PP325 - Assessing Relationship of Number of Follow-Up Appointments to User Satisfaction and Average Hearing Aid Wear Time

Abstract:
This study looks at the relationship between the number of follow-up appointments with the hearing health professional following a new hearing aid fitting, the average user wear time, and the resulting self-perceived patient satisfaction. Data collection includes assessment of patient chart notes, questionnaire results (HHIE, IOI-HA, & ALDQ), and collection of average wear time from hearing aid software data logging. This aims to provide data that shows that an increased engagement with a healthcare professional leads to better user outcomes, showing the importance of counseling to increase user success, outcomes, and overall hearing aid wear time.

Summary:

Introduction:
Benefit from hearing aids can be increased when follow-up counseling on hearing aid use is incorporated (McCormack & Fortnum,2013). Patients also state that the hearing healthcare professional's knowledge, their professionalism, empathy, creation of realistic expectations, explained care and maintenance of their hearing aids, and quality of services during their fitting process and maintenance appointments are factors that significantly influenced patients’ hearing aid journey (Poost-Foroosh (2011). Previous research has also shown that increased follow-up appointments correlate with increased long-term hearing aid user outcomes and self-perceived improvement in quality of life. This study aims to determine the relationship between the number of follow-ups and hearing aid satisfaction.

Methods:
Participants are 40 older adults with bilaterally symmetrical mild to moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss who have used hearing aids for at least 6 months. Participants’ follow-up visit notes were obtained from their clinical records. They were asked to complete the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE), International Outcome Inventory-Hearing Aids (IOI-HA), and the Auditory Lifestyle and Demand Questionnaire (ALDQ). We also qualitatively analyzed their most common complaints at their follow-up visits and the subsequent audiologists’ actions.

Results:
Preliminary qualitative results indicate that the five most common complaints of the patients were that the device was dead, the patient was not hearing as well as before, having difficulty in background noise, damaged hearing devices, and/or Bluetooth concerns. The audiologists’ most common actions at follow-up visits were found to be cleaning the hearing aid, providing programming adjustments to the device, sending the device or earmold out for repair, Bluetooth assistance, and counseling regarding aural rehabilitation to address the patient’s needs.

We used multivariate linear regression analyses to determine the relationship between the number of follow-up visits and scores on HHIE, ALDQ, and IOI-HA. Preliminary results show no relationship between the number of follow-up visits and HHIE and ALDQ scores. For the IOI-HA scores, a significant negative relationship was found between the number of follow-up visits and perceived benefit, residual activity limitation, satisfaction, impact on others, and quality of life.

Conclusion:
Results indicate that as the number of follow-up visits increases, patients have poorer outcomes. This decline can be attributed to a few factors. Patients experience substantial benefits following their initial hearing aid fit, but over time, they become accustomed to these benefits and notice their problems more. Another reason we see these findings may be because individuals who attend more follow-up visits may be more particular patients (or patients with unrealistic expectations) and dissatisfied with their fittings prompting them to return for adjustments. As data collection continues, preliminary qualitative results may or may not be consistent with final findings once more participant data is collected.