ORCID Profile
0000-0002-1254-8407
Current Organisation
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: MDPI AG
Date: 03-2023
DOI: 10.3390/AUDIOLRES13020018
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 lification) 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.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 19-04-2023
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 02-08-2022
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 18-11-2020
Publisher: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Date: 13-12-2022
DOI: 10.1101/2022.12.12.22283331
Abstract: Hearing loss is a highly prevalent condition, with numerous debilitating consequences when left untreated. However, less than 20% of adults with hearing loss in the United States use hearing aids. Over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids became available in October 2022 to improve access and affordability. However, clinical effectiveness studies of available OTC hearing aids using the existing devices in the market are limited. To compare the clinical effectiveness of a self-fitting OTC hearing aid with remote support to a hearing aid fitted using audiologist best practices. A randomized parallel-assigned clinical effectiveness trial was conducted between April to August 2022. Sixty-eight adults with self-perceived mild-to-moderate hearing loss were recruited and randomly assigned to either the self-fitting (SF) group or an audiologist-fitted (AF) group. Following hearing aid fitting, participants first completed a two-week, take-home field trial without any support. Access to fine-tuning for both groups was only available after the two-week trial. The level of support and adjustment was done remotely for the SF group per request and by the audiologist for the AF group. Participants were then re-assessed after an additional four-week take-home trial. A commercially available self-fitting OTC hearing aid was provided to participants in the SF group who were expected to set up the hearing aids using the commercially supplied instructional material and accompanying smartphone app. In the AF group, audiologists fitted the same hearing aid according to a commonly used (NAL-NL2) prescriptive gain target using real-ear verification with hearing aid use instruction. The primary outcome measure was self-reported hearing aid benefit, measured using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB). Secondary measures included the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) and speech recognition in noise measured using the QuickSIN and digits-in-noise (DIN) tests. All measures were completed at baseline and at two intervals following hearing aid fitting (two- and six weeks). Sixty-four participants were included in the analytic s le, with equal number of participants ( n = 32) randomized into SF and AF groups. The groups did not differ significantly in age (effect size r , -0.2 95 CI -0.3 to 0.2) or four-frequency pure tone average (PTA effect size r , 0.2 95% CI -0.1 to 0.4). After the two-week field trial, the SF group had an initial advantage compared to the AF group on the self-reported benefit measures (APHAB Cohen ‘s d , -0.5 95% CI -1.0 to 0, IOI-HA effect size r , 0.3 95% CI 0.0 to 0.5) but not speech recognition in noise. At the end of the six-week trial, no meaningful differences were evident between the groups on any outcome measures. This effectiveness trial indicates self-fitting OTC hearing aids with remote support provides comparable outcomes to a hearing aid fitted using audiologist best practices at 6-weeks post-fitting. Self-fitting OTC hearing aids can provide an effective intervention for mild to moderate hearing loss. Can self-fitting over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids provide similar outcomes compared to best-practice audiologist-fitted hearing aids? Self-reported and speech-in-noise benefit was equivalent between the self-fitting OTC and audiologist-fitted hearing aid conditions at the end of the six-week trial. A self-fitting OTC hearing aid can be an effective intervention option for people with mild-to-moderate hearing loss and produce self-perceived and clinical outcomes similar to that of a clinical audiologist-fitted hearing aid.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 02-01-2021
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 09-08-2022
DOI: 10.1080/14992027.2021.1957160
Abstract: To determine the attitudes of audiologists towards telehealth and use of telehealth for the delivery of ear and hearing services pre-, during- and post- the COVID-19 pandemic, and to identify the perceived effects of telehealth on services and barriers to telehealth. An online survey distributed through the International Society of Audiology and member societies. A total of 337 audiologists completing the survey between 23 June and 13 August 2020. There was a significant increase in the perceived importance of telehealth from before (44.3%) to during COVID-19 (87.1%), and the use of telehealth previous (41.3%), current (61.9%) and expected use of telehealth (80.4%). Telehealth was considered adequate for many audiology services, although hearing assessment and device fitting by telehealth received least support. Matters related to timeliness of services and reduction of travel were reported as the main advantages, but relationships between practitioners and clients may suffer with telehealth. Important barriers were technologies related to the client or remote site clinic-related items were moderate barriers, although more clinician training was a common theme provided through open-ended responses. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in audiologists having a more positive attitude towards and greater use of telehealth, but with some reservations.
Publisher: American Speech Language Hearing Association
Date: 02-06-2022
DOI: 10.1044/2021_AJA-21-00172
Abstract: Online reviews have become increasingly common for consumers to share their experiences about products and to assist potential consumers with decision making. The current study was aimed to understand the hearing aid user experience from online consumer reviews using qualitative analysis. The study used a qualitative thematic analysis to analyze open text responses from consumers leaving hearing aid reviews on the www.HearingTracker.com website. One thousand three hundred seventy-eight online consumer hearing aid reviews (open-text responses) were extracted and analyzed. Three domains emerged within the data set, containing 11 themes and 136 subthemes. Domain one (Clinical Processes) contained two themes: Hearing Assessment and Hearing Aid Acquisition. Domain two (The Device) contained five themes: Function, Performance, Physical, Device Management, and Maintenance. Domain three (The Person) contained four themes: Satisfaction, Quality of Life, Personal Adjustment, and Knowledge. The themes gave an understanding that there were a contribution of factors that formed part of a consumers hearing aid user experience. Hearing aid users described a range of positive, negative, and neutral descriptions online about their hearing aid user experience and gave advice to fellow hearing aid users helping clinicians improve their hearing aid fitting skills in practice. These findings have implications to future product development as well as service delivery model in terms of developing strategies for fostering patient-centered audiological practice.
Publisher: American Speech Language Hearing Association
Date: 05-09-2023
Publisher: American Speech Language Hearing Association
Date: 04-10-2023
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 13-06-2021
DOI: 10.1080/14992027.2021.1931487
Abstract: To explore the publicised opinions of consumers actively participating in online hearing aid reviews. A retrospective design examining data generated from an online consumer review website (www.HearingTracker.com). Qualitative data (open text responses) were analysed using the open source automated topic modelling software IRaMuTeQ (www.iramuteq.org/) to identify themes. Outputs were compared with quantitative data from the consumer reviews (short response questions exploring hearing aid performance and benefit, and some meta-data such as hearing aid brand and years of hearing aid ownership). 1378 online consumer hearing aid reviews. Six clusters within two domains were identified. The domain Device Acquisition included three clusters: Although online hearing aid consumers indicate positive performance on multiple-choice questions relating to hearing aid performance and benefit, their online reviews describe a number of barriers limiting their success. Hearing healthcare clinicians must employ a personalised approach to audiological rehabilitation to ensure in idual clients' needs are met.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 17-06-2022
DOI: 10.1080/14992027.2021.1937348
Abstract: This study surveyed the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the audiology workplace. The study used a cross-sectional survey design for audiologists across the globe ( Participants represented varied work settings and audiology services. Only a third (31.5%) provided psychosocial support, which may be important during the pandemic, as part of their services. Almost all (97%) audiologists reported changes to their workplace, with 76.4% reporting reduced caseloads during the COVID-19 pandemic. When rating their current and anticipated work conditions, 38.7% reported reduced working hours although only 13.8% anticipated reduced working hours in 6-months' time. Audiologists ranked services such as access to hearing assessment, hearing device adjustment and maintenance, and general audiological support as being more important during the pandemic than services such as psychosocial, emotional and tinnitus support. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant disruptions to audiological practice that highlights the need to adapt and incorporate new audiological practices including telehealth, to ensure patients have continued access to care and clinics remain sustainable during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and recovery phase.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 02-08-2013
Publisher: American Speech Language Hearing Association
Date: 10-09-2021
DOI: 10.1044/2021_AJA-20-00223
Abstract: The study examined psychologically meaningful language dimensions (i.e., social and emotional dimensions, health dimensions, and personal concerns) within online consumer reviews on hearing health care services using an automated textual analysis approach. Nine thousand six hundred twenty-two consumer reviews of hearing health care services, including an open-ended question (i.e., free text response to the prompt “share details of your own experience at this place”) and an overall rating (on a 5-point scale ranging from “very good” to “very poor”) were extracted from Google.com from 40 different cities across the United States. In addition, some metadata about the cities (i.e., region, population size, median age, percentage of older adults) were also recorded. Text responses were analyzed using the automated Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count software for selected language dimensions. The language dimensions of online hearing health care reviews were descriptively compared with language dimensions observed in the natural language of typical bloggers. Language dimensions from free text responses were correlated with quantitative overall experience ratings. Automated linguistic analysis showed that consumer reviews on hearing health care services had higher social processes, positive emotions, hearing, health, money, and work, and lower negative emotions and time-awareness when compared to typical bloggers. Examining the association between overall experience rating and the language dimensions revealed two broad findings. First, higher engagement of consumers in terms of social processes, positive emotions, hearing, and work dimensions was related to higher experience ratings. Second, higher engagement of consumers in terms of negative emotions, time awareness, and money was related to lower experience ratings. Online reviews contain information about various dimensions (i.e., social and emotional dimensions as well as personal concerns) that have bearing toward the way in that they rate their health care experiences. Automated linguistic analysis of consumer reviews appears helpful in identifying gaps in service delivery that may influence consumer experience.
Publisher: American Speech Language Hearing Association
Date: 17-08-2020
DOI: 10.1044/2020_PERSP-20-00058
Abstract: The current study examines metadata, upload source, type of informational content, understandability, and actionability of YouTube videos related to vocal health. A search for videos related to vocal health in YouTube was completed. Metadata (i.e., number of views, video length, thumbs-up, thumbs-down), upload source (i.e., consumer, professional, media), and type of informational content were identified. The Patient Education Material Assessment Tool for Audiovisual Materials was used to assess understandability and actionability of the 100 most frequently viewed videos. A total of 166 videos were obtained. The collective number of views was 19,799,299. A significant difference between video source groups was found for number of views and thumbs-down, but not for video length or thumbs-up. The YouTube videos were primarily educational, and a majority of the content focused on tips and techniques for professional voice users. Videos had adequate understandability (i.e., 71.5%) and actionability scores (i.e., 74%). Videos uploaded by consumers were superior to professional sources in actionability, but no difference was noted between video source for understandability. Study insights about metadata, source, type of informational content, understandability, and actionability of YouTube videos may help professionals understand the nature of online content related to vocal health. Study implications and recommendations for further research are discussed.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 02-04-2023
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 15-12-2022
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 10-03-2020
Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc.
Date: 23-08-2023
DOI: 10.2196/46043
Abstract: The most common management option for hearing loss is hearing aids. In addition to devices, patients require information and support, including maintenance and troubleshooting. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies can support hearing aid management, acclimatization, and use. This study developed an mHealth acclimatization and support program for first-time hearing aid users and subsequently implemented and pilot-tested the feasibility of the program. The program was facilitated by community health workers (CHWs) in low-income communities in South Africa. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of an mHealth acclimatization and support program supported by CHWs in low-income communities. An application-based acclimatization and support was adapted and translated for use in low- and middle-income countries. This program was delivered in the form of 20 different voice notes accompanied by graphical illustrations via WhatsApp or 20 different SMS text messages. The program was provided to first-time hearing aid users immediately after a community-based hearing aid fitting in March 2021 in 2 low-income communities in the Western Cape, South Africa. The 20 messages were sent over a period of 45 days. Participants were contacted telephonically on days 8, 20, and 43 of the program and via open-ended paper-based questionnaires translated to isiXhosa 45 days and 6 months after the program started to obtain information on their experiences, perceptions, and accessibility of the program. Their responses were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. A total of 19 participants fitted with hearing aids received the mHealth acclimatization and support program. Most participants (15/19, 79%) received the program via WhatsApp, with 21% (4/19) of them receiving it via SMS text message. Participants described the program as helpful, supportive, informative, sufficient, and clear at both follow-ups. A total of 14 participants reported that they were still using their hearing aids at the 6-month follow-up. Three participants indicated that not all their questions about hearing aids were answered, and 5 others had minor hearing aid issues. This included feedback (n=1), battery performance (n=1), physical fit (n=2), and issues with hearing aid accessories (n=1). However, CHWs successfully addressed all these issues. There were no notable differences in responses between the participants who received the program via WhatsApp compared with those who received it through SMS text message. Most participants receiving WhatsApp messages reported that the voice notes were easier to understand, but the graphical illustrations supplemented the voice notes well. An mHealth acclimatization and support program is feasible and potentially assists hearing aid acclimatization and use for first-time users in low-income communities. Scalable mHealth support options can facilitate increased access and improve outcomes of hearing care.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 21-11-2018
DOI: 10.1080/14992027.2017.1393565
Abstract: To raise awareness and propose a good practice guide for translating and adapting any hearing-related questionnaire to be used for comparisons across populations ided by language or culture, and to encourage investigators to publish detailed steps. From a synthesis of existing guidelines, we propose important considerations for getting started, followed by six early steps: (1) Preparation, (2, 3) Translation steps, (4) Committee Review, (5) Field testing and (6) Reviewing and finalising the translation. Not applicable. Across these six steps, 22 different items are specified for creating a questionnaire that promotes equivalence to the original by accounting for any cultural differences. Published ex les illustrate how these steps have been implemented and reported, with shared experiences from the authors, members of the International Collegium of Rehabilitative Audiology and TINnitus research NETwork. A checklist of the preferred reporting items is included to help researchers and clinicians make informed choices about conducting or omitting any items. We also recommend using the checklist to document these decisions in any resulting report or publication. Following this step-by-step guide would promote quality assurance in multinational trials and outcome evaluations but, to confirm functional equivalence, large-scale evaluation of psychometric properties should follow.
Publisher: American Speech Language Hearing Association
Date: 10-09-2021
DOI: 10.1044/2021_AJA-21-00041
Abstract: The aim of this study was to examine experiences of hearing health care services as described in online consumer reviews. This study used a cross-sectional design. Online consumer reviews about hearing health care services generated from Google.com to an open-ended question “Share details of your own experience at this place” and perceived overall experience (indicated on a 5-point rating scale: “very good” to “very poor”) were extracted from 40 different cities across the United States. The open text contributed a text corpus of 9,622 unique consumer reviews. These responses were analyzed with the cluster analysis approach using an open-source automated text analysis software program, IRaMuTeQ, to identify key themes. Association between clusters and consumer experience ratings as well as consumer metadata (percentage of older adults in the city, region) were examined using the chi-square analysis. The majority of consumers appeared satisfied with their hearing health care services, with nearly 95% of consumers reporting “very good” and “good” on the global experience scale. The analysis of text responses resulted in seven clusters within two domains. Domain 1 (Clinical Processes) included the three clusters: administration processes, perceived benefits, and device acquisition. Domain 2 (Staff and Service Interactions) included the four clusters: clinician communications, staff professionalism , customer service, and provider satisfaction . Content relating to administration processes was associated with overall rating regarding the hearing health care service experience. Consumer's reviews relating to administration processes mostly described negative experiences, and these participants were more inclined to provide poorer overall experience ratings. In addition, city characteristics (i.e., percentage of older adults, region) had bearing toward what elements of hearing health care services are highlighted more in the consumer reviews. Consumers comment on a variety of elements when describing their experiences with hearing health care services. Experiences reported in most clusters were generally positive, although some concerns in the “clinical process” are associated with lower satisfaction. Employing patient-centered strategies and ensuring patients have good experiences in the areas of concern may help improve both patient experience and their satisfaction. 0.23641/asha.16455924
Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc.
Date: 27-01-2023
Abstract: he most common management option for hearing loss is hearing aids. In addition to devices, patients require information and support, including maintenance and troubleshooting. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies can support hearing aid management, acclimatization, and use. This study developed an mHealth acclimatization and support program for first-time hearing aid users and subsequently implemented and pilot-tested the feasibility of the program. The program was facilitated by community health workers (CHWs) in low-income communities in South Africa. his study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of an mHealth acclimatization and support program supported by CHWs in low-income communities. n application-based acclimatization and support was adapted and translated for use in low- and middle-income countries. This program was delivered in the form of 20 different voice notes accompanied by graphical illustrations via WhatsApp or 20 different SMS text messages. The program was provided to first-time hearing aid users immediately after a community-based hearing aid fitting in March 2021 in 2 low-income communities in the Western Cape, South Africa. The 20 messages were sent over a period of 45 days. Participants were contacted telephonically on days 8, 20, and 43 of the program and via open-ended paper-based questionnaires translated to isiXhosa 45 days and 6 months after the program started to obtain information on their experiences, perceptions, and accessibility of the program. Their responses were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. total of 19 participants fitted with hearing aids received the mHealth acclimatization and support program. Most participants (15/19, 79%) received the program via WhatsApp, with 21% (4/19) of them receiving it via SMS text message. Participants described the program as helpful, supportive, informative, sufficient, and clear at both follow-ups. A total of 14 participants reported that they were still using their hearing aids at the 6-month follow-up. Three participants indicated that not all their questions about hearing aids were answered, and 5 others had minor hearing aid issues. This included feedback (n=1), battery performance (n=1), physical fit (n=2), and issues with hearing aid accessories (n=1). However, CHWs successfully addressed all these issues. There were no notable differences in responses between the participants who received the program via WhatsApp compared with those who received it through SMS text message. Most participants receiving WhatsApp messages reported that the voice notes were easier to understand, but the graphical illustrations supplemented the voice notes well. n mHealth acclimatization and support program is feasible and potentially assists hearing aid acclimatization and use for first-time users in low-income communities. Scalable mHealth support options can facilitate increased access and improve outcomes of hearing care. >
Publisher: American Speech Language Hearing Association
Date: 10-09-2021
DOI: 10.1044/2021_AJA-21-00061
Abstract: Online reviews have been used by hearing aid owners to share their experiences and to provide suggestions to potential hearing aid buyers, although they have not been systematically examined. The study was aimed at examining the hearing aid consumer reviews using automated linguistic analysis, and how the linguistic variables relate to self-reported hearing aid benefit and satisfaction ratings. The study used a cross-sectional design. One thousand three hundred seventy-eight consumer hearing aid reviews (i.e., text response to open-ended question), self-reported benefit and satisfaction ratings on hearing aids in a 5-point scale with meta-data (e.g., hearing aid brand, technology level) extracted from the Hearing Tracker website were analyzed using automated text analysis method known as the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count. Self-reported hearing aid benefit and satisfaction ratings were high (i.e., mean rating of 4.04 in a 5-point scale). Examining the association between overall rating and the key linguistic variables point to two broad findings. First, the more people were personally, socially, and emotionally engaged with the hearing device experience, the higher they rated their hearing device(s). Second, a minimal occurrence of clinic-visit language dimensions points to factors that likely affect benefit and satisfaction ratings. For ex le, if people mention paying too much money (money), their overall ratings are generally lower. Conversely, if people write about their health or home, the ratings were higher. There was no significant difference in linguistic analysis across different hearing aid brands and technology levels. Hearing aid consumers are generally satisfied with their hearing device(s), and their online reviews contain information about social/emotional dimensions as well as clinic-visit related aspects that have bearing toward hearing aid benefit and satisfaction ratings. These results suggest that the natural language used by consumers provide insights on their perceived benefit/satisfaction from their hearing device.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 12-08-2022
Publisher: American Speech Language Hearing Association
Date: 06-2023
DOI: 10.1044/2022_AJA-22-00130
Abstract: More affordable hearing aids are now available due to over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aid regulations. Although laboratory studies have validated many OTC hearing technologies, there are limited real-world benefit studies. This study compared hearing aid outcomes reported by clients from OTC and conventional hearing care professional (HCP) service delivery models. An ecological, cross-sectional survey design was employed. An online survey was sent to the Hearing Tracker user and OTC Lexie hearing aid user databases. Moreover, 656 hearing aid users completed the survey—406 through conventional HCP services ( M age = 66.7 ± 13.0 years) and 250 through the OTC model ( M age = 63.7 ± 12.2 years). Self-reported hearing aid benefit and satisfaction were measured with the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids outcome tool. No significant difference for overall hearing aid outcomes between HCP and OTC users was evident using regression analyses, controlling for age, gender, duration of hearing loss, duration before hearing aid purchase, self-reported hearing difficulty, and unilateral versus bilateral fitting. For the “daily use” domain, HCP clients reported significantly longer hours of daily use. For the “residual activity limitations” domain, OTC hearing aid users reported significantly less difficulty hearing in situations where they most wanted to hear better. OTC hearing aid outcomes could complement and provide similar satisfaction and benefit to HCP models for adults. Service delivery aspects such as self-fitting, acclimatization programs, remote support, behavioral incentivization, and payment options should be investigated for their potential role in OTC hearing aid outcomes. 0.23641/asha.22134788
Location: United States of America
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: Sweden
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Vinaya Manchaiah.