Disparities in Hearing Aid Use Among Those With Hearing Loss in Rural and Urban Settings

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Paul Johnson, Emmanuel Garcia Morales, Nicholas Reed
{"title":"Disparities in Hearing Aid Use Among Those With Hearing Loss in Rural and Urban Settings","authors":"Paul Johnson,&nbsp;Emmanuel Garcia Morales,&nbsp;Nicholas Reed","doi":"10.1002/lio2.70125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To investigate potential disparities in hearing aid use among urban and rural populations with hearing loss.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Study Design</h3>\n \n <p>Cross-sectional analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We used pooled data from the 2017 and 2018 rounds of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS). Our analytic sample was restricted to 8107 participants with hearing loss (those who reported little to a lot of trouble hearing) and with a full set of covariates. Multivariate logistic regression models for the probability of hearing aid use were estimated using a participant's place of residence (rural/urban) and household income relative to the Federal Poverty Level (low and middle income ≤ 200% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL); high income &gt; 200% FPL) as main exposures.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In models using place of residence as the main exposure, we found no statistically significant difference in hearing aid use between rural and urban populations. In models combining place of residence with income, we found that respondents in the rural high-income group were at the highest odds for hearing aid use (odds ratio (OR): 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.52–2.59) when compared to the rural low and middle-income group and, similarly, for the urban high-income (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.26–1.96) and urban low and middle-income groups (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.02–1.69).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>There are potential interactions of metro status and income regarding hearing aid use that are more pronounced in rural populations. This might allow policymakers to target interventions for hearing loss to rural and low-income populations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Level of Evidence</h3>\n \n <p>3</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48529,"journal":{"name":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","volume":"10 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lio2.70125","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lio2.70125","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To investigate potential disparities in hearing aid use among urban and rural populations with hearing loss.

Study Design

Cross-sectional analysis.

Methods

We used pooled data from the 2017 and 2018 rounds of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS). Our analytic sample was restricted to 8107 participants with hearing loss (those who reported little to a lot of trouble hearing) and with a full set of covariates. Multivariate logistic regression models for the probability of hearing aid use were estimated using a participant's place of residence (rural/urban) and household income relative to the Federal Poverty Level (low and middle income ≤ 200% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL); high income > 200% FPL) as main exposures.

Results

In models using place of residence as the main exposure, we found no statistically significant difference in hearing aid use between rural and urban populations. In models combining place of residence with income, we found that respondents in the rural high-income group were at the highest odds for hearing aid use (odds ratio (OR): 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.52–2.59) when compared to the rural low and middle-income group and, similarly, for the urban high-income (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.26–1.96) and urban low and middle-income groups (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.02–1.69).

Conclusions

There are potential interactions of metro status and income regarding hearing aid use that are more pronounced in rural populations. This might allow policymakers to target interventions for hearing loss to rural and low-income populations.

Level of Evidence

3

Abstract Image

农村和城市听力损失者在助听器使用方面的差异
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
245
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信