Dataset Information

Perception and expectations of personal sound amplification products in Korea: A hospital-based, multi-center, cross-sectional survey.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The objective of this study was to investigate current perception and expected price of personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) and to analyze influencing factors through multi-center hospital-based surveys of outpatients, caregivers, and hearing experts.

Methods

A multi-center exploratory cross-sectional study was conducted in two groups of respondents with two separate surveys: 1) a perception survey of patients and caregivers who visited an otorhinolaryngology outpatient clinic in 5 general hospitals and 2) an opinion survey of hearing specialists about the expected price of PSAPs. A total of 197 outpatient visitors responded to the perception survey, and 42 hearing specialists responded to the opinion survey.

Results

Overall perception score (18 questions) was 3.04 (95% CI, 3.00-3.09). When 5 categories of perception (knowledge, needs, cost, expectation, and information categories) were analyzed, cost and expectation showed the highest scores of 3.33 (95% CI, 3.21-3.44) and 3.33 (95% CI, 3.27-3.40), respectively, and needs showed the lowest score of 2.23 (95% CI, 1.97-2.49). The ≥ 60-year-old group showed significantly higher perception of PSAPs (P = 0.002), and the individuals with greater severity of subjective hearing loss showed significantly higher perception of PSAPs (P = 0.002). The expected price of PSAPs of the outpatient visitors was 933.9 USD (95% CI, 811.9-1056.0) per ear. Mean expected price of PSAPs of hearing specialists was 291.3 USD (95% CI, 238.2-344.3) per ear.

Conclusion

The perception rate of PSAPs was very low, and there was a discrepancy in the expected price of PSAPs between patients/caregivers and hearing experts. Hearing specialists should make effort to improve perception of PSAPs.

SUBMITTER: Han JS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9135199 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Perception and expectations of personal sound amplification products in Korea: A hospital-based, multi-center, cross-sectional survey.

Han Jae Sang JS Kim Yeonji Y Park Moo Kyun MK Song Jae-Jun JJ Moon Il Joon IJ Lee Woojoo W Cho Young Sang YS Seo Jae-Hyun JH Park Yong-Ho YH

PloS one 20220526 5

<h4>Objectives</h4>The objective of this study was to investigate current perception and expected price of personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) and to analyze influencing factors through multi-center hospital-based surveys of outpatients, caregivers, and hearing experts.<h4>Methods</h4>A multi-center exploratory cross-sectional study was conducted in two groups of respondents with two separate surveys: 1) a perception survey of patients and caregivers who visited an otorhinolaryngology ...[more]

PMID: 35617328

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe aging population is prone to hearing loss, which has several adverse effects on quality of life, including difficulty following conversations in noisy environments. Personal Sound Amplification Products (PSAPs) are a less expensive, over-the-counter alternative to traditional, more expensive hearing aids. Although some studies have shown that PSAPs can mitigate hearing loss, the literature generally only addresses group differences without considering interindividual variability. This study aimed to 1) determine how PSAPs affect listening effort and speech perception in noise and 2) measure interindividual variability and identify contributing demographic and health factors.DesignWe used a cross-over design in which all participants were assigned to each condition.ParticipantsTwenty-eight adults aged 60 to 87 years with normal hearing and mild hearing loss fulfilled the study requirements.InterventionIn one session, speech-in-noise perception tasks were performed without PSAPs, and in the other, the tasks were performed with bilateral PSAPs. The two sessions were separated by one week, and the order of the sessions was balanced across participants.Main outcome measuresIn both sessions, participants performed the Quick speech-in-noise test and a word discrimination task in noise, in which their self-reported listening effort was measured.ResultsPSAPs use improved speech perception in noise in both tasks and reduced listening effort. There was considerable variability between individuals, with approximately 60-70% of participants showing benefit. Age, hearing and cognitive status were significant predictors of the benefits.ConclusionNot all individuals may benefit from the effect of PSAPs to the same extent at their first use, and this depends on specific health and demographic factors, particularly age, hearing, and cognitive status. These results underscore the importance of demographic and health factors in assessing the benefits of hearing amplification in older adults.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05076045.

Project description:BackgroundHearing loss is a common morbidity that requires a hearing device to improve quality of life and prevent sequelae, such as dementia, depression falls, and cardiovascular disease. However, conventional hearing aids have some limitations, including poor accessibility and unaffordability. Consequently, personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) are considered a potential first-line alternative remedy for patients with hearing loss. The main objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of PSAPs and conventional hearing aids regarding hearing benefits in patients with hearing loss.MethodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Five databases and reference lists were searched from inception to January 12, 2022. Studies including randomised, controlled trials; nonrandomised, controlled trials; or observational studies comparing PSAPs and hearing aids with regard to hearing gain performance (e.g., speech intelligence) were considered eligible. The review was registered prospectively on PROSPERO (CRD42021267187).FindingsOf 599 records identified in the preliminary search, five studies were included in the review and meta-analysis. A total of 124 patients were divided into the PSAP group and the conventional hearing aid group. Five studies including seven groups compared differences for speech intelligence in the signal-noise ratio (SNR) on the hearing in noise test (HINT) between PSAPs and conventional hearing aids. The pooled results showed nonsignificant differences in speech intelligence (SMD, 0.14; 95% CI, -0.19 to 0.47; P = .41; I 2=65%), sound quality (SMD, -0.37; 95% CI, -0.87 to 0.13; P = .15; I 2=77%) and listening effort (SMD 0.02; 95% CI, -0.24 to 0.29; P = .86; I 2=32%). Nonsignificant results were also observed in subsequent analyses after excluding patients with moderately severe hearing loss. Complete sensitivity analyses with all of the possible combinations suggested nonsignificant results in most of the comparisons between PSAPs and conventional hearing aids.InterpretationPSAPs are potentially beneficial as conventional hearing aids are in patients with hearing loss. The different features among PSAPs should be considered for patients indicated for hearing devices.FundingThis work was supported by grants from Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST-10-2622-8-075-001) and Veterans General Hospitals and University System of Taiwan Joint Research Program (VGHUST111-G6-11-2 and VGHUST111c-140).

Project description:ObjectiveTo identify patient expectations regarding chaplain visitation, characteristics of patients who want to be visited by a chaplain, and what patients deem important when a chaplain visits.Participants and methodsThree weeks after discharge, 4500 eligible medical and surgical patients from hospitals in Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida were surveyed by mail to collect demographic information and expectations regarding chaplain visitation. The survey was conducted during the following time periods: Minnesota participants, April 6 until April 25, 2006; Arizona participants, October 16, 2008, until January 13, 2009; Florida participants, October 16, 2008, until January 20, 2009. Categorical variables were summarized with frequencies or percentages. Associations between responses and site were examined using χ(2) tests. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the likelihood of wanting chaplain visitation on the basis of patient demographics and perceived importance of reasons for chaplain visitation.ResultsAbout one-third of those surveyed responded from each site. Most were male, married, aged 56 years or older, and Protestant or Catholic. Of the respondents, nearly 70% reported wanting chaplain visitation, 43% were visited, and 81% indicated that visitation was important. The strongest predictor of wanting chaplain visitation was denomination vs no indicated religious affiliation (Catholic: odds ratio [OR], 8.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.49-14.64; P<.001; evangelical Protestant: OR, 4.95; 95% CI, 2.74-8.91; P<.001; mainline Protestant: OR, 4.34; 95% CI, 2.58-7.29; P<.001). Being female was a weak predictor (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.05-2.09; P=.03), as was site. Among the reasons given by respondents for wanting chaplain visitation, the most important were that chaplains served as reminders of God's care and presence (OR, 4.37; 95% CI, 2.58-7.40; P<.001) and that they provided prayer or scripture reading (OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.53-4.20; P<.001).ConclusionThe results of this study suggest the importance medical and surgical patients place on being visited by a chaplain while they are hospitalized. Those who valued chaplains because they reminded them of God's care and presence and/or because they prayed or read scripture with them were more likely to desire a visit. Our results also suggest that being religiously affiliated is a very strong predictor of wanting chaplain visitation.

Project description:ImportanceHearing loss is a highly prevalent condition with multiple negative associated outcomes, yet few persons with hearing loss have hearing aids (HAs). Personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) could be an alternative low-cost solution to HAs, but data are lacking on the performance of PSAPs.ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical efficacy of a PSAP by comparing its performance with that of a basic HA and a premium HA in participants with mild, moderate, and moderately severe hearing impairment.Design, setting, and participantsA prospective, single-institution cohort study was performed with a total of 56 participants, including 19 with mild hearing loss, 20 with moderate hearing loss, and 17 with moderately severe hearing loss. All participants underwent 4 clinical hearing tests with each of the PSAP, basic HA, and premium HA, and all completed an evaluative questionnaire.InterventionsAll hearing devices (PSAP, basic HA, and premium HA) were applied by a clinician to prevent bias and order effects; participants were blinded to the device in use, and sequence of devices was randomized.Main outcomes and measuresThe study used the Korean version of the hearing in noise test, the speech intelligibility in noise test, listening effort measurement using a dual-task paradigm, pupillometry, and a self-rating questionnaire regarding sound quality and preference. These tests were administered under the following 4 hearing conditions: unaided hearing, use of PSAP, use of basic HA, and use of premium HA.ResultsThe study included 56 participants with a mean age of 56 years (interquartile range, 48-59 years); 29 (52%) were women. In the mild and moderate hearing loss groups, there was no meaningful difference between PSAP, basic HA, and premium HA for speech perception (Cohen d = 0.06-1.05), sound quality (Cohen d = 0.06-0.71), listening effort (Cohen d = 0.10-0.92), and user preference (PSAP, 41%; basic HA, 28%; premium HA, 31%). However, for the patients with moderately severe hearing loss, the premium HA had better performance across most tests (Cohen d = 0.60-1.59), and 70% of participants preferred to use the premium HA.Conclusions and relevanceThe results indicate that basic and premium HAs were not superior to the PSAP in patients with mild to moderate hearing impairment, which suggests that PSAPs might be used as an alternative to HAs in these patient populations. However, if hearing loss is more severe, then HAs, especially premium HAs, should be considered as an option to manage hearing loss.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare personnel (HCP) are at risk of being exposed to or transmitting infections in hospitals, and vaccination against vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) is a well-known preventive strategy. Vaccination against influenza, hepatitis B virus, measles-mumps-rubella, varicella, and pertussis is recommended for HCP. However, there is no information on the current status of hospitals' vaccination policies for HCP in Korea.MethodsWe conducted a nationwide survey on hospital vaccination policies and barriers to implementing recommended vaccination programs in 2018. The online survey questionnaire was distributed to 652 hospitals, and 200 of them responded.ResultsOf the 200 surveyed hospitals, 151 (75.5%) conducted a pre-employment screening program for at least one VPD, and 196 (98%) had vaccination programs that included at least one vaccine. Influenza vaccine was most commonly included in their programs (97.5%, n = 195), followed by hepatitis B vaccines (69%, n = 138). However, < 25% of the hospitals included other vaccines in their policies (measles-mumps-rubella, 24.5%; varicella, 18.5%; pertussis, 11%). Only 13 hospitals (6.5%) included the five recommended vaccines for HCP in their policies. Influenza vaccination coverage had a mean of 89.9% and was significantly higher in hospitals fully funding the vaccination cost (91.8% vs. 80.4%, P < 0.001). Among hospitals funding influenza vaccines, the coverage was lower in hospitals with ≥ 700 beds (-6.5%, P = 0.003). Hospitals' financial burden was the most important barrier to implementing vaccination polices as recommended (78.6%, 121/154), followed by lack of awareness (21%) or campaign (21%) and lack of leadership (17%).ConclusionDespite the recommendations on vaccination for HCP, the vaccination policies for HCP differ in hospitals and appear to be insufficient to protect HCP and prevent nosocomial transmission. Strong leadership of each hospital to protect HCP and financial support from the government are required to implement appropriate vaccination policies in hospitals.

Dataset Information

Perception and expectations of personal sound amplification products in Korea: A hospital-based, multi-center, cross-sectional survey.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Perception and expectations of personal sound amplification products in Korea: A hospital-based, multi-center, cross-sectional survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets