폐쇄형(Closed Fit) 보청기를 착용하는 난청환자들의 RIC 보청기의 비교체험에 관한 예비 연구
Comparative Analyses between Receiver in the Canal Hearing Aids and Closed Fit Hearing Aids: Preliminary Study
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background and Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the degree of satisfaction of the patients, hearing loss type and severity, and satisfactory and unsatisfactory factors between closed fit hearing aid (HA) and receiver in the canal (RIC) HA. Subjects and Method Seventeen patients with hearing loss participated in this study. Allpatients had used closed fit HAs prior to the study, with the ratio of those using in the canal (ITC) types and completely in the canal (CIC) types being 4:13. After a 2-week trial period of using RIC HAs, patients were evaluated for their satisfaction of using RIC HAs by filling out the questionnaire on the Korean version International Outcome Inventory for hearing aids (K-IOI-HA). Results The visual analogue scale (VAS) score of closed fit HA was higher in the RIC-HAdissatisfied group (≤5, n=8) than in the RIC-HA-satisfied group (＞5, n=9). The K-IOI-HA score of closed fit HA was higher than that of RIC HA in the RIC-HA-dissatisfied group and similar in the RIC-HA-satisfied group. Audiologically, air conduction and bone conduction thresholds at 500 Hz were lower in the RIC-HA-satisfied group than in the RIC-HA-dissatisfied group. In addition, the VAS score of RIC HA was negatively correlated with air and bone conduction thresholds and the K-IOI-HA score of RIC HA was positively correlated with speech discrimination score, whereas the VAS and K-IOI-HA scores of closed fit HA were not. Conclusion Among the patients with closed fit HA, some patients indicated RIC HA to besuitable and showed intention to change. The HA should be prescribed firstly based on audiologic criteria, which could increase the subjective satisfaction and prevent poor compliance due to incongruity.
Abstract
Background and Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the degree of satisfaction of the patients, hearing loss type and severity, and satisfactory and unsatisfactory factors between closed fit hearing aid (HA) and receiver in the canal (RIC) HA. Subjects and Method Seventeen patients with hearing loss participated in this study. Allpatients had used closed fit HAs prior to the study, with the ratio of those using in the canal (ITC) types and completely in the canal (CIC) types being 4:13. After a 2-week trial period of using RIC HAs, patients were evaluated for their satisfaction of using RIC HAs by filling out the questionnaire on the Korean version International Outcome Inventory for hearing aids (K-IOI-HA). Results The visual analogue scale (VAS) score of closed fit HA was higher in the RIC-HAdissatisfied group (≤5, n=8) than in the RIC-HA-satisfied group (＞5, n=9). The K-IOI-HA score of closed fit HA was higher than that of RIC HA in the RIC-HA-dissatisfied group and similar in the RIC-HA-satisfied group. Audiologically, air conduction and bone conduction thresholds at 500 Hz were lower in the RIC-HA-satisfied group than in the RIC-HA-dissatisfied group. In addition, the VAS score of RIC HA was negatively correlated with air and bone conduction thresholds and the K-IOI-HA score of RIC HA was positively correlated with speech discrimination score, whereas the VAS and K-IOI-HA scores of closed fit HA were not. Conclusion Among the patients with closed fit HA, some patients indicated RIC HA to besuitable and showed intention to change. The HA should be prescribed firstly based on audiologic criteria, which could increase the subjective satisfaction and prevent poor compliance due to incongruity.
참고문헌 (15)
- Metselaar M, "Comparative studies on hearing aid selection and fitting procedures:a review of the literature", Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol, 265(1), pp.21~29 (2008)
- Kuk F, "Hearing aid selection and BTEs: choosing among various “open-ear” and “receiver-in-canal” options", Hear Rev, 15(3), pp.22~36 (2008)
- Mueller HG, "Introduction to Audiologic Rehabilitation", pp.31~76 (2006), Allyn & Bacon
- Wimmer V, "The occlusion effect from earmolds", Hear Instrum, 37(12), pp.19~57 (1986)
- Hoen M, "Hearing aids with external receivers: can they offer power and cosmetics?", Hear J, 60(1), pp.28~34 (2007)
- Nemes J, "Open-canal hearing aids: a revolution in the making?", Hear J, 61(9), pp.19~24 (2008)
- Kiessling J, "Open fittings: something new or old hat?", Proceedings of the Hearing Care for Adults First International Conference, pp.217~226 (2006)
- Cox RM, "Translations of the international outcome inventory for hearing aids (IOI-HA)", Int J Audiol, 41(1), pp.3~26 (2002)
- 추호석, "한국어판 International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids(IOI-HA)의 표준화: 타당도 및 신뢰도 검증", 대한이비인후과학회지 두경부외과학, 55(1), pp.20~25 (2012), 대한이비인후과학회
- Hallenbeck SA, "Thin-tube and receiver-incanal devices:there is positive feedback on both!", Hear J, 61(1), pp.28~34 (2008)
- Kochkin S, "MarkeTrak III identifies key factors in determining customer satisfaction", Hear J, 45(8), pp.39~44 (1993)
- 장영수, "보청기 착용 환자에서 MarkeTrak 기반 설문지를 이용하여 평가한 만족도 조사", 대한이비인후과학회지 두경부외과학, 57(5), pp.304~313 (2014), 대한이비인후과학회[DOI]
- Kochkin S, "MarkeTrak VIII: customer satisfaction with hearing aids is slowly increasing", Hear J, 63(1), pp.19~27 (2010)
- Dillon H, "Hearing aids", pp.336~353 (2012), Boomerang Press
- Taylor B, "Real-world satisfaction and benefit with opencanal fittings", Hear J, 59(11), pp.74~82 (2006)