53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 243 Fournier P, Fitzpatrick EM, Seguin C, Armstrong S, Chénier J, Schramm D. The FM Benefit Counseling Tool (FM-BCT): initial stages of the development of a tool for assessing the benefit of FM amplification from the perspective of adult cochlear implant users. Can J Speech-Language Pathol Audiol 2012; 36 (02) 150-167
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 244 Lewis MS, Crandell CC, Valente M, Horn JE. Speech perception in noise: directional microphones versus frequency modulation (FM) systems. J Am Acad Audiol 2004; 15 (06) 426-439
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 245 Schafer EC, Huynh C, Romine D, Jimenez R. Speech recognition and subjective perceptions of neck-loop FM receivers with cochlear implants. Am J Audiol 2013; 22 (01) 53-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 246 Thibodeau L. Benefits of adaptive FM systems on speech recognition in noise for listeners who use hearing aids. Am J Audiol 2010; 19 (01) 36-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 247 Thibodeau L. Application of advanced listening technology in adults. In: Proceedings of Hearing Care in Adults. Chicago, IL: Phonak; 2007: 3-13
    Google Scholar
  • 248 Thibodeau LM. Benefits of remote microphone technology in health care management for the World War II Generation. Perspect ASHA Spec Interest Groups 2019; 4 (06) 1379-1384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 249 Wolfe J, Duke MM, Schafer E. et al. Evaluation of performance with an adaptive digital remote microphone system and a digital remote microphone audio-streaming accessory system. Am J Audiol 2015; 24 (03) 440-450
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 250 Bondurant L, Thibodeau L. Behavioral verification of programmable FM advantage settings. J Educ Audiol 2011; 17: 11-22
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 251 Wolfe J, Morais M, Schafer E. Improving hearing performance for cochlear implant recipients with use of a digital, wireless, remote-microphone, audio-streaming accessory. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (06) 532-539
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 252 Wolfe J, Morais M, Schafer E, Agrawal S, Koch D. Evaluation of speech recognition of cochlear implant recipients using adaptive, digital remote microphone technology and a speech enhancement sound processing algorithm. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (05) 502-508
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 253 Wolfe J, Schafer EC, Heldner B, Mülder H, Ward E, Vincent B. Evaluation of speech recognition in noise with cochlear implants and dynamic FM. J Am Acad Audiol 2009; 20 (07) 409-421
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 254 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Decision Memo for Cochlear Implantation (CAG-00107N). Available at: http255. Published 2005. Accessed January 1, 2020
  • 255 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Cochlear implants for children and adults with severe to profound deafness: Technology appraisal guidance. Published 2019. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta566
  • 256 British Cochlear Implant Group (BCIG). Quality Standards Cochlear Implant Services for Children and Adults. Published 2020. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.bcig.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/QS-update-2018-PDF-final.pdf
  • 257 British Cochlear Implant Group (BCIG). Consensus statement on candidacy for cochlear implantation. Published 2017. Accessed April 17, 2020 at: https://www.cicandidacy.co.uk/
  • 258 Wilson B. The cochlear implant and possibilities for narrowing the remaining gaps between prosthetic and normal hearing. World J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2018; 3 (04) 200-210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 259 Helms J, Müller J, Schön F. et al. Evaluation of performance with the COMBI40 cochlear implant in adults: a multicentric clinical study. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 1997; 59 (01) 23-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 260 Koch DB, Osberger MJ, Segel P, Kessler D. HiResolution and conventional sound processing in the HiResolution bionic ear: using appropriate outcome measures to assess speech recognition ability. Audiol Neuro-Otology 2004; 9 (04) 214-223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 261 Balkany T, Hodges A, Menapace C. et al. Nucleus Freedom North American clinical trial. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007; 136 (05) 757-762
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 262 Blamey P, Arndt P, Bergeron F. et al. Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants. Audiol Neurotol 1996; 1 (05) 293-306
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 263 Rubinstein JT, Parkinson WS, Tyler RS, Gantz BJ. Residual speech recognition and cochlear implant performance: effects of implantation criteria. Am J Otol 1999; 20 (04) 445-452
    Google Scholar
  • 264 Friedland DR, Venick HS, Niparko JK. Choice of ear for cochlear implantation: the effect of history and residual hearing on predicted postoperative performance. Otol Neurotol 2003; 24 (04) 582-589
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 265 Sorkin DL, Buchman CA. Cochlear implant access in six developed countries. Otol Neurotol 2016; 37 (02) e161-e164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 266 Sorkin D. Cochlear implantation in the world’s largest medical device market: utilization and awareness of cochlear implants in the United States. Cochlear Implants Int 2013; 14 (Suppl. 01) S4-S12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 267 Fielden CA, Hampton R, Smith S, Kitterick PT. Access to aidable residual hearing in adult candidates for cochlear implantation in the UK. Cochlear Implants Int 2016; 17 (01) (Suppl. 01) 70-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 268 Fielden CA, Mehta RL, Kitterick PT. Choosing which ear to implant in adult candidates with functional residual hearing. Cochlear Implants Int 2016; 17 (01) (Suppl. 01) 47-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 269 Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Sheffield SW, Teece K, Olund AP. Availability of binaural cues for bilateral implant recipients and bimodal listeners with and without preserved hearing in the implanted ear. Audiol Neurotol 2014; 19 (01) 57-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 270 Gifford RH, Dorman MF. Bimodal hearing or bilateral cochlear implants? Ask the patient. Ear Hear 2019; 40 (03) 501-516
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 271 Neuman AC, Waltzman SB, Shapiro WH, Neukam JD, Zeman AM, Svirsky MA. Self-reported usage, functional benefit, and audiologic characteristics of cochlear implant patients who use a contralateral hearing aid. Trends Hear 2017; 21: 2331216517699530
    Google Scholar
  • 272 Neuman AC, Zeman A, Neukam J, Wang B, Svirsky MA. The effect of hearing aid bandwidth and configuration of hearing loss on bimodal speech recognition in cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 2019; 40 (03) 621-635
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 273 Kong Y-Y, Cruz R, Jones JA, Zeng F-G. Music perception with temporal cues in acoustic and electric hearing. Ear Hear 2004; 25 (02) 173-185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 274 Kong Y-Y, Mullangi A, Marozeau J. Timbre and speech perception in bimodal and bilateral cochlear-implant listeners. Ear Hear 2012; 33 (05) 645-659
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 275 Dorman MF, Gifford RH, Spahr AJ, McKarns SA. The benefits of combining acoustic and electric stimulation for the recognition of speech, voice and melodies. Audiol Neurotol 2008; 13 (02) 105-112
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 276 El Fata F, James CJ, Laborde M-L, Fraysse B. How much residual hearing is ‘useful’ for music perception with cochlear implants?. Audiol Neurotol 2009; 14 (01) (Suppl. 01) 14-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 277 Prentiss SM, Friedland DR, Nash JJ, Runge CL. Differences in perception of musical stimuli among acoustic, electric, and combined modality listeners. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (05) 494-501
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 278 Crew JD, Galvin III JJ, Landsberger DM, Fu QJ. Contributions of electric and acoustic hearing to bimodal speech and music perception. PLoS One 2015; 10 (03) e0120279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 279 Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Guidance for industry and FDA staff: implantable middle ear hearing device. Published 2003. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/guidance-documents-medical-devices-and-radiation-emitting-products/implantable-middle-ear-hearing-device-guidance-industry-and-fda-staff
  • 280 Kahue CN, Carlson ML, Daugherty JA, Haynes DS, Glasscock III ME. Middle ear implants for rehabilitation of sensorineural hearing loss: a systematic review of FDA approved devices. Otol Neurotol 2014; 35 (07) 1228-1237
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 281 Ghossaini SN, Roehm PC. Osseointegrated auditory devices: bone-anchored hearing aid and PONTO. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2019; 52 (02) 243-251
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 282 Reinfeldt S, Håkansson B, Taghavi H, Eeg-Olofsson M. New developments in bone-conduction hearing implants: a review. Med Devices (Auckl) 2015; 8: 79-93
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 283 Vinay, Moore BC. Speech recognition as a function of high-pass filter cutoff frequency for people with and without low-frequency cochlear dead regions. J Acoust Soc Am 2007; 122 (01) 542-553
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 284 Hornsby BWY, Dundas JA. Factors affecting outcomes on the TEN (SPL) test in adults with hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 2009; 20 (04) 251-263
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 285 Pepler A, Munro KJ, Lewis K, Kluk K. Prevalence of cochlear dead regions in new referrals and existing adult hearing aid users. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (03) e99-e109
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 286 Chang Y-S, Park H, Hong SH, Chung W-H, Cho Y-S, Moonid J. Predicting cochlear dead regions in patients with hearing loss through a machine learning-based approach: a preliminary study. PloS One 2019; 14 (06) e0217790
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 287 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Auditory brain stem implants: interventional procedures guidance. Published 2005. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ipg108
  • 288 Wong K, Kozin ED, Kanumuri VV. et al. Auditory brainstem implants: recent progress and future perspectives. Front Neurosci 2019; 13 (JAN): 10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 289 Greenhalgh T, Howick J, Maskrey N. Evidence Based Medicine Renaissance Group. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis?. BMJ 2014; (348) g3725
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 290 Manchaiah VK, Stephens D. The patient journey: living with hearing impairment. J Acad Rehabilitative Audiol 2011; 44: 29-40
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 291 Arnold ML, Oree P, Sanchez V, Reed N, Chisolm T. Development and formative assessment of the hearing loss toolkit for self-management. Semin Hear 2019; 40 (01) 49-67
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 292 Bess F. The role of generic health-related quality of life measures in establishing audiological rehabilitation outcomes. Ear Hear 2000; 21 (04) 74S-79S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 293 Boothroyd A. Adult aural rehabilitation: what is it and does it work?. Trends Amplif 2007; 11 (02) 63-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 294 Sawyer CS, Munro KJ, Dawes P, O’Driscoll MP, Armitage CJ. Beyond motivation: identifying targets for intervention to increase hearing aid use in adults. Int J Audiol 2019; 58 (01) 53-58
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 295 Borg E, Borg B. New perspectives on counselling in audiological habilitation/rehabilitation. Int J Audiol 2015; 54 (01) 11-19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 296 Ferguson M, Maidment D, Henshaw H, Heffernan E. Evidence-based interventions for adult aural rehabilitation: that was then, this is now. Semin Hear 2019; 40 (01) 68-84
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 297 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 (03) (Suppl. 03) S23-S33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 298 Carlsson P-I, Hall M, Lind K-J, Danermark B. Quality of life, psychosocial consequences, and audiological rehabilitation after sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2011; 50 (02) 139-144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 299 Tseng CC, Hu LY, Liu ME, Yang AC, Shen CC, Tsai SJ. Risk of depressive disorders following sudden sensorineural hearing loss: a nationwide population-based retrospective cohort study. J Affect Disord 2016; 197: 94-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 300 Chung SD, Hung SH, Lin HC, Sheu JJ. Association between sudden sensorineural hearing loss and anxiety disorder: a population-based study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015; 272 (10) 2673-2678
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 301 Convery E, Keidser G, Hickson L, Meyer C. The relationship between hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Am J Audiol 2019; 28 (02) 274-284
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 302 Tjørnhøj-Thomsen T. Framing the clinical encounter for greater understanding, empathy, and success. Hear J 2009; 62 (08) 38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 303 British Society of Audiology (BSA). Practice Guidance - Common Principles of Rehabilitation for Adults in Audiology Services 2016. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.thebsa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/OD104-52-Practice-Guidance-Common-Principles-of-Rehabilitation-for-Adults-in-Audiology-Services-2016.pdf
  • 304 Ekberg K, Grenness C, Hickson L. Addressing patients’ psychosocial concerns regarding hearing aids within audiology appointments for older adults. Am J Audiol 2014; 23 (03) 337-350
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 305 Ridgway J, Hickson L, Lind C. Autonomous motivation is associated with hearing aid adoption. Int J Audiol 2015; 54 (07) 476-484
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 306 Stropahl M, Besser J, Launer S. Auditory training supports auditory rehabilitation: a state-of-the-art review. Ear Hear 2020; 41 (04) 697-704
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 307 Bayard C, Machart L, Strauß A, Gerber S, Aubanel V, Schwartz J-L. Cued speech enhances speech-in-noise perception. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2019; 24 (03) 223-233
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 308 Hallam R, Ashton P, Sherbourne K, Gailey L. Persons with acquired profound hearing loss (APHL): how do they and their families adapt to the challenge?. Health (London) 2008; 12 (03) 369-388
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 309 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
  • 310 Barker F, Munro KJ, de Lusignan S. Supporting living well with hearing loss: a Delphi review of self-management support. Int J Audiol 2015; 54 (10) 691-699
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 311 Kramer SE, Allessie GHM, Dondorp AW, Zekveld AA, Kapteyn TS. A home education program for older adults with hearing impairment and their significant others: a randomized trial evaluating short- and long-term effects. Int J Audiol 2005; 44 (05) 255-264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 312 Barker AB, Leighton P, Ferguson MA. Coping together with hearing loss: a qualitative meta-synthesis of the psychosocial experiences of people with hearing loss and their communication partners. Int J Audiol 2017; 56 (05) 297-305
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 313 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 (03) (Suppl. 03) S99-S104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 314 Ferguson MA, Coulson NS, Henshaw H, Heffernan E. Application of health behaviour theory to hearing healthcare research: the state of play and beyond. Int J Audiol 2016; 55 (03) (Suppl. 03) S1-S2
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 315 Hawkins DB. Effectiveness of counseling-based adult group aural rehabilitation programs: a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16 (07) 485-493
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 316 Sherbourne K, White L, Fortnuni H. Intensive rehabilitation programmes for deafened men and women: an evaluation study. Int J Audiol 2002; 41 (03) 195-201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 317 Southall K, Jennings MB, Gagné J-P, Young J. Reported benefits of peer support group involvement by adults with hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2019; 58 (01) 29-36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 318 Smith A, Shepherd A, Jepson R, Mackay S. The impact of a support centre for people with sensory impairment living in rural Scotland. Prim Health Care Res Dev 2016; 17 (02) 138-148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 319 Singleton JL, Remillard ET, Mitzner TL, Rogers WA. Everyday technology use among older deaf adults. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2019; 14 (04) 325-332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 320 de Witte L, Steel E, Gupta S, Ramos VD, Roentgen U. Assistive technology provision: towards an international framework for assuring availability and accessibility of affordable high-quality assistive technology. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2018; 13 (05) 467-472
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 321 Jama GM, Shahidi S, Danino J, Murphy J. Assistive communication devices for patients with hearing loss: a cross-sectional survey of availability and staff awareness in outpatient clinics in England. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2019; 1-4 ; Doi: 10.1080/17483107.2019.1604823
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 322 McPherson B. Hearing assistive technologies in developing countries: background, achievements and challenges. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2014; 9 (05) 360-364
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 323 Romero RL, Kates F, Hart M, Ojeda A, Meirom IHS, Hardy S. Modifying the Mobile App Rating Scale With a Content Expert: Evaluation Study of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Apps. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2019; 7 (10) e14198 http://mhealth.jmir.org/2019/10/e14198/ DOI: 10.2196/14198.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 324 Hermawati S, Pieri K. Assistive technologies for severe and profound hearing loss: beyond hearing aids and implants. Assist Technol 2019; 1-12 ; Doi: 10.1080/10400435.2018.1522524
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 325 MacLachlan M, Banes D, Bell D. et al. Assistive technology policy: a position paper from the first global research, innovation, and education on assistive technology (GREAT) summit. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2018; 13 (05) 454-466
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 326 Kochkin S, Sterkins J, Compton-Conley C. et al. Consumer perceptions of the impact of inductively looped venues on the utility of their hearing devices: using hearing devices with loop systems dramatically increases customer satisfaction. Hear Rev 2014; 16-30
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 327 Bankaitis A. Hearing Assistance Technology: Integrating HATs into Clinical Practice Audiology Online. AudiologyOnline.com. Published 2007. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.audiologyonline.com/articles/hearing-assistance-technology-integrating-hats-936
    Google Scholar
  • 328 Ding Y, Chourasia A, Anson D, Atkins T, Vanderheiden G. Raising the Floor - International understanding decision requirements for selection of assistive technology. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 59th Annual Meeting; Los Angeles; 2015
    Google Scholar
  • 329 Guest CM, Collis GM, McNicholas J. Hearing dogs: a longitudinal study of social and psychological effects on deaf and hard-of-hearing recipients. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2006; 11 (02) 252-261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 330 Rintala DH, Matamoros R, Seitz LL. Effects of assistance dogs on persons with mobility or hearing impairments: a pilot study. J Rehabil Res Dev 2008; 45 (04) 489-503
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 331 Hart LA, Zasloff RL, Benfatto AM. The socializing role of hearing dogs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1996; 47 (1-2): 7-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 332 Tunkel DE, Bauer CA, Sun GH. et al. Clinical practice guideline: tinnitus. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014; 151 (02) S1-S40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 333 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Tinnitus: assessment and management. Published 2020. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng155
  • 334 Baguley D, McFerran D, Hall D. Tinnitus. Lancet 2013; 1600-1607
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 335 American Academy of Audiology (AAA). Audiologic Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Tinnitus Patients. Audiology Today. Published 2001. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.audiology.org/sites/default/files/audiologytoday/2001ATMarApr.pdf
  • 336 Hoare DJ, Edmondson-Jones M, Sereda M, Akeroyd MA, Hall D. Amplification with hearing aids for patients with tinnitus and co-existing hearing loss. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; (01) CD010151
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 337 Tutaj L, Hoare DJ, Sereda M. Combined amplification and sound generation for tinnitus: a scoping review. Ear Hear 2018; 39 (03) 412-422
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 338 Sereda M, Xia J, El Refaie A, Hall DA, Hoare DJ. Sound therapy (using amplification devices and/or sound generators) for tinnitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 12 (12) CD013094
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 339 British Society of Audiology (BSA). Fitting of combination hearing aids for subjects with tinnitus. Published 2020. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.thebsa.org.uk/resources/practice-guidance-fitting-of-combination-hearing-aids-for-subjects-with-tinnitus/
  • 340 Hoare DJ, Kowalkowski VL, Kang S, Hall DA. Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials examining tinnitus management. Laryngoscope 2011; 121 (07) 1555-1564
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 341 Hesser H, Weise C, Westin VZ, Andersson G. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of cognitive-behavioral therapy for tinnitus distress. Clin Psychol Rev 2011; 31 (04) 545-553
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 342 McFerran D, Hoare DJ, Carr S, Ray J, Stockdale D. Tinnitus services in the United Kingdom: a survey of patient experiences. BMC Health Serv Res 2018; 18 (01) 110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 343 Nolan DR, Gupta R, Huber CG, Schneeberger AR. An effective treatment for tinnitus and hyperacusis based on cognitive behavioral therapy in an inpatient setting: a 10-year retrospective outcome analysis. Front Psychiatry 2020; 11: 25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 344 McKenna L, Marks EM, Hallsworth CA, Schaette R. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy as a treatment for chronic tinnitus: a randomized controlled trial. Psychother Psychosom 2017; 86 (06) 351-361
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 345 Gevonden MJ, Myin-Germeys I, van den Brink W, van Os J, Selten JP, Booij J. Psychotic reactions to daily life stress and dopamine function in people with severe hearing impairment. Psychol Med 2015; 45 (08) 1665-1674
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 346 Valente M, Bentler R, Kaplan HS. et al. Guidelines for hearing aid fitting for adults. Am J Audiol 1998; 7 (01) 5-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 347 Saunders GH, Chisolm TH, Abrams HB. Measuring hearing aid outcomes--not as easy as it seems. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005; 42 (04) (Suppl. 02) 157-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 348 Valente M, Oeding K, Brockmeyer A, Smith S, Kallogjeri D. Differences in word and phoneme recognition in quiet, sentence recognition in noise, and subjective outcomes between manufacturer first-fit and hearing aids programmed to NAL-NL2 using real-ear measures. J Am Acad Audiol 2018; 29 (08) 706-721
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 349 Anderson M, Rallapalli V, Schoof T, Souza P, Arehart K. The use of self-report measures to examine changes in perception in response to fittings using different signal processing parameters. Int J Audiol 2018; 57 (11) 809-815
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 350 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
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 351 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
  • 352 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 353 Timmer BHB, Hickson L, Launer S. Ecological momentary assessment: feasibility, construct validity, and future applications. Am J Audiol 2017; 26 (3S): 436-442
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 354 Chundu S, Buhagiar R. Audiologists’ knowledge of cochlear implants and their related referrals to the cochlear implant centre: pilot study findings from UK. Cochlear Implants Int 2013; 14 (04) 213-224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 355 Carlson ML, Sladen DP, Gurgel RK, Tombers NM, Lohse CM, Driscoll CL. Survey of the American Neurotology Society on Cochlear Implantation. Otol Neurotol 2018; 39 (01) 1-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 356 Vickers D, De Raeve L, Graham J. International survey of cochlear implant candidacy. Cochlear Implants Int 2016; 17 (01) (Suppl. 01) 36-41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 357 Green R. The uses and abuses of speech audiometry in rehabilitation. In: Martin M. ed. Speech Audiometry. 2nd ed. Singular Publishing Group; 1997
    Google Scholar
  • 358 Parving A. The value of speech audiometry in hearing-aid rehabilitation. Scand Audiol 1991; 20 (03) 159-164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 359 Rodemerk KS, Galster JA. The benefit of remote microphones using four wireless protocols. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (08) 724-731
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 360 Kates JM, Arehart KH, Harvey Jr. LO. Integrating a remote microphone with hearing-aid processing. J Acoust Soc Am 2019; 145 (06) 3551-3566
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 361 Kawaguchi L, Wu Y-H, Miller C. The effects of amplification on listening self-efficacy in adults with sensorineural hearing loss. Am J Audiol 2019; 28 (03) 572-582
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 362 Bennett RJ, Meyer CJ, Eikelboom RH, Atlas JD, Atlas MD. factors associated with self-reported hearing aid management skills and knowledge. Am J Audiol 2018; 27 (04) 604-613
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 363 Goggins S, Day J. Pilot study: efficacy of recalling adult hearing-aid users for reassessment after three years within a publicly-funded audiology service. Int J Audiol 2009; 48 (04) 204-210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 364 Allen S, Jones L, Gregory M. Exploring the Barriers and Facilitators for Adult CI Referral by Audiologists Working in Non-CI Centres; 2018 . Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.heartogether.org.uk/files/download/1872
  • 365 Bierbaum M, McMahon CM, Hughes S. et al. Barriers and facilitators to cochlear implant uptake in Australia and the United Kingdom. Ear Hear 2020; 41 (02) 374-385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 366 Davies AC, Harris D, Banks-Gatenby A, Brass A. Problem-based learning in clinical bioinformatics education: does it help to create communities of practice?. PLOS Comput Biol 2019; 15 (06) e1006746
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 367 American Academy of Audiology (AAA) Clinical practice algorithms and statements. Audiol Today 2000; ; Special Issue: 32-49
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 368 ASHA Ad Hoc Committee on Hearing Aid Selection and Fitting. Guidelines for hearing aid fitting for adults. Am J Audiol 1998; 7 (01) 5-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 369 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA). Knowledge and Skills Required for the Practice of Audiologic/Aural Rehabilitation. Published 2001. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.asha.org/policy/KS2001-00216/
  • 370 Audiology Australia Professional Practice Standards - Part B Clinical Standards. Published 2013. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://audiology.asn.au/Tenant/C0000013/PositionPapers/MemberResources/ClinicalStandardspartb-wholedocumentJuly131.pdf
  • 371 Boecking B, Brueggemann P, Mazurek B. Tinnitus: psychosomatic aspects. HNO 2019; 67 (02) 137-152
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 372 British Society of Audiology (BSA). Practice Guidance - Assessment of speech understanding in noise in adults with hearing difficulties. Published 2019. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.thebsa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/OD104-80-BSA-Practice-Guidance-Speech-in-Noise-FINAL.Feb-2019.pdf
  • 373 British Society of Audiology (BSA). Tinnitus in Children Practice Guideline. Published 2015. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.thebsa.org.uk/resources/tinnitus-in-children-practice-guidance/
  • 374 British Society of Audiology (BSA). Tinnitus in Adults Practice Guideline; 2019. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: http://www.thebsa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Practice-Guidance_Tinnitus-in-Adults_for-member-consultation_30AUG2019.pdf
  • 375 College of Audiologists and Speech-Language Pathologists of Ontario. Practice standards and guidelines for hearing assessment of adults by audiologists. Published 2018. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: http://www.caslpo.com/sites/default/uploads/files/PSG_EN_Hearing_Assessment_of_Adults_by_Audiologists.pdf
  • 376 New Zealand Audiological Society (NZAS). Professional Practice Standards Part B Clinical Practice. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: www.audiology.org.nz
  • 377 National Health Service (NHS) UK. Action plan on hearing loss. Published 2015. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/act-plan-hearing-loss-upd.pdf
  • 378 National Health Service (NHS) UK. Provision of Services for Adults with Tinnitus: A Good Practice Guide 2009
  • 379 National Health Service (NHS) England. Commissioning Services for People with Hearing Loss: A Framework for Clinical Commissioning Groups. Published 2016. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/HLCF.pdf
  • 380 National Health Service (NHS) Wales. Quality standards for adult hearing rehabilitation services - version 2. Published 2016. Accessed June 23, 2020 at: https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2019-10/quality-standards-for-adult-hearing-rehabilitation-services.pdf
  • 381 Thibodeau L, Johnson C. Wireless technology to improve communication in noise. Semin Hear 2014; 35 (03) 157
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 382 Fuller TE, Haider HF, Kikidis D. et al. Different teams, same conclusions? A systematic review of existing clinical guidelines for the assessment and treatment of tinnitus in adults. Front Psychol 2017; 8 (206) 206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar