不同助听器患者满意度评价:107例患者的研究

S. Ulusoy, N. Muluk, T. San, C. Cingi
{"title":"不同助听器患者满意度评价:107例患者的研究","authors":"S. Ulusoy, N. Muluk, T. San, C. Cingi","doi":"10.1177/014556131709600103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We retrospectively investigated patient satisfaction with different types of hearing aids in 107 patients—60 males and 47 females, aged 8 to 84 years (mean: 53.8)—with unilateral or bilateral hearing loss, each of whom used two different hearing devices for at least 3 years per device. The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids, Turkish edition (IOI-HA-TR) was used to evaluate satisfaction levels; we also calculated our own total individual subjective satisfaction (TISS) scores. We divided 16 different hearing devices into two types: device 1 and device 2; on average, device 2 had more channels, a lower minimum frequency, and a higher maximum frequency. We found that the IOI-HA-TR scores and TISS scores were higher and usage time was greater during device 2 use, and that there was a positive correlation between IOI-HA-TR and TISS scores. A total of 69 patients (64.5%) used device 2 for more than 8 hours per day, while 38 patients (35.5%) used it for 4 to 8 hours per day during the final 2 weeks of the trial. In contrast, 40 patients (37.4%) used device 1 for more than 8 hours, 50 (46.7%) used it for 4 to 8 hours, and the remaining 17 (15.9%) used it for less than 4 hours; the difference in the duration of use of the two devices was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Younger patients and patients with more education were more satisfied with their devices than were older patients and those who were not as well educated. We conclude that devices with good technologic features such as more channels, a lower minimum frequency, and a higher maximum frequency result in better hearing. Also, based on the age difference that we observed, we recommend that psychological support be provided to older patients with aided hearing to enhance their mental health and quality of life.","PeriodicalId":11842,"journal":{"name":"ENT Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":"E22 - E28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Patient Satisfaction with Different Hearing Aids: A Study of 107 Patients\",\"authors\":\"S. Ulusoy, N. Muluk, T. San, C. Cingi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/014556131709600103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We retrospectively investigated patient satisfaction with different types of hearing aids in 107 patients—60 males and 47 females, aged 8 to 84 years (mean: 53.8)—with unilateral or bilateral hearing loss, each of whom used two different hearing devices for at least 3 years per device. The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids, Turkish edition (IOI-HA-TR) was used to evaluate satisfaction levels; we also calculated our own total individual subjective satisfaction (TISS) scores. We divided 16 different hearing devices into two types: device 1 and device 2; on average, device 2 had more channels, a lower minimum frequency, and a higher maximum frequency. We found that the IOI-HA-TR scores and TISS scores were higher and usage time was greater during device 2 use, and that there was a positive correlation between IOI-HA-TR and TISS scores. A total of 69 patients (64.5%) used device 2 for more than 8 hours per day, while 38 patients (35.5%) used it for 4 to 8 hours per day during the final 2 weeks of the trial. In contrast, 40 patients (37.4%) used device 1 for more than 8 hours, 50 (46.7%) used it for 4 to 8 hours, and the remaining 17 (15.9%) used it for less than 4 hours; the difference in the duration of use of the two devices was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Younger patients and patients with more education were more satisfied with their devices than were older patients and those who were not as well educated. We conclude that devices with good technologic features such as more channels, a lower minimum frequency, and a higher maximum frequency result in better hearing. Also, based on the age difference that we observed, we recommend that psychological support be provided to older patients with aided hearing to enhance their mental health and quality of life.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ENT Journal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"E22 - E28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ENT Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/014556131709600103\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ENT Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/014556131709600103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

我们回顾性调查了107例患者对不同类型助听器的满意度,其中男性60例,女性47例,年龄8至84岁(平均:53.8岁),患有单侧或双侧听力损失,每个患者使用两种不同的助听器至少3年。使用国际助听器结果清单,土耳其版(IOI-HA-TR)来评估满意度;我们还计算了我们自己的个人主观满意度(TISS)总分。我们将16种不同的助听器分为两类:设备1和设备2;平均而言,设备2有更多的通道、更低的最小频率和更高的最大频率。我们发现,在使用设备2期间,IOI-HA-TR评分和TISS评分更高,使用时间更长,并且IOI-HA-TR评分与TISS评分呈正相关。共有69名患者(64.5%)每天使用装置2超过8小时,而38名患者(35.5%)在试验的最后2周每天使用4至8小时。相比之下,40例(37.4%)患者使用器械1超过8小时,50例(46.7%)使用器械1 4 ~ 8小时,其余17例(15.9%)使用器械1不足4小时;两种设备的使用时间差异有统计学意义(p < 0.001)。年轻患者和受教育程度较高的患者比年长患者和受教育程度较低的患者更满意他们的医疗器械。我们的结论是,具有良好技术特征的设备,如更多的通道,更低的最低频率和更高的最高频率,可以带来更好的听力。此外,根据我们观察到的年龄差异,我们建议为老年助听患者提供心理支持,以改善他们的心理健康和生活质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of Patient Satisfaction with Different Hearing Aids: A Study of 107 Patients
We retrospectively investigated patient satisfaction with different types of hearing aids in 107 patients—60 males and 47 females, aged 8 to 84 years (mean: 53.8)—with unilateral or bilateral hearing loss, each of whom used two different hearing devices for at least 3 years per device. The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids, Turkish edition (IOI-HA-TR) was used to evaluate satisfaction levels; we also calculated our own total individual subjective satisfaction (TISS) scores. We divided 16 different hearing devices into two types: device 1 and device 2; on average, device 2 had more channels, a lower minimum frequency, and a higher maximum frequency. We found that the IOI-HA-TR scores and TISS scores were higher and usage time was greater during device 2 use, and that there was a positive correlation between IOI-HA-TR and TISS scores. A total of 69 patients (64.5%) used device 2 for more than 8 hours per day, while 38 patients (35.5%) used it for 4 to 8 hours per day during the final 2 weeks of the trial. In contrast, 40 patients (37.4%) used device 1 for more than 8 hours, 50 (46.7%) used it for 4 to 8 hours, and the remaining 17 (15.9%) used it for less than 4 hours; the difference in the duration of use of the two devices was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Younger patients and patients with more education were more satisfied with their devices than were older patients and those who were not as well educated. We conclude that devices with good technologic features such as more channels, a lower minimum frequency, and a higher maximum frequency result in better hearing. Also, based on the age difference that we observed, we recommend that psychological support be provided to older patients with aided hearing to enhance their mental health and quality of life.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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