AUDITORY REHABILITATION--INSTRUMENT VALIDATION

背景资料。声音处理技术的进步导致了助听器的激增，这些助听器在质量、功能和成本上都有很大差异。虽然已经开发了一些针对听力的生活质量量表来衡量治疗效果，但这些量表是为了评估总体益处而设计的，而不是为了区分助听器之间的差异。明确的目标。为助听器使用者开发和验证一份临床实用的问卷，以衡量听觉康复(EAR)的有效性。该量表的设计目的是：1)区分不同类型助听器的有效性；2)深入了解助听器的特定功能如何影响患者的感知利益。该工具是申请人建立研究听力损失和听力康复的临床研究计划的长期目标的关键前提，包括识别成功康复的预后因素、评估筛查计划和助听器创新试验。方法：研究方法。一项试点试验的数据表明，患者认为现有的生活质量量表中没有的一些非听力问题(如便利性、可靠性和外观)很重要。这些变量对满意度和助听器遵从性至关重要。对这些问题以及与听证相关的问题进行了分类。为了开发EAR量表，将组装与分类的每个类别相对应的问题，在方便的患者样本中进行测试，并以迭代的方式进行修改。为了对问卷进行心理测量学验证，将在华盛顿大学附属的三个听力学诊所的患者队列中建立信度(重测，内部一致性)和结构效度(同时、已知组和判别)。最后，为了确定量表的响应性，来自验证队列的受试者将在接受帮助进行重复评估的3个月后返回。我们假设，在报告高满意率和依从性的患者中，耳朵评分将改善最大。

Background. Advances in sound processing technology have led to a proliferation of hearing aids that vary greatly in quality, features, and cost. Although a number of hearing-specific quality of life scales have been developed to measure treatment effect, these scales have been designed to assess overall benefit, rather than to distinguish differences between hearing aids. Specific Aims. To develop and validate a clinically practical questionnaire for hearing aid users that measures the Effectiveness of Auditory Rehabilitation (EAR). This scale will be designed to: 1) distinguish between the effectiveness of different types of hearing aids, and 2) provide insight into how particular hearing aid features affect patient-perceived benefit. This tool is a critical antecedent in the applicant's long-term goal of building a clinical research program to study hearing loss and auditory rehabilitation, including identification of prognostic factors for successful rehabilitation, evaluation of screening programs, and trials of hearing aid innovations. Methods. Data from a pilot trial suggest that patients find important a number of non-hearing issues (e.g., convenience, reliability, and appearance) that are absent from existing quality of life scales. These variables are critical to satisfaction and hearing aid compliance. A taxonomy of these issues, as well as hearing-related concerns, has been created. To develop the EAR scale, questions corresponding to each category of the taxonomy will be assembled, tested in a convenience sample of patients, and modified in an iterative fashion. To psychometrically validate the questionnaire, reliability (test-retest, internal consistency) and construct validity (concurrent, known-groups, and discriminant) will be established in a cohort of patients from three audiology clinics affiliated with the University of Washington. Finally, to establish the responsiveness of the scale, subjects from the validation cohort will return 3 months after receiving their aid for repeat evaluation. We hypothesize that EAR scores will improve the most in patients reporting high rates of satisfaction and compliance.