The main aim of this study was to collect descriptive data and to evaluate the psychometric properties of a range of self-report questionnaires in a Swedish population. Other aims were to investigate the correlations between these measures and the higher order factorial structure of the included questionnaires. One hundred and sixty-two first-time hearing aid users completed four standardized hearing specific questionnaires: the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE); the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life (SADL); the Communication Strategies Scale (CSS); and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA). In addition, two psychosocial questionnaires were completed: the Sense of Coherence scale (SOC); and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). All measures were administered at one year post hearing aid fitting. Mean scores for the questionnaires were in agreement with previous studies. The questionnaires were found to be reliable and acceptable for further clinical use. Correlations were seen across different hearing specific questionnaires, and between hearing aid use and satisfaction. Psychosocial variables were more strongly associated with participation restriction and satisfaction than with the demographic variables, confirming the importance of subjective measures. The factor analysis extracted four factors: psychosocial well-being, hearing aid satisfaction, adaptive communications strategies, and residual participation restriction, and indicated that the number of questionnaires could be reduced. It is concluded that psychosocial factors are important to consider in hearing aid rehabilitation and their possible role should be further investigated in future studies.

Thirty-nine first time hearing aid users with mild to moderate hearing losses were randomly assigned to a pre-fitting intervention group (N=19) or a control group (N=20). The pre-fitting intervention consisted of three weekly visits, where the user adjusted the amplification of an experimental hearing aid to preferred settings, and wore the aid between the visits. After the pre-fitting intervention phase, both groups received conventional hearing aid fitting. Standardized questionnaires (IOI-HA, HHIE, ECHO, SADL, HADS) were administered before and after pre-fitting intervention, after conventional hearing aid fitting, and at one-year follow-up. Hearing aid success was evaluated by an independent audiologist at the one- year follow-up appointment. The pre-fitting intervention phase showed positive effects for the intervention group but not for the control group on activity limitation and participation restriction, and expectations. However, the intervention in its current version had no lasting effects beyond the control group after conventional hearing aid fitting or after a year. Furthermore, both groups showed mostly successful hearing aid fittings, improved psychosocial well-being, quality of life, and reduced participation restriction.

The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of an individual pre-fitting intervention for first-time hearing aid users. Thirty-eight hearing impaired adults were randomly assigned to a sound awareness pre-fitting intervention (n=19) or to a control group (n=19). The purpose of the sound awareness training was to facilitate the users' acclimatization to amplified sound. The pre-fitting intervention consisted of three visits and was followed by conventional hearing aid fitting that was identical for both groups. Standardized questionnaires were administered before and after the pre-fitting intervention, after the conventional hearing aid fitting, and at a one-year follow-up. The follow-up also included a clinical assessment by means of a telephone interview performed by an independent audiologist. The pre-intervention did not result in any major improvement over and above the control group. However, improvements were found for both groups following hearing aid fitting. In addition, most participants were considered as successful users in the interview. Future research should target individuals in need of extended hearing aid rehabilitation.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop and validate an interview instrument for assessing outcome following hearing aid fitting based on clinical global impressions.

Method: The Audiological Rehabilitation Clinical Global Impression (AR-CGI) was developed and used in a telephone interview in two separate samples. The first sample (N=69) consisted of hearing aid owners who had participated in two intervention studies and the second sample consisted of hearing aid owners receiving regular services from a hearing clinic (N=21). Following the structured telephone interview, participants were categorized into three categories: Successful, Successful with some limitations, or Unsuccessful.

Results: A vast majority were categorized as Successful (80% of the intervention sample and 71% of the clinical sample). Those categorized as successful were found to differ from those categorized as less successful in terms of age and self-reported hearing aid use, depressed mood, and residual participation restriction, but they did not differ in terms of degree of hearing loss.

Conclusion: It is suggested that the brevity and usefulness of the AR-CGI makes it a potential tool for further use in audiological settings.