Social Predictors of Hearing Aid Purchase: Do Stigma, Social Network Composition, Social Support, and Loneliness Matter?

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Gurjit Singh, Huiwen Goy, Kay Wright-Whyte, Alison L Chasteen, M Kathleen Pichora-Fuller
{"title":"Social Predictors of Hearing Aid Purchase: Do Stigma, Social Network Composition, Social Support, and Loneliness Matter?","authors":"Gurjit Singh, Huiwen Goy, Kay Wright-Whyte, Alison L Chasteen, M Kathleen Pichora-Fuller","doi":"10.1097/AUD.0000000000001656","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the extent to which four different social factors (stigma, social network composition, social support, and loneliness) predict the purchase of hearing aids in a sample of older adults with impaired hearing who had not previously tried hearing aids and visited a hearing care clinic for the first time.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Data collection took place across 130 different hearing care clinics (Connect Hearing) in Canada. A total of 4630 participants were recruited for the study from notices in the waiting rooms of the clinics or by advertising in local newspapers. The final sample consisted of 753 adults (mean age = 69.2 years; SD = 9.0; 57.4% male) who were all recommended to try hearing aids. Clinical records were tracked for a minimum of 3 months and a maximum of 15 months after the appointment to determine if they obtained hearing aids. Participants completed a 56-item questionnaire before their appointment and then experienced standard care at the clinic (i.e., hearing evaluation, hearing rehabilitation if desired, etc.). Key factors assessed by the questionnaire included stigma related to age, stigma related to hearing aids, social network composition, perceived levels of social support, loneliness, self-reported hearing disability, and demographic information.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were analyzed using two methods, a penalized logistic regression and a classification tree analysis, to identify statistical predictors and meaningful clinical cutoff scores, respectively. Both models found that hearing aid adoption was best predicted by being older and having greater self-reported hearing disability. Hearing aid uptake was also predicted by social factors, but these predictors were less robust than age and self-reported hearing disability. Participants were more likely to adopt hearing aids if they reported less hearing aid stigma and had a social network that included at least 1 person with a suspected hearing loss. Loneliness and social support did not predict hearing aid adoption. Some model-specific variables also emerged.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Using a prospective research design, the study provides novel quantitative evidence of the role of different social factors regarding the uptake of hearing aids. The research findings may be used to better identify individuals more and less likely to obtain hearing aids, inform hearing rehabilitation, and motivate the use of interventions designed to lessen the impact of stigma on hearing rehabilitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":55172,"journal":{"name":"Ear and Hearing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ear and Hearing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000001656","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the extent to which four different social factors (stigma, social network composition, social support, and loneliness) predict the purchase of hearing aids in a sample of older adults with impaired hearing who had not previously tried hearing aids and visited a hearing care clinic for the first time.

Design: Data collection took place across 130 different hearing care clinics (Connect Hearing) in Canada. A total of 4630 participants were recruited for the study from notices in the waiting rooms of the clinics or by advertising in local newspapers. The final sample consisted of 753 adults (mean age = 69.2 years; SD = 9.0; 57.4% male) who were all recommended to try hearing aids. Clinical records were tracked for a minimum of 3 months and a maximum of 15 months after the appointment to determine if they obtained hearing aids. Participants completed a 56-item questionnaire before their appointment and then experienced standard care at the clinic (i.e., hearing evaluation, hearing rehabilitation if desired, etc.). Key factors assessed by the questionnaire included stigma related to age, stigma related to hearing aids, social network composition, perceived levels of social support, loneliness, self-reported hearing disability, and demographic information.

Results: Data were analyzed using two methods, a penalized logistic regression and a classification tree analysis, to identify statistical predictors and meaningful clinical cutoff scores, respectively. Both models found that hearing aid adoption was best predicted by being older and having greater self-reported hearing disability. Hearing aid uptake was also predicted by social factors, but these predictors were less robust than age and self-reported hearing disability. Participants were more likely to adopt hearing aids if they reported less hearing aid stigma and had a social network that included at least 1 person with a suspected hearing loss. Loneliness and social support did not predict hearing aid adoption. Some model-specific variables also emerged.

Conclusions: Using a prospective research design, the study provides novel quantitative evidence of the role of different social factors regarding the uptake of hearing aids. The research findings may be used to better identify individuals more and less likely to obtain hearing aids, inform hearing rehabilitation, and motivate the use of interventions designed to lessen the impact of stigma on hearing rehabilitation.

助听器购买的社会预测因素:羞耻感、社会网络构成、社会支持和孤独感重要吗?
目的:本研究的目的是评估四种不同的社会因素(耻辱感、社会网络构成、社会支持和孤独感)对听力受损的老年人购买助听器的影响程度,这些老年人之前没有尝试过助听器,并且第一次去了听力保健诊所。设计:数据收集在加拿大130个不同的听力保健诊所(Connect hearing)进行。共有4630名参与者从诊所候诊室的通知或当地报纸的广告中招募。最终样本包括753名成年人(平均年龄= 69.2岁;Sd = 9.0;57.4%男性),均被建议尝试助听器。临床记录在预约后至少跟踪3个月,最多跟踪15个月,以确定他们是否获得助听器。参与者在预约前完成了一份56项的问卷,然后在诊所体验了标准的护理(即听力评估,如果需要的话,听力康复等)。问卷评估的关键因素包括与年龄相关的耻辱感、与助听器相关的耻辱感、社会网络构成、感知到的社会支持水平、孤独感、自我报告的听力残疾和人口统计信息。结果:采用惩罚逻辑回归和分类树分析两种方法对数据进行分析,分别确定统计预测因子和有意义的临床截止评分。两种模型都发现,年龄较大和自述听力障碍程度较高的人最能预测助听器的采用情况。社会因素也可以预测助听器的使用情况,但这些预测因素不如年龄和自我报告的听力残疾那么可靠。如果参与者报告的助听器耻辱较少,并且社交网络中至少有一个疑似听力损失的人,那么他们更有可能采用助听器。孤独和社会支持并不能预测助听器的采用。还出现了一些特定于模型的变量。结论:采用前瞻性研究设计,本研究为不同社会因素对助听器使用的作用提供了新的定量证据。研究结果可用于更好地识别更可能或更不可能获得助听器的个体,为听力康复提供信息,并激励使用旨在减轻耻辱感对听力康复的影响的干预措施。
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
Ear and Hearing
Ear and Hearing 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
10.80%
发文量
207
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: From the basic science of hearing and balance disorders to auditory electrophysiology to amplification and the psychological factors of hearing loss, Ear and Hearing covers all aspects of auditory and vestibular disorders. This multidisciplinary journal consolidates the various factors that contribute to identification, remediation, and audiologic and vestibular rehabilitation. It is the one journal that serves the diverse interest of all members of this professional community -- otologists, audiologists, educators, and to those involved in the design, manufacture, and distribution of amplification systems. The original articles published in the journal focus on assessment, diagnosis, and management of auditory and vestibular disorders.
×
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