Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-htx7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-25T18:57:41.639Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

One aid or two?—more visits please!

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2007

Richard H. Vaughan-Jones ,
Nigel D. Padgham ,
Helen E. Christmas ,
John Irwin  and
M. Ann Doig
Richard H. Vaughan-Jones*
Affiliation:
University Department of Otolaryngology, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee
Nigel D. Padgham
Affiliation:
University Department of Otolaryngology, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee
Helen E. Christmas
Affiliation:
University Department of Otolaryngology, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee
John Irwin
Affiliation:
University Department of Otolaryngology, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee
M. Ann Doig
Affiliation:
University Department of Otolaryngology, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee
*
Mr R. Vaughan-Jones, Department of Otolaryngology, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A prospective trial of hearing aid provision was undertaken to define factors which might be used to allow hearing aids to be fitted optimally. Patients referred for the provision of a hearing aid were studied prospectively at each of five visits when they were questioned by means of a proforma. Fifty-six patients completed the trial and gave adequate responses for analysis. No audiometric or symptomatic criteria were found to be of use in predicting the final choice of hearing aid combination. It may be that initial sequential monaural aiding leads to a higher uptake of binaural aids in the long term. Patients valued multiple visits to the clinic and sequential trials of monaural aiding, the majority felt that binaural aids should be tried.

Keywords

Hearing aidmonauralbinauralAudiogram

Information

Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 107 , Issue 4 , April 1993 , pp. 329 - 332
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aasen, A. (1970) Undersokelse i bruken av horeapparater. Nordisk Audiologi 19: 19.Google Scholar
Bergman, M. (1957) Binaural hearing. Archives of Otolaryngology 66: 572–578.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
British Society of Audiology (1981) British Journal of Audiology 15: 213–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
British Society of Audiology (1987) British Journal of Audiology 21: 231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, D. N., Bulmer, D., (1981) Survey of binaural hearing aid users. Ear and Hearing 2 (5): 220–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carhart, R. (1958) The usefulness of the binaural hearing aid. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 23: 41–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheung, S. M, Stephens, S. D. G. (1986) Factors influencing binaural hearing aid use. British Journal of Audiology 20: 129–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kodman, F. (1961) Successful binaural hearing aid users. Archives Otolaryngology 73: 302–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreurs, K. K., Olsen, W. O. (1985) Comparison of monaural and binaural hearing aid use on a trial period basis. Ear and Hearing 6 (4): 198–202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stephens, S. D. G. (1977) Hearing aid use by adults: a survey of surveys. Clinical Otolarygnology 2: 385–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stephens, S. D. G., Callaghan, D. E., Hogan, S., Meredith, R., Rayment, A., Davis, A. (1991) Acceptability of binaural hearing aids: a cross-over study. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 84: 267–269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swan, I. R. C. (1989) The acceptability of binaural hearing aids by first time hearing aid users. British Journal of Audiology 23: 360.Google Scholar
Swan, I. R. C, Browning, G. G., Gatehouse, S. (1986) A cross-over study of side of hearing aid provision. Clinical Otolaryngology 11: 205–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed