Effectiveness of an online SUpport PRogramme (SUPR) for older hearing aid users: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Process Evaluation of an Online SUpport PRogram for Older Hearing Aid Users Delivered in a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives: To evaluate the process of implementing a web-based support program (SUPR) for hearing aid users in the Dutch dispensing setting in order to allow interpretation of the randomized controlled trial's results (positive effects on hearing-aid related outcomes; no effects on psychosocial outcomes).

Design: Measures: context of implementation, recruitment, SUPR's: reach, implementation fidelity, dose delivered, dose received, satisfaction, and benefit. Data collection: quantitative and qualitative.

Study Sample: One hundred thirty-eight clients (mean age 68.1 years; 60% male) and 44 dispensers completed questionnaires. Five clients and 6 dispensers participated in interviews and focus groups.

Results: Clients and dispensers were generally satisfied with SUPR's usefulness. SUPR-videos were watched by 7–37% of the clients. Around half of the dispensers encouraged clients to watch them or informed them about SUPR. Some clients found the SUPR-materials suboptimal, and changes in personnel and limited dispenser-training were barriers acting on a contextual level.

Conclusions: This study identified several factors that contributed to the success of SUPR. Others factors, acting on various levels (e.g., intervention material, dispensers, and implementation context), were suboptimal and may explain the absent psychosocial effects. The identified factors are important to consider in further development of SUPR, and in other web-based support programs.

Effectiveness of a web-based SUpport PRogramme (SUPR) for communication partners of persons with hearing loss: results of a two-arm, cluster randomised controlled trial and process evaluation

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of web-based SUpport PRogram (SUPR) for communication partners (CPs) of persons with hearing loss (PHLs) in a HA dispensing setting.

DESIGN

Cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) with two arms (SUPR: Booklet, online videos; care as usual: no support) plus process evaluation. Measurements: baseline, and immediately-, six, and 12 months post-intervention. Outcomes: Significant Other Scale for Hearing Disability (SOS-HEAR), International Outcome Inventory for HAs/Alternative Interventions for Significant Others (IOI-HA/AI-SO). Process evaluation: dose-received, satisfaction, and benefit.

STUDY SAMPLE

The cRCT included 73 (SUPR) and 57 (care as usual) CPs. In the process evaluation study, 41 CPs (SUPR) participated.

RESULTS

There were no significant effects of SUPR for third-party disability (SOS-HEAR), the proxy report (IOI-HA-SO item "use"), and third-party disability (IOI-HA-SO items "satisfaction", and "quality of life"). SUPR-videos were watched by 15-22% of the CPs. SUPR materials were rated as moderately beneficial and useful.

CONCLUSIONS

Low baseline disability (floor effect) and low intervention dose-received may explain the findings. Directly targeting CPs rather than via their PHLs and providing intervention materials specifically for CPs may improve their engagement and contribute to SUPR's value supplementary to standard HA care.

Effectiveness of a Web-Based SUpport PRogram (SUPR) for Hearing Aid Users Aged 50+: Two-Arm, Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Hearing aid (HA) use is known to improve health outcomes for people with hearing loss. Despite that, HA use is suboptimal, and communication issues and hearing-related activity limitations and participation restrictions often remain. Web-based self-management communication programs may support people with hearing loss to effectively self-manage the impact of hearing loss in their daily lives.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of the research is to examine the short- and long-term effects of a web-based self-management SUpport PRogram (SUPR) on communication strategy use (primary outcome) and a range of secondary outcomes for HA users aged 50 years and older.

METHODS

Clients of 36 HA dispensing practices were randomized to SUPR (SUPR recipients; n=180 HA users) and 34 to care as usual (controls; n=163 HA users). SUPR recipients received a practical support booklet and online materials delivered via email over the course of their 6-month HA rehabilitation trajectory. They were encouraged to appoint a communication partner and were offered optional email contact with the HA dispensing practice. The online materials included 3 instruction videos on HA handling, 5 videos on communication strategies, and 3 testimonial videos. Care as usual included a HA fitting rehabilitation trajectory only. Measurements were carried out at baseline, immediately postintervention, 6 months postintervention, and 12 months postintervention. The primary outcome measure was self-reported use of communication strategies (3 subscales of the Communication Profile for the Hearing Impaired [CPHI]). Secondary outcome measures included self-reported personal adjustment to hearing loss (CPHI); use, satisfaction and benefit of HAs and SUPR (use questionnaire; International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids [IOI-HA], Alternative Interventions [IOI-AI]); recommendation of HA dispensing services; self-efficacy for HA handling (Measure of Audiologic Rehabilitation Self-Efficacy for Hearing Aids [MARS-HA]); readiness to act on hearing loss (University of Rhode Island Change Assessment adapted for hearing loss [URICA-HL]); and hearing disability (Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap [AIADH]).

RESULTS

Linear mixed model analyses (intention to treat) showed no significant differences between the SUPR and control group in the course of communication strategy use (CPHI). Immediately postintervention, SUPR recipients showed significantly higher self-efficacy for advanced HA handling than the controls, which was sustained at 12 months (MARS-HA; mean difference immediately postintervention: 5.3, 95% CI 0.3 to 10.4; P=.04). Also, SUPR recipients showed significantly greater HA satisfaction than controls immediately postintervention (IOI-HA; 0.3, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.5; P=.006), which was sustained at 12 months, and significantly greater HA use than the controls immediately postintervention (IOI-HA; 0.3, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.5; P=.03), which was not sustained at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides ground to recommend adding SUPR to standard HA dispensing care, as long-term, modest improvements in HA outcomes were observed. Further research is needed to evaluate what adjustments to SUPR are needed to establish long-term effectiveness on outcomes in the psychosocial domain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN77340339; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN77340339.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015012.

Experiences With and Lessons Learned From Developing, Implementing, and Evaluating a Support Program for Older Hearing Aid Users and Their Communication Partners in the Hearing Aid Dispensing Setting

Purpose The SUpport PRogram (SUPR) study was carried out in the context of a private academic partnership and is the first study to evaluate the long-term effects of a communication program (SUPR) for older hearing aid users and their communication partners on a large scale in a hearing aid dispensing setting. The purpose of this research note is to reflect on the lessons that we learned during the different development, implementation, and evaluation phases of the SUPR project. Procedure This research note describes the procedures that were followed during the different phases of the SUPR project and provides a critical discussion to describe the strengths and weaknesses of the approach taken. Conclusion This research note might provide researchers and intervention developers with useful insights as to how aural rehabilitation interventions, such as the SUPR, can be developed by incorporating the needs of the different stakeholders, evaluated by using a robust research design (including a large sample size and a longer term follow-up assessment), and implemented widely by collaborating with a private partner (hearing aid dispensing practice chain).

Rationale, Theoretical Underpinnings, and Design of HEAR-aware: Providing Adults With Hearing Loss With Tailored Support to Self-Manage Their Hearing Problems via a Smartphone App, as an Alternative to Hearing Aids

Purpose An alarming two thirds of adults aged 50 years or over with hearing impairment who could benefit from hearing aids do not own any, leaving these adults with no support to self-manage their hearing problems. In the HEAR-aware project, it is hypothesized that self-management can be facilitated via a smartphone app if its educational content is tailored to a person's dynamic stage of readiness to take action on their hearing (stage of change) and to a person's dynamic acoustical situations (as measured via a wearable microphone) and associated challenges (as captured via ecological momentary assessment). As such, the HEAR-aware app would be an ecological momentary intervention. This research note describes the rationale and theoretical underpinnings of the app, as well as the rationale for planning a series of studies to develop and evaluate it. Study Designs After a preparatory phase, Study 1 includes qualitative group interviews to assess user needs. Next, a creative session will be held, in which all stakeholders involved will work toward a specified version of the app. Subsequently, prototypes of the app will be developed and pilot-tested (Pilot Studies 2A and 2B). Users' usage and ratings (usability and quality indicators) of the app's elements will be examined and processed in the app. Lastly, the effectiveness of the app's final version will be examined in a randomized controlled trial (Study 3). Discussion The project's merits and challenges will be discussed.

Identifying the approaches used by audiologists to address the psychosocial needs of their adult clients

OBJECTIVE

To identify the approaches taken by audiologists to address their adult clients' psychosocial needs related to hearing loss.

DESIGN

A participatory mixed methods design. Participants generated statements describing the ways in which the psychosocial needs of their adult clients with hearing loss are addressed, and then grouped the statements into themes. Data were obtained using face-to-face and online structured questions. Concept mapping techniques were used to identify key concepts and to map each of the concepts relative to each other.

STUDY SAMPLE

An international sample of 65 audiologists.

RESULTS

Ninety-three statements were generated and grouped into seven conceptual clusters: Client Empowerment; Use of Strategies and Training to Personalise the Rehabilitation Program; Facilitating Peer and Other Professional Support; Providing Emotional Support; Improving Social Engagement with Technology; Including Communication Partners; and Promoting Client Responsibility.

CONCLUSIONS

Audiologists employ a wide range of approaches in their attempt to address the psychosocial needs associated with hearing loss experienced by their adult clients. The approaches described were mostly informal and provided in a non-standardised way. The majority of approaches described were not evidence-based, despite the availability of several options that are evidence-based, thus highlighting the implementation gap between research and clinical practice.

Cognitive behavioural therapy for tinnitus

BACKGROUND

Tinnitus affects up to 21% of the adult population with an estimated 1% to 3% experiencing severe problems. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a collection of psychological treatments based on the cognitive and behavioural traditions in psychology and often used to treat people suffering from tinnitus.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and safety of CBT for tinnitus in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the ENT Trials Register; CENTRAL (2019, Issue 11); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 25 November 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of CBT versus no intervention, audiological care, tinnitus retraining therapy or any other active treatment in adult participants with tinnitus.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were the impact of tinnitus on disease-specific quality of life and serious adverse effects. Our secondary outcomes were: depression, anxiety, general health-related quality of life, negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus and other adverse effects. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 28 studies (mostly from Europe) with a total of 2733 participants. All participants had had tinnitus for at least three months and their average age ranged from 43 to 70 years. The duration of the CBT ranged from 3 to 22 weeks and it was mostly conducted in hospitals or online. There were four comparisons and we were interested in outcomes at end of treatment, and 6 and 12 months follow-up. The results below only refer to outcomes at end of treatment due to an absence of evidence at the other follow-up time points. CBT versus no intervention/wait list control Fourteen studies compared CBT with no intervention/wait list control. For the primary outcome, CBT may reduce the impact of tinnitus on quality of life at treatment end (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.83 to -0.30; 10 studies; 537 participants; low certainty). Re-expressed as a score on the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI; range 0 to 100) this is equivalent to a score 10.91 points lower in the CBT group, with an estimated minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for this scale being 7 points. Seven studies, rated as moderate certainty, either reported or informed us via personal communication about serious adverse effects. CBT probably results in little or no difference in adverse effects: six studies reported none and in one study one participant in the CBT condition worsened (risk ratio (RR) 3.00, 95% CI 0.13 to 69.87). For the secondary outcomes, CBT may result in a slight reduction in depression (SMD -0.34, 95% CI-0.60 to -0.08; 8 studies; 502 participants; low certainty). However, we are uncertain whether CBT reduces anxiety, improves health-related quality of life or reduces negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus (all very low certainty). From seven studies, no other adverse effects were reported (moderate certainty). CBT versus audiological care Three studies compared CBT with audiological care. CBT probably reduces the impact of tinnitus on quality of life when compared with audiological care as measured by the THI (range 0 to 100; mean difference (MD) -5.65, 95% CI -9.79 to -1.50; 3 studies; 444 participants) (moderate certainty; MCID = 7 points). No serious adverse effects occurred in the two included studies reporting these, thus risk ratios were not calculated (moderate certainty). The evidence suggests that CBT may slightly reduce depression but may result in little or no difference in anxiety or health-related quality of life (all low certainty) when compared with audiological care. CBT may reduce negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus when compared with audiological care (low certainty). No other adverse effects were reported for either group (moderate certainty). CBT versus tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT) One study compared CBT with TRT (including bilateral sound generators as per TRT protocol). CBT may reduce the impact of tinnitus on quality of life as measured by the THI when compared with TRT (range 0 to 100) (MD -15.79, 95% CI -27.91 to -3.67; 1 study; 42 participants; low certainty). For serious adverse effects three participants deteriorated during the study: one in the CBT (n = 22) and two in the TRT group (n = 20) (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.64; low certainty). We are uncertain whether CBT reduces depression and anxiety or improves health-related quality of life (low certainty). CBT may reduce negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus. No data were available for other adverse effects. CBT versus other active control Sixteen studies compared CBT with another active control (e.g. relaxation, information, Internet-based discussion forums). CBT may reduce the impact of tinnitus on quality of life when compared with other active treatments (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.05; 12 studies; 966 participants; low certainty). Re-expressed as a THI score this is equivalent to 5.84 points lower in the CBT group than the other active control group (MCID = 7 points). One study reported that three participants deteriorated: one in the CBT and two in the information only group (RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.16 to 18.36; low certainty). CBT may reduce depression and anxiety (both low certainty). We are uncertain whether CBT improves health-related quality of life compared with other control. CBT probably reduces negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus compared with other treatments. No data were available for other adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

CBT may be effective in reducing the negative impact that tinnitus can have on quality of life. There is, however, an absence of evidence at 6 or 12 months follow-up. There is also some evidence that adverse effects may be rare in adults with tinnitus receiving CBT, but this could be further investigated. CBT for tinnitus may have small additional benefit in reducing symptoms of depression although uncertainty remains due to concerns about the quality of the evidence. Overall, there is limited evidence for CBT for tinnitus improving anxiety, health-related quality of life or negatively biased interpretations of tinnitus.

Predictors of Purchasing a Hearing Aid After an Evaluation Period: A Prospective Study in Dutch Older Hearing Aid Candidates

Purpose The current study aimed to identify factors that distinguish between older (50+ years) hearing aid (HA) candidates who do and do not purchase HAs after having gone through an HA evaluation period (HAEP). Method Secondary data analysis of the SUpport PRogram trial was performed (n = 267 older, 1st-time HA candidates). All SUpport PRogram participants started an HAEP shortly after study enrollment. Decision to purchase an HA by the end of the HAEP was the outcome of interest of the current study. Participants' baseline covariates (22 in total) were included as candidate predictors. Multivariable logistic regression modeling (backward selection and reclassification tables) was used. Results Of all candidate predictors, only pure-tone average (average of 1, 2, and 4 kHz) hearing loss emerged as a significant predictor (odds ratio = 1.03, 95% confidence interval [1.03, 1.17]). Model performance was weak (Nagelkerke R ² = .04, area under the curve = 0.61). Conclusions These data suggest that, once HA candidates have decided to enter an HAEP, factors measured early in the help-seeking journey do not predict well who will and will not purchase an HA. Instead, factors that act during the HAEP may hold this predictive value. This should be examined.