Volume 8, Issue 1, January – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165

Impact of Amplifications on Hearing Aid User among

Middle Adulthood
Samina Ahmad; Dr. Shahid Majeed; Fasiha Iftikhar; Hasmain Ahmad
Bahawalpur Medical College & Hospital

Abstract:- of hearing loss in the world is (WHO) 56% in males and 44

Background: Around the word hearing loss is became a in females.
concern topic. To overcome from this science introduce
multiple hearing aid categories with a lots of benefit. With (6)Humans have a fairly small range of hearing
the increase hear loss, amplifications play a significant compared to other species; the frequencies that we can hear
role for the users. The purpose of the study is to find out are between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz, this is known as the audio
the satisfaction level of clients who use amplifications in or sonic range. The frequencies above that range are known
their routine life, Also effect of different amplification as ultrasonic and those below are known as infrasonic. The
among different individual. These hearing aids are auditory system serves functions other than speech listening,
envisioned to help user with perceived mild to moderate such as tracking sounds. There are three types of hearing loss.
hearing loss. Hearing aids are available from a hearing Conductive hearing loss, sensorineural hearing loss, and
health professional that will program according to unit of
hearing loss. Method: The cross sectional study conducted mixed hearing loss. (4)The most common categories of
to justify the research by using (SADL) satisfaction with hearing loss classification are mild, moderately severe,
amplification in daily life questionnaire. Sample of 100 severe, and profound hearing loss.
populations male and female were selected of around
middle age “40-60”. Data were collected from different If one has a mild HL, the quietest sounds individual can
private hospitals and clinics from different cities hear with our best hearing are between 25 and 40 dB with a
“Bahawalpur, Multan and Lahore. Descriptive Statistics, moderate HL, the quietest sounds one can hear with our best
Pearson Product Moment Correlation, Independent ear are between 41 and 55dB. If one has a severe moderate
Sample t-test and Linear Multiple analysis were used to HL, the quietest sounds an individual can hear with the ear
analyse the data. Results: Result revealed a positive are between 56 and 90 dB, and with SHL; the quietest sounds
correlated significant value among different category of one can hear are between 71 and 90 dB and more, and above
amplifications. Among all hearing types, the people using 91 dB is profound HL.
BTE (Behind the Ear) were mostly satisfied with their
devices. Age also revealed a significant relationship, (7)Many factors will interfere with patient satisfaction
people aged 40-45 were mostly satisfied with every and benefit from an earpiece, Lack of incentives, the fear of
category of hearing aid. Hearing aid type ITC “In the stigmatization, low expectations of benefits, or failure to
canal” revealed a negative significance correlation. accept are barriers that remain. Medical professionals need to
Conclusion: hearing aid can improve the quality of life for demonstrate to both the communities’ resource provider, the
hearing aid user and satisfaction level increases among service that they offer, the client's functional status, and
hearing aid users with the passage of time. quality of Life. In the setting of sound rehabilitation, the result
measure emerged as effective in this method, specific
Keywords:- Hearing Aid, Amplification, Satisfaction with interventions such as hearing aids work to get positive results
Amplification in Daily Life. for the client. The client's information about the benefit of
interventions and techniques promotes the decision- making
I. INTRODUCTION based on data. (5) (6)
(1)Hearing impairment is a major concern around the Hearing aids help to communicate with other clients,
world. Hearing impairment to almost any extent can be regular daily activities, and decrease in psychosocial society
improved with a hearing aid. Evidence highlights the effects of hearing loss. This aid partially overcomes the
importance of hearing aids to improve the quality of daily life defects associated with hearing loss.
of the person. Hearing loss is a disorder that affects cognitive,
behavioral, and social functions. The use of hearing aids in II. METHOD
such individuals improves the general quality of life.
The study was conducted from December 2021 to July
(2)Disabling Hearing Loss is defined as hearing loss of 2022 after taking permission from relevant department. It was
more than 40 dB in the better auditory ear in adults (15 years Descriptive cross sectional research design and a non-
old or above =) and children (0-14 years) and the prevalence probability purposively sampling technique used to recruit

IJISRT23JAN905 www.ijisrt.com 804

Volume 8, Issue 1, January – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
data. The sample size was calculated through G-Power movement correlation was used to study the effect and
analysis with 95% confidence interval, error of margin 5% relationship of variable.
and 50% response distribution. Calculated sample size was
100. Age range of middle adulthood was 40-60. Male and III. RESULT
female were equally selected for research. “Satisfaction with
amplification in daily life (SADL) scale was used for this The purpose of present study is to find the Level of
study. It consists on 15 items divided into 4 subscales. It is a satisfaction of hearing aid users with amplification in daily
7-point Likert scale and the value choose for each scale was life. Total number of patients were n= 100. The study
“A for never, B for somewhat frequent, C for frequent, D for comprised 62% males and 38% percent females around the
always and so on” the internal consistency was found α=.80 middle age and the mean age of participant is 47%. Result
and in this study was α=.90. Data were analyzed through reveals the positive correlated significant value at the 0.01
SPSS-21. Descriptive statistic was used to study the level (2-tailed).
demographic characteristics of the sample. Pearson product

Table I: Gender type of Hearing Aid Usage

Gender Behind the ear HA In the ear HA In the canal HA Completely in canal HA
Males (62) 32 13 11 06
Females (38) 16 03 13 06

Table I Shows the gender types of hearing aid usage females (38) patients were using behind the ear (16), in the
n=100males patients were using behind the ear HA (32), in canal HA (03), in the canal (13) and completely in the canal
the canal HA (13) and completely in canal HA (06) n=100 HA (06).

Table II: Duration of HA usages

Time Frequency Percentage Cumulative percentage
0-3 months 29 29% 29.0
3-6 months 12 12% 41.0
1-2 years 40 40% 81.0
2-5 years 19 19% 100.0

Table II Shows the patients n=100 HA usage among 0-3 months users was 29%, among 3-6 months users was 12%, among
1-2 years users was 40% and among 2-5 years users was 19%.

Fig 1 Degree of hearing loss

Figure 1 shows the degree of hearing loss. Pie chart shows the degree of hearing loss found as 28% moderate level of hearing
loss, 43% was moderate to severe hearing loss and 29% was severe degree of hearing loss.

Table III Correlation

Pearson CorrelationSig. (2- .027 .404** .462** 1 .332**
tailed)
Personal Image .791 .000 .000 .001
N 100 100 100 100 100
Pearson Correlation .355** .726** .481** .332** 1
Global Score

IJISRT23JAN905 www.ijisrt.com 805

Volume 8, Issue 1, January – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
.001
N 100 100 100 100
100
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table IV-7 Correlations

positive service and Negative Personal Global Score
Effect cost Factors Image
1 .544** .006 .027 .355**
Pearson Correlation
PositiveEffect Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .953 .000
N 100 100 100 100
.79
1 100
Service andCost .544** 1 .271** .404 ** .726**
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .006 .000
N 100 100 100 .00 100
100
.006 .271** 1 .462** .481**
Pearson Correlation
NegativeFactors Sig. (2-tailed) .953 .006 .000
N 100 100 100 .000 100

100

IV. DISCUSSION Evidence shows that implementing a worldwide

rehabilitation program that support adults with hearing
The present study aimed to find the amplifications on disabilities and their families, tackle disadvantages and
hearing aid users among middle adulthood aged 40-60. The obstacles due to defects recognized as lacking in hearing aids.
SADL tool has 15 questions and divided into four subscales An integralpart of the problem is to prevent social isolation to
Positive Effects, Services and Costs, Negative Factors and the patient for verbal communication of the world.
Personal Image. (8)Prior study shows that the data is very (18)Literatures show that its effect typically appears after one
important to follow the auditory rehabilitation program year or several years use of monaural HA in children and
including home listening, guidance and counselling so that adults. The hearing level and degree of asymmetry are big
the patient can have realistic expectations beyond the problems; significantly big benefits were obtained from
selection of the most technically relevant hearing aids. binaural amplification. This was deemed to be due to central
(9)Many authors suggest that it is a determinant of satisfaction aggregation. It has been concluded that amplification of both
ears should be attempted in both ears, of subjects with severe
of hearing aid users it is closely related to recognition of hearing impairment.
product performance. Evidence shows that shortterm benefits
of hearing aids is most prominent in the handicap person with V. CONCLUSION
disabilities and increasing attention well life.
Hearing aid can improve the quality of life for hearing
The result shows that males have severe hearing loss. aid user and satisfaction level increases among hearing aid
(12)A study has conducted in Australia and show differences users with the passage of time. Due to the findings of the
in male and females hearing loss. Numbers of males facing current research, degree of hearing loss, age and type of
hearing problems are greater than females. The present result hearing aid has shown positive influence on the usage, the
shows that hearing loss is increasing with age. A similarstudy satisfaction and the quality of life for people with hearing
shows that people are suffering from different diseases such problems. In addition, degree of subjective awareness of
as stress, psychological disorder, diabetes, mellitus, high disability caused by hearing loss meaningfully affects the use
protection etc. which are contributing factors of hearing loss. of a hearing aid and satisfaction of patients.

The current study shows the satisfaction of the HA

users. (16) A similar study shows factors associated with high
level of satisfaction whose temporality wasnot achieved and
perceptive patients were in a good general health status.

IJISRT23JAN905 www.ijisrt.com 806

Volume 8, Issue 1, January – 2023 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
REFERENCES [16]. Beck LB. The role of outcomes data in health-care
resource allocation. Ear and hearing. 2000 Aug;21(4
[1]. World Health Organization. WHO global estimates on Suppl):89S-96S
prevalence of hearing loss. Geneva: World Health [17]. .FabryDA, Jacobson GP, Newman CW. The
Organization. 2012. development of the three- clinic hearing aid selection
[2]. Higgs DM. Neuroethology and sensory ecology of profile. Correspondênciapessoal. Mai. 2000.
teleost ultrasound detection. In The senses of fish 2004 [18]. Weinstein BE. Outcome measures in the hearing aid
(pp. 173-188). Springer, Dordrecht. fitting/selection process. Trends in Amplification. 1997
[3]. Adams PF, Marano MA. Current estimates from the Dec;2(4):117-37.
National Health Interview Survey, 1994. Vital and
health statistics. Series 10, Data from the National
Health Survey. 1999 Dec (193 Pt 1)
[4]. ( Byrne& Noble, 1998) Byrne D, Noble W. Optimizing
sound localization with hearing aids. Trends in
Amplification. 1998 Jun ;3(2):51-73.
[5]. Uriarte M, Denzin L, Dunstan A, Sellars J, Hickson L.
Measuring hearingaid outcomes using the Satisfaction
with Amplification in Daily Life(SADL) questionnaire:
Australian data. Journal of the American Academy of
Audiology. 2005 Jun 1;16 (6):383-402.
[6]. ( Stephens SD, Callaghan DE, Hogan S, Meredith R,
Rayment A, DavisAC. Hearing disability in people aged
50-65: effectiveness and acceptability of rehabilitative
intervention. BMJ. 1990 Feb 24;300(6723):508-11.
[7]. Byrne D, Dillon H, Ching T, Katsch R, Keidser G.
NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids:
characteristics and comparisons with other procedures.
Journal of the American academy of audiology. 2001Jan
1;12(1).
[8]. Penteado SP, Bento RF, Battistella LR, Silva SM,
Sooful P. Use of the satisfaction with amplification in
daily life questionnaire to assess patient satisfaction
following remote hearing aid adjustments (telefitting).
JMIR medical informatics. 2014 Jul;2(2).
[9]. HOSFORD-DUNN HO, HUCH JL. Hearing Aid User
Attitudes. Textbook of Hearing Aid Amplification.
2000:467.
[10]. Nabelek AK, Freyaldenhoven MC, Tampas JW,
Burchfield SB,Muenchen RA. Acceptable noise level as
a predictor of hearing aid use.Journal of the American
Academy of Audiology. 2006 Oct 1;17(9):626- 39.
[11]. Freyaldenhoven MC, Nabelek AK, Tampas JW.
Relationship between acceptable noise level and the
abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit.
[12]. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research.
2008 Feb 1;51(1):136-46.
[13]. Rein S, Reisslein M. Identifying the classical music
composition of an unknown performance with wavelet
dispersion vector and neural nets. Information Sciences.
2006 Jun 22;176(12):1629-55.
[14]. Lambrou T, Kudumakis P, Speller R, Sandler M, Linney
A. Classification of audio signals using statistical
features on time and wavelet transform domains.
InAcoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 1998.
Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE International Conference
on 1998 May 12(Vol. 6, pp. 36213624). IEEE.
[15]. Martin KD, Kim YE. 2pMU9. Musical instrument
identification: A patternrecognition approach.
InPresented at the 136th meeting of the Acoustical
Society of America 1998 Oct 13.

IJISRT23JAN905 www.ijisrt.com 807