Hearing aid effect study

The stigma associated with wearing hearing aids, known as the "hearing aid effect," remains a significant issue in hearing healthcare. Despite notable changes in the look and feel of hearing aids over the last decade, little is known about the influence of socioeconomic factors on the perception of different hearing devices in a socioeconomically diverse setting. Therefore the objective of the study is to determine the hearing aid effect across a range of hearing devices and its association with socioeconomic factors, namely area of residence and level of education across African communities.The study used a cross-sectional design with 322 participants (161 rural, 161 urban); mean age 31.9 years (14.7 SD). Participants rated photographs of seven different styles of devices [standard behind-the-ear hearing aid (BTE HA) with an earmould, mini BTE HA with a slim tube (ST), in-the-canal (ITC) HA, Airpod, receiver-in-canal (RIC), completely-in-canal (CIC) HA, and Personal Sound Amplification Product (PSAP)] worn by a peer model using a validated scale of eight attributes (attractiveness , age, success, hardworking, trustworthiness, intelligence, friendliness, education). 

The ratings of the BTE HA with earmould were used as a benchmark for comparison. No hearing aid effect was observed across all participants (n = 322) with device ratings ranging between neutral and positive. Significant differences between device ratings were evident for attractiveness for ST and PSAP and trustworthiness for ITC. In terms of residence, urban participants provided more favorable ratings compared to rural participants, with significant differences across three attribute ratings: hardworking for ST; attractiveness, hardworking for ITC; age for RIC and Airpod and hardworking for PSAP. For level of education, significant differences were found for attributes of attractiveness (H = 13.5; p = 0.001) for ITC; attractiveness (H = 14.7, p = 0.001) for PSAP; age (H = 9.5; p = 0.009) for RIC; age (H = 14.3; p < 0.001) and intelligence (H = 15.1; p < 0.001) for Airpod and; hardworking (H = 11.9, p = 0.003) for ST. Overall, participants had a neutral to positive view of hearing devices with preferences for less visible, conventionally styled devices. Socioeconomic variables such as educational attainment and geographical location influence perceptions of hearing devices emphasizing the importance of taking these aspects into account when prescribing hearing devices.

佩戴助听器的污名，即所谓的“助听器效应”，在听力健康领域仍是一个重大问题。尽管在过去十年中，助听器的外观和手感发生了显著变化，但在社会经济多元化的环境下，关于社会经济因素对不同听力设备认知的影响知之甚少。因此，本研究旨在确定不同听力设备间的助听器效应及其与社会经济因素（即居住区域和教育水平）在非洲社区中的关联。研究采用横断面设计，共有322名参与者（161名农村，161名城市）；平均年龄为31.9岁（标准差14.7）。参与者使用经过验证的包含八个属性（吸引力、年龄、成功、勤奋、可信度、智慧、友好性、教育程度）的量表，对七种不同风格的设备照片[标准耳后式助听器（BTE HA）带耳塞、迷你BTE HA带细管（ST）、耳道式（ITC）助听器、Airpod、耳道接收式（RIC）助听器、完全耳道式（CIC）助听器和个人声音放大产品（PSAP）]进行了评分，这些设备由一个同伴模型佩戴。BTE HA带耳塞的评分被用作比较基准。在所有参与者（n = 322）中均未观察到助听器效应，设备评分介于中性和积极之间。在吸引力方面，ST和PSAP设备评分存在显著差异，而在可信度方面，ITC设备评分存在显著差异。就居住地而言，城市参与者提供的评分比农村参与者更有利，在三项属性评分上存在显著差异：ST的勤奋性；ITC的吸引力和勤奋性；RIC和Airpod的年龄以及PSAP的勤奋性。在教育水平方面，对于ITC的吸引力（H = 13.5；p = 0.001）、PSAP的吸引力（H = 14.7，p = 0.001）、RIC的年龄（H = 9.5；p = 0.009）、Airpod的年龄（H = 14.3；p < 0.001）和智慧（H = 15.1；p < 0.001）以及ST的勤奋性（H = 11.9，p = 0.003）等属性均发现了显著差异。总体而言，参与者对助听设备持有中性至积极的看法，偏好更不显眼、传统风格的设备。教育成就和地理位置等社会经济变量影响了对助听设备的认知，强调了在处方助听设备时考虑这些因素的重要性。