NCT01788423

Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes for two different hearing-aid delivery models. In one model, the audiologist selects and fits the hearing aid and, in the other model, the consumer does this directly.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
323

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Nov 2012

Longer than P75 for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

October 24, 2012

Completed
8 days until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

November 1, 2012

Completed
3 months until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

February 11, 2013

Completed
5 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

February 28, 2018

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

February 28, 2018

Completed
1.4 years until next milestone

Results Posted

Study results publicly available

July 23, 2019

Completed
Last Updated

July 23, 2019

Status Verified

July 1, 2019

Enrollment Period

5.3 years

First QC Date

October 24, 2012

Results QC Date

May 23, 2019

Last Update Submit

July 3, 2019

Conditions

Keywords

presbycusishearing aids

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Profile of Hearing Aid Performance Benefit (PHAB)

    Change from unaided to aided performance on the Profile of Hearing Aid Performance with the difference in aided and unaided scores labeled Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (PHAB), a self-report measure of benefit. The aided and unaided PHAP scores are proportions of time difficulties encountered in various listening situations. Low PHAP scores indicate less frequent difficulties. When subtracting aided from unaided PHAP scores, a positive PHAB score reflects less frequent problems when wearing a hearing aid compared to without. The range of possible PHAB scores are -1.0 to +1.0 with 0.0 indicating no difference between aided and unaided performance. There are seven subscales of the PHAP/PHAB and the scores reported are based on the arithmetic means of the five subscales that deal with speech communication, PHABglobal. These include the following subscale scores: EC (Ease of Communication), FT (Familiar Talkers), BN (Background Noise), Reverberation (RV) and Reduced Cues (RC).

    two times: at hearing-aid fit and at 6-weeks post-fit

Secondary Outcomes (1)

  • Connected Speech Test (CST) Benefit

    two times: at hearing-aid fit and at 6-weeks post-fit

Study Arms (3)

Audiologist-Based

EXPERIMENTAL

Audiologist selects hearing aid for patient

Device: hearing aid

Consumer Decides

EXPERIMENTAL

Consumer selects hearing aid

Device: hearing aid

Placebo

PLACEBO COMPARATOR

Patient fitted with hearing aid that is acoustically transparent.

Device: hearing aid

Interventions

All subjects received hearing aids, some selected by audiologist, some selected by consumer, and some programmed as placebo devices.

Audiologist-BasedConsumer DecidesPlacebo

Eligibility Criteria

Age55 Years - 79 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • yrs of age
  • Native English speaker
  • no prior hearing aid use
  • ability to read 18 point font

You may not qualify if:

  • hearing loss too severe or too mild for hearing aid
  • middle-ear conductive pathology present
  • asymmetrical hearing loss
  • presence of dementia, Parkinson's disease, or other neurological disorder
  • \- subject not interested in purchasing hearing aids

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

IU Department of Speech & Hearing Sciences

Bloomington, Indiana, 47405-7002, United States

Location

Related Publications (2)

  • Humes LE, Kinney DL, Main AK, Rogers SE. A Follow-Up Clinical Trial Evaluating the Consumer-Decides Service Delivery Model. Am J Audiol. 2019 Mar 15;28(1):69-84. doi: 10.1044/2018_AJA-18-0082.

  • Humes LE, Rogers SE, Quigley TM, Main AK, Kinney DL, Herring C. The Effects of Service-Delivery Model and Purchase Price on Hearing-Aid Outcomes in Older Adults: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial. Am J Audiol. 2017 Mar 1;26(1):53-79. doi: 10.1044/2017_AJA-16-0111.

MeSH Terms

Conditions

PresbycusisHearing Loss

Interventions

Hearing Aids

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Hearing Loss, SensorineuralHearing DisordersEar DiseasesOtorhinolaryngologic DiseasesSensation DisordersNeurologic ManifestationsNervous System DiseasesSigns and SymptomsPathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Wearable Electronic DevicesElectrical Equipment and SuppliesEquipment and SuppliesSensory Aids

Results Point of Contact

Title
Larry E. Humes
Organization
Indiana University, Department of Speech and Hearing Sci

Study Officials

  • Larry E. Humes, PhD

    Indiana University

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Publication Agreements

PI is Sponsor Employee
No
Restrictive Agreement
No

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
TRIPLE
Who Masked
PARTICIPANT, CARE PROVIDER, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Distinguished Professor

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

October 24, 2012

First Posted

February 11, 2013

Study Start

November 1, 2012

Primary Completion

February 28, 2018

Study Completion

February 28, 2018

Last Updated

July 23, 2019

Results First Posted

July 23, 2019

Record last verified: 2019-07

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will share

Study protocol, study forms, and final publication all available via Open Access publication in the American Journal of Audiology in March, 2017. De-identified individual data available from PI upon request.

Shared Documents
STUDY PROTOCOL, ICF
Time Frame
Already available online with Open Access publication of the study in March, 2017.
Access Criteria
Open Access to protocol, study forms, and detailed results via publication in March, 2017. De-identified data available from investigator upon request.

Locations