Satisfaction and speech perception were frequent secondary outcomes .
There was diversity in measures used to report patient outcomes .
Outcome categories other than patient health status and behavior were rarely reported .
This review has highlighted considerable diversity in patient-reported outcome measurements in r and omized control trials in the context of adult auditory rehabilitation .
OBJECTIVES This review documented the range and nature of reported outcome measures in the context of adult auditory rehabilitative research .
Audiologist-Driven Versus Patient-Driven Fine Tuning of Hearing Instruments
Two methods of fine tuning the initial setting s of hearing aids were compared : An audiologist-driven approach––using real ear measurements and a patient-driven fine-tuning approach––using feedback from real-life situations . The patient-driven fine tuning was conducted by employing the Amplifit ® II system using audiovideo clips . The audiologist-driven fine tuning was based on the NAL-NL1 prescription rule . Both setting s were compared using the same hearing aids in two 6-week trial periods following a r and omized blinded cross-over design . After each trial period , the setting s were evaluated by insertion-gain measurements . Performance was evaluated by speech tests in quiet , in noise , and in time-reversed speech , presented at 0 ° and with spatially separated sound sources . Subjective results were evaluated using extensive question naires and audiovisual video clips . A total of 73 participants were included . On average , higher gain values were found for the audiologist-driven setting s than for the patient-driven setting s , especially at 1000 and 2000 Hz . Better objective performance was obtained for the audiologist-driven setting s for speech perception in quiet and in time-reversed speech . This was supported by better scores on a number of subjective judgments and in the subjective ratings of video clips . The perception of loud sounds scored higher than when patient-driven , but the overall preference was in favor of the audiologist-driven setting s for 67 % of the participants
Satisfaction and speech perception were frequent secondary outcomes .
There was diversity in measures used to report patient outcomes .
Outcome categories other than patient health status and behavior were rarely reported .
This review has highlighted considerable diversity in patient-reported outcome measurements in r and omized control trials in the context of adult auditory rehabilitation .
OBJECTIVES This review documented the range and nature of reported outcome measures in the context of adult auditory rehabilitative research .