Introduction: The international outcome inventory for hearing aids (IOI-HA) is a questionnaire widely used to assess the subjective benefits of hearing aids. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between IOI-HA outcomes and target mismatch in real-ear measurement (REM). Methods: Thirty-four ears of 25 patients who had worn hearing aids were evaluated using the Korean version of the IOI-HA and REM after fitting for 2 months. Real-ear insertion gain (REIG) was measured at three different levels of input intensity – 50, 65, and 80 dB sound pressure level (SPL) – and a frequency range of 0.25–6 kHz. Factors 1 and 2 and total IOI-HA scores were compared with the mismatches of REIGs and target gains of REM. Results: Factor 1, factor 2, and total IOI-HA scores were 14.6 ± 3.5, 11.4 ± 2.2, and 25.9 ± 5.1, respectively. The averages of the difference of REIGs and target gains in REM at 50, 65, and 80 dB SPL input levels were −3.1 ± 6.7, −2.3 ± 7.2, and −3.0 ± 8.2, respectively. Factors 1 and 2 scores of the IOI-HA showed significant correlations with target mismatch in REM at 1 kHz and 0.75 kHz frequencies, respectively. Total IOI-HA scores had significant correlations with target mismatches in REM at 0.75 and 1 kHz frequencies. Conclusion: IOI-HA scores correlated with target mismatch in REM at mid frequencies. The IOI-HA can be a useful screening measure for evaluating the necessity of further adjustments in hearing aids through REM at mid frequencies.

1.
Cox
R
,
Hyde
M
,
Gatehouse
S
,
Noble
W
,
Dillon
H
,
Bentler
R
, et al
.
Optimal outcome measures, research priorities, and international cooperation
.
Ear Hear
.
2000
;
21
(
4 Suppl l
):
106S
15S
.
2.
Cox
RM
,
Alexander
GC
.
The international outcome inventory for hearing aids (IOI-HA): psychometric properties of the English version
.
Int J Audiol
.
2002
;
41
(
1
):
30
5
.
3.
Hickson
L
,
Clutterbuck
S
,
Khan
A
.
Factors associated with hearing aid fitting outcomes on the IOI-HA
.
Int J Audiol
.
2010
;
49
(
8
):
586
95
.
4.
Gazia
F
,
Galletti
B
,
Portelli
D
,
Alberti
G
,
Freni
F
,
Bruno
R
, et al
.
Real ear measurement (REM) and auditory performances with open, tulip and double closed dome in patients using hearing aids
.
Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngol
.
2020
;
277
(
5
):
1289
95
.
5.
Mueller
G
,
Picou
E
.
Survey examines popularity of real-ear probe-microphone measures
.
Hear J
.
2010
;
63
(
5
):
27
8
.
6.
Chu
H
,
Cho
YS
,
Park
SN
,
Byun
JY
,
Shin
JE
,
Han
GC
, et al
.
Standardization for a Korean adaptation of the international outcome inventory for hearing aids: study of validity and reliability
.
Korean J Otorhinolaryngol-head Neck Surg
.
2012
;
55
(
1
):
20
5
.
7.
Cox
RM
,
Alexander
GC
,
Beyer
CM
.
Norms for the international outcome inventory for hearing aids
.
J Am Acad Audiol
.
2003
;
14
(
08
):
403
13
.
8.
Cox
RM
,
Alexander
GC
.
Maturation of hearing aid benefit: objective and subjective measurements
.
Ear Hear
.
1992
;
13
(
3
):
131
41
.
9.
Humes
LE
,
Wilson
DL
.
An examination of changes in hearing-aid performance and benefit in the elderly over a 3-year period of hearing-aid use
.
J Speech Lang Hear Res
.
2003
;
46
(
1
):
137
45
.
10.
Humes
LE
,
Wilson
DL
,
Barlow
NN
,
Garner
CB
,
Amos
N
.
Longitudinal changes in hearing aid satisfaction and usage in the elderly over a period of one or two years after hearing aid delivery
.
Ear Hear
.
2002
;
23
(
5
):
428
38
.
11.
British Society of Audiology
.
Guidance on the use of real-ear measurements to verify the fitting of digital signal processing hearing aids
;
2007
. Available from: https://www.baaudiology.org/app/uploads/2020/11/REMS-2018.pdf
12.
Valente
M
,
Oeding
K
,
Brockmeyer
A
,
Smith
S
,
Kallogjeri
D
.
Differences in word and phoneme recognition in quiet, sentence recognition in noise, and subjective outcomes between manufacturer first-fit and hearing aids programmed to NAL-NL2 using real-ear measures
.
J Am Acad Audiol
.
2018
;
29
(
8
):
706
21
.
13.
Boymans
M
,
Goverts
ST
,
Kramer
SE
,
Festen
JM
,
Dreschler
WA
.
Candidacy for bilateral hearing aids: a retrospective multicenter study
.
J Speech Lang Hear Res
.
2009
;
52
(
1
):
130
40
.
14.
Noh
H
,
Lee
DH
.
Predictable factors of people with asymmetrical hearing loss wearing a hearing aid in the worse ear only
.
J Clin Med
.
2023
;
12
(
6
):
2251
.
15.
Noordhoek
IM
,
Houtgast
T
,
Festen
JM
.
Relations between intelligibility of narrow-band speech and auditory functions, both in the 1-kHz frequency region
.
J Acoust Soc Am
.
2001
;
109
(
3
):
1197
212
.
16.
Cox
RM
,
Alexander
GC
.
The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit
.
Ear Hear
.
1995
;
16
(
2
):
176
86
.
17.
Löhler
J
,
Gräbner
F
,
Wollenberg
B
,
Schlattmann
P
,
Schönweiler
R
.
Sensitivity and specificity of the abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB)
.
Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngol
.
2017
;
274
(
10
):
3593
8
.
18.
Löhler
J
,
Akcicek
B
,
Wollenberg
B
,
Kappe
T
,
Schlattmann
P
,
Schönweiler
R
.
The influence of frequency-dependent hearing loss to unaided APHAB scores
.
Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngol
.
2016
;
273
(
11
):
3587
93
.
19.
Cook
JA
,
Bacon
SP
,
Sammeth
CA
.
Effect of low-frequency gain reduction on speech recognition and its relation to upward spread of masking
.
J Speech Lang Hear Res
.
1997
;
40
(
2
):
410
22
.
20.
Plyler
PN
,
Fleck
EL
.
The effects of high-frequency amplification on the objective and subjective performance of hearing instrument users with varying degrees of high-frequency hearing loss
.
J Speech Lang Hear Res
.
2006
;
49
(
3
):
616
27
.
You do not currently have access to this content.