Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26565785›Full record

Trial reportEar and hearing

A Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Benefits of a Multimedia Educational Program for First-Time Hearing Aid Users.

Melanie Ferguson, Marian Brandreth, William Brassington, Paul Leighton, Heather Wharrad

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03136718 (The Feasibility of mHealth Technologies to Improve Hearing Aid Use and Benefit in First-time Hearing Aid Users), which is not on this map. Cited by 58 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03136718 completednot on this map

The Feasibility of mHealth Technologies to Improve Hearing Aid Use and Benefit in First-time Hearing Aid Users

TypeobservationalSponsorNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustRan2017 to 2018Enrolled94ConditionsHearing LossArmsMobile-enabled RLOs (mRLOs)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 143 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Hearing aids for mild to moderate hearing loss in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  4. Interventions to improve hearing aid use in adult auditory rehabilitation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Melanie Ferguson1NIHR Nottingham Hearing Biomedical Research Unit, Otology and Hearing Group, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom; 2Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom; 3School of Medicine, and 4School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
Marian Brandreth
William Brassington
Paul Leighton
Heather Wharrad
University of Nottingham · GBNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0909-20294
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aims of this study were to (1) develop a series of short interactive videos (or reusable learning objects [RLOs]) covering a broad range of practical and psychosocial issues relevant to the auditory rehabilitation for first-time hearing aid users; (2) establish the accessibility, take-up, acceptability and adherence of the RLOs; and (3) assess the benefits and cost-effectiveness of the RLOs.

designThe study was a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial with two arms. The intervention group (RLO+, n = 103) received the RLOs plus standard clinical service including hearing aid(s) and counseling, and the waitlist control group (RLO-, n = 100) received standard clinical service only. The effectiveness of the RLOs was assessed 6-weeks posthearing aid fitting. Seven RLOs (total duration 1 hr) were developed using a participatory, community of practice approach involving hearing aid users and audiologists. RLOs included video clips, illustrations, animations, photos, sounds and testimonials, and all were subtitled. RLOs were delivered through DVD for TV (50.6%) and PC (15.2%), or via the internet (32.9%).

resultsRLO take-up was 78%. Adherence overall was at least 67%, and 97% in those who attended the 6-week follow-up. Half the participants watched the RLOs two or more times, suggesting self-management of their hearing loss, hearing aids, and communication. The RLOs were rated as highly useful and the majority of participants agreed the RLOs were enjoyable, improved their confidence and were preferable to written information. Postfitting, there was no significant between-group difference in the primary outcome measure, overall hearing aid use. However, there was significantly greater hearing aid use in the RLO+ group for suboptimal users. Furthermore, the RLO+ group had significantly better knowledge of practical and psychosocial issues, and significantly better practical hearing aid skills than the RLO- group.

conclusionsThe RLOs were shown to be beneficial to first-time hearing aid users across a range of quantitative and qualitative measures. This study provides evidence to suggest that the RLOs may provide valuable learning and educational support for first-time hearing aid users and could be used to supplement clinical rehabilitation practice.

Indexed as

Hearing AidsMultimediaAgedAged, 80 and overAudiometry, Pure-ToneAudiovisual AidsFemaleHearing LossHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient CompliancePatient Education as TopicPatient SatisfactionSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID26565785
PMCPMC4764016
OpenAlexW2399494870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.