{"title":"Alignment of Audiologists' Values With Best-Practice Standards: Insights From a National Survey.","authors":"Katherine N Menon, Eric C Hoover","doi":"10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Previous research documented the values of audiology through a qualitative content analysis of documents representing traditional, best-practice hearing health care. The primary objective of this study was to validate the existing list of audiology values. Through a nationwide survey, this study aimed to elicit the values of practicing audiologists, with a specific focus on the prescription and dispensing of amplification devices, to ensure a comprehensive understanding of their priorities. Additionally, this study sought to identify any values missing from the original list and determine the rank order importance of these values, comparing this to the prioritization of values found in best-practice audiology documents. This comparison aimed to assess the alignment of recommended guidelines and real-world practices in hearing health care.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>An online survey was distributed to audiologists to elicit the prioritization of values from hearing health care providers. Participants were tasked with sorting and ranking 18 items, each representing a specific value in hearing health care, based on importance. Respondents were encouraged to suggest and rank the importance of additional values not included in the list. Audiologists were recruited from professional association mailing lists and direct contact. Respondent demographics were representative of U.S. audiologists. Qualitative content analysis was used to interpret values suggested by audiologists. Kendall's rank distance test was used to compare values prioritization between audiologists and best-practice audiology documents.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After filtering out incomplete or disqualifying responses, data from 289 audiologists across 46 states were analyzed. Additional values suggested by respondents aligned with existing values from best-practice documents; thus, no new values were added as a result of this study. A ranked list of values based on mean order of importance was elicited from U.S.-based audiologists. There was substantial agreement between survey results and the rank order of values found in best-practice audiology documents. A demographic subgroup analysis revealed a broad agreement among audiologists in the rank order of values.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study validated a comprehensive list of values in audiology and identified the rank order of values among a nationally representative sample of audiologists. The findings provide a foundation for future investigations into how these values influence decision-making processes for individuals with hearing difficulty. Addressing values conflicts as potential barriers to hearing health care usage can lead to solutions aligned with values of specific populations, ultimately improving the adoption and effectiveness of hearing health care interventions.</p><p><strong>Supplemental material: </strong>https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.27478149.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Audiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00102","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Previous research documented the values of audiology through a qualitative content analysis of documents representing traditional, best-practice hearing health care. The primary objective of this study was to validate the existing list of audiology values. Through a nationwide survey, this study aimed to elicit the values of practicing audiologists, with a specific focus on the prescription and dispensing of amplification devices, to ensure a comprehensive understanding of their priorities. Additionally, this study sought to identify any values missing from the original list and determine the rank order importance of these values, comparing this to the prioritization of values found in best-practice audiology documents. This comparison aimed to assess the alignment of recommended guidelines and real-world practices in hearing health care.
Design: An online survey was distributed to audiologists to elicit the prioritization of values from hearing health care providers. Participants were tasked with sorting and ranking 18 items, each representing a specific value in hearing health care, based on importance. Respondents were encouraged to suggest and rank the importance of additional values not included in the list. Audiologists were recruited from professional association mailing lists and direct contact. Respondent demographics were representative of U.S. audiologists. Qualitative content analysis was used to interpret values suggested by audiologists. Kendall's rank distance test was used to compare values prioritization between audiologists and best-practice audiology documents.
Results: After filtering out incomplete or disqualifying responses, data from 289 audiologists across 46 states were analyzed. Additional values suggested by respondents aligned with existing values from best-practice documents; thus, no new values were added as a result of this study. A ranked list of values based on mean order of importance was elicited from U.S.-based audiologists. There was substantial agreement between survey results and the rank order of values found in best-practice audiology documents. A demographic subgroup analysis revealed a broad agreement among audiologists in the rank order of values.
Conclusions: This study validated a comprehensive list of values in audiology and identified the rank order of values among a nationally representative sample of audiologists. The findings provide a foundation for future investigations into how these values influence decision-making processes for individuals with hearing difficulty. Addressing values conflicts as potential barriers to hearing health care usage can lead to solutions aligned with values of specific populations, ultimately improving the adoption and effectiveness of hearing health care interventions.
期刊介绍：
Mission: AJA publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles pertaining to clinical audiology methods and issues, and serves as an outlet for discussion of related professional and educational issues and ideas. The journal is an international outlet for research on clinical research pertaining to screening, diagnosis, management and outcomes of hearing and balance disorders as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. The clinical orientation of the journal allows for the publication of reports on audiology as implemented nationally and internationally, including novel clinical procedures, approaches, and cases. AJA seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work.
Scope: The broad field of clinical audiology, including audiologic/aural rehabilitation; balance and balance disorders; cultural and linguistic diversity; detection, diagnosis, prevention, habilitation, rehabilitation, and monitoring of hearing loss; hearing aids, cochlear implants, and hearing-assistive technology; hearing disorders; lifespan perspectives on auditory function; speech perception; and tinnitus.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
