To be conducted with adult participants with mild-to-moderate hearing loss to validate the effectiveness of the Web App fitting strategy. Validation measures participant's perceived hearing aid benefit when using the Web App fitted hearing aids and when using standard-of-care fitted hearing aids.
A prospective, randomized controlled, adaptive design, non-inferiority, pre-market and NSR device study. Completed in 26 adult subjects with mild-to-moderate hearing loss to validate the effectiveness of a Web App fitting strategy. Validation measured subject´s perceived hearing aid benefit when using the Web App fitted hearing aids and when using standard-of-care fitted hearing aids. The adaptive study design began with a cross-over design of the first 12 subjects. At the interim analysis, the possibility of an interaction effect was evaluated as a nuisance parameter. In the absence of an interaction effect, the study was completed in cross-over design. The standard-of-care fitted hearing aids were fitted to National Acoustic Laboratories Nonlinear Version 2 (NAL-NL2) prescriptive targets, verified by probe-mic real-ear measures (REM). The null hypothesis (H0) was that subject´s perceived hearing aids benefit using Web App fitted hearing aids is inferior to perceived benefit using standard-of-care fitted hearing aids, and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was that subject´s perceived hearing aids benefit using Web App fitted hearing aids is non-inferior to that using standard-of-care fitted hearing aids.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
28
Web App Strategy fitting of hearing aids
Standard-of-care fitting of hearing aids
University of South Dakota, USD Speech and Hearing Clinic
Vermillion, South Dakota, United States
Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB)
The APHAB consists of 24 questions across 4 subscales: Ease of Communication (EC), Background Noise (BN), Reverberation (RV), and Aversiveness (AV), assessing hearing difficulties in daily situations reported as percentage of problems (0-100%, 100% = highest number of problems). It evaluates hearing aid (HA) benefit by subtracting the reported % of problems with HA from without HA, yielding scores from 0 (no benefit) to 100 (maximum benefit) in each subscale. The study focuses on the communication subscales (EC, BN, RV) and calculates benefit score differences for each subscale after using A) Web-App-fitted and B) standard-of-care-fitted HAs. The difference-of-benefit scores are compared to non-inferiority margins from Cox\&Alexander (Ear\&Hearing 1995). Differences-in-benefit scores range from -100 to 100, with negative scores indicating greater benefit with Web-App-fitted HAs, 0 indicating identical benefit and higher scores indicating greater benefit with standard-of-care fitting.
Time frame: 14-17 Days hearing aid wearing time per fitting type
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.