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 .
Development and validation of the effectiveness of [corrected] auditory rehabilitation scale.
OBJECTIVE To develop a new scale of hearing-related function and quality of life in patients with hearing aids that addresses overlooked concerns , such as hearing-aid comfort , convenience , and cosmetic appearance , that may influence hearing-aid adherence while maintaining brevity and sensitivity to clinical change . DESIGN Prospect i ve , multicenter instrument validation . SETTING Four diverse sites in Washington State , including 2 private practice s , 1 university setting , and 1 Veterans Affairs hospital . PATIENTS Seventy-eight patients with hearing aids . INTERVENTIONS We created 2 modules in the Effectiveness of Auditory Rehabilitation ( EAR ) scale . The first module ( Inner EAR ) covers intrinsic hearing issues such as hearing in quiet and hearing in noise and is administered both before and after treatment . The second module ( Outer EAR ) covers extrinsic ( hearing-aid related ) issues such as comfort , appearance , and convenience and is administered after hearing-aid fitting . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Both scales were developed and vali date d in 3 stages . Stage 1 used a qualitative approach from multiple data sources to develop preliminary instruments . Stage 2 used approaches from classic test theory to reduce the number of items and psychometrically vali date the instruments . Stage 3 examined the responsiveness or sensitivity to clinical change . RESULTS A 10-item Inner EAR module and a 10-item Outer EAR module were created and vali date d. Internal consistency of individual domains ( Cronbach alpha = 0.85 and 0.72 , respectively ) and test-retest reliability ( intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.76 and 0.81 , respectively ) were excellent . Evidence of construct validity included concurrent validity with other hearing scales and global visual analog scales , discriminant validity with dizziness h and icap , correlation with hearing-aid adherence , and confirmatory factor analyses . Both scales had strong evidence of responsiveness ( sensitivity to change ) , with higher effect sizes and Guyatt responsiveness statistics than the 2 widely used hearing scales in this study . The scales took an average of 5 minutes to complete . CONCLUSIONS The EAR scale is a valid and reliable measure of the effectiveness of amplification in the treatment of sensorineural hearing loss . It addresses the range of issues that are of importance to hearing-aid patients . The scales have excellent psychometric properties , are more responsive than several widely used hearing scales , and are minimally burdensome for patients to complete . The EAR may be a valuable outcome measure in future studies of both existing hearing aids and newer hearing-aid technologies , such as bone-anchored aids or middle ear implants
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 .