Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36960979›Full record

ArticleAudiology research2023

Hearing Healthcare Professionals' Views about Over-The-Counter (OTC) Hearing Aids: Analysis of Retrospective Survey Data.

Vinaya Manchaiah, Anu Sharma, Hansapani Rodrigo, Abram Bailey, Karina C De Sousa, De Wet Swanepoel

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Audiology research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Usability and Performance of Self-Fitting Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2025
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Vinaya ManchaiahDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO 80045, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1254-8407
Anu SharmaBrain and Behavior Laboratory, Department of Speech Language and Hearing Sciences, Institute of Cognitive Science, Center for Neuroscience, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80305, USA.
Hansapani RodrigoVirtual Hearing Lab, Collaborative Initiative between the University of Colorado and the University of Pretoria, Aurora, CO 80045, USA.
Abram BaileyHearing Tracker Inc, Austin, TX 40702, USA.
Karina C De SousaVirtual Hearing Lab, Collaborative Initiative between the University of Colorado and the University of Pretoria, Aurora, CO 80045, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1742-1613
De Wet SwanepoelDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO 80045, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8313-1636
Ear Science Institute Australia · AUThe University of Texas Rio Grande Valley · USUniversity of Colorado Boulder · USUniversity of Colorado Hospital · USUniversity of Pretoria · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over-the-counter hearing aids have been available to consumers in the US since 17 October 2022 following a ruling by the Food and Drug Administration. However, their reception by hearing healthcare professionals (HHP) has been mixed, and concerns have been expressed by many HHPs. The aim of this study was to examine the concerns that HHPs have towards over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids. The study used a retrospective survey design. The survey data of HHPs (n = 730) was obtained from Hearing Tracker. A 22-item structured questionnaire was administered using a Question Scout platform. Descriptive analyses examined reported areas of concern and a Fisher's exact test examined the relationship between demographics and responses. A cluster analysis with partitioning around medoids (PAM) was used to identify a sub-group of participants based on responses. Nearly half of HHPs who participated reported that they will support patients with OTC hearing aids purchased elsewhere, whereas a quarter reported that they will sell OTC hearing aids in their clinic or website. HHPs expressed over 70% agreement in 'concern' statements in 14 of the 17 items. Issues about safety, counseling, and audiological care were the key concerns expressed by HHPs about OTC hearing aids. Some demographics (i.e., profession, primary position) were associated with responses to some statements. Two groups were identified based on the responses to concern statements. The HHPs in the first cluster 'OTC averse' (51%) agreed on all the 17 concern statements, whereas the second cluster 'OTC apprehensive' (49%) had some items rated as disagree (i.e., consumers will give up on amplification) and neither agree nor disagree (i.e., do not provide good value, warranties and return periods will be worse), and remaining items were rated as agree. OTC hearing aids were initiated to improve affordability, accessibility, and hearing aid uptake and are currently a rapidly emerging category of hearing devices. Overall, the results of the current study indicate that HHPs have serious concerns about OTC hearing aids. HHP concerns cited in this study provide useful feedback to stakeholders (e.g., HHP professional agencies, FDA, industry, and insurance payers) involved in improving OTC hearing aid implementation.

Indexed as

audiologistsdirect-to-consumer hearing deviceshearing aidshearing healthcare professionalsover-the-counter hearing aidsprofessional perspectives

Identifiers

PMID36960979
PMCPMC10037636
OpenAlexW4322774858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read12
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.