Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 24, 2025
Systematic Hearing Performance Evaluation Process for Adolescents with Cochlear Implantation at Early Ages
Published on: March 24, 2023
[Comparison of different measurements of the benefit in hearing aid fitting using the APHAB]
Max Thomas1, Rainer Schönweiler2, Jan Löhler3
1Klinik und Poliklinik für Hals-, Nasen- und Ohrenheilkunde, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Background:
Questionnaires measuring the subjective outcome of hearing aid benefit are used in diagnostics of hearing loss additionally. Since 2012, the APHAB is part of the quality agreement for statutory insured patients in hearing aid fitting. Actually, calculating the benefit by the given formula (improvement quotient A) causes distortion by patients with negative results. In general, these dues to misinterpretation of the results. In this study, we proposed two alternative ways of calculation and compared the results together.
Methods:
Using the data of 6861 hearing aid fitted patients from a database, we calculated the benefit by A and two new formulas (improvement quotient B and cumulated benefit) and compared the results together.
Results:
The average for A was -29.02 % (SD ± 47.94) and a minimum of -637.93 %. The average for B was -13.42 % (SD ± 13.14) and a minimum of -78,63. No relevant differences by calculating the improvement quotients between A and B occurred. The average APHAB-score (EC-, BN-, and RV-subscale) was 50.70 before and 29.29 after hearing aid fitting, the average of the cumulated benefit was 21.41.
Conclusions:
Quotient B avoids the intrinsic potential of distortion of A in favor of patients with negative results in hearing aid benefit. It would be useful for the further developing of the quality agreement if B in exchange for A and, in addition, the cumulated benefit should be used.
