Adjusting expectations: Hearing abilities in a population-based sample using an SSQ short form

Authors

  • Petra von Gablenz Institute of Hearing Technology and Audiology, Jade University of Applied Sciences and Cluster of Excellence “Hearing4all”, Oldenburg, Germany
  • Fabian Sobotka Department of Health Services Research, School for Medicine and Health Sciences, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany
  • Inga Holube Institute of Hearing Technology and Audiology, Jade University of Applied Sciences and Cluster of Excellence “Hearing4all”, Oldenburg, Germany

Keywords:

self-reported hearing, SSQ, quantile regression, hearing loss, gender differences

Abstract

Self-reports of hearing (dis)abilities play an important role in hearing rehabilitation. Among the large variety of questionnaires, the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) has become an internationally used measure to assess hearing abilities in specified everyday listening situations using a visualized scale ranging from 0 to 10. Research mainly focused on adults with impaired hearing, whereas adults with “normal” hearing were hardly considered. However, the ratings of adults out of the general population could be of particular interest when it comes to the question of score benchmarks based on different definitions of “normal” hearing. In the cross-sectional, population-based study HÖRSTAT (n=1903) the German SSQ17 short form was used along with a standardized interview and comprehensive hearing examinations. As the SSQ score distributions are extremely negatively skewed, semiparametric quantile and expectile regression analysis was performed to examine the conditional score distribution and the effects of age, gender, globally reported hearing problems, hearing loss, and social status. Though no normative cut-off values can be established from empirical findings only, the distribution of “normal” hearing abilities might align the management of expectations during the process of hearing rehabilitation.

References

Agus, T.R., Akeroyd, M.A., et al. (2009). “An analysis of the masking of speech by competing speech using self-report data,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 125, 23-26. doi: 10.1121/1.3025915

Banh, J., Singh, G., et al. (2012). “Age affects responses on the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) by adults with minimal audiometric loss,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 23, 81-91. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.23.2.2

Demeester, K., Topsakal, V., et al. (2012). “Hearing disability measured by the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale in clinically normal-hearing and hearing-impaired middle-aged persons, and disability screening by means of a reduced SSQ (the SSQ5),” Ear. Hearing, 33, 615-626. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31824e0ba7

Gatehouse, S., and Noble, W. (2004). “The speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ),” Int. J. Audiol., 43, 85-99. doi: 10.1080/14992020400050014

Gatehouse, S., and Akeroyd M. (2006). “Two-eared listening in dynamic situations,” Int. J. Audiol., 45, S120-S124. doi: 10.1080/14992020600783103

Kießling, J., Grugel, L., et al. (2011). “Übertragung der Fragebögen SADL, ECHO und SSQ ins Deutsche und deren Evaluation,” Z. Audiol., 50, 6-16.

Koenker, R.W., and Basset, G. (1978). “Regression Quantiles,” Econometrica, 46, 33-50.

Kollmeier, B., and Wesselkamp, M. (1997). “Development and evaluation of a German sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 102, 2412-2421. doi: 10.1121/1.419624

Moulin, A, and Richard, C. (2016). “Sources of variability of speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ) scores in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired populations,” Int. J. Audiol, 55, 101-109. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1104734

Singh, G., and Pichora-Fuller, M.K. (2010) “Older adults' performance on the speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ): Test-retest reliability and a comparison of interview and self-administration methods,” Int. J. Audiol., 49, 733-740. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2010.491097

Von Gablenz, P., and Holube, I. (2016). “Hearing threshold distribution and effect of screening in a population-based German sample,” Int. J. Audiol., 55, 110-125. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1084054

Zokoll, M.A., Wagener K.C., et al. (2012). “Internationally comparable screening tests for listening in noise in several European languages: The German digit triplet test as an optimization prototype,” Int. J. Audiol., 51, 697-707. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2012.690078
Adaptive processes in hearing

Additional Files

Published

2018-01-08

How to Cite

von Gablenz, P., Sobotka, F., & Holube, I. (2018). Adjusting expectations: Hearing abilities in a population-based sample using an SSQ short form. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 6, 271–278. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2017-33

Issue

Vol. 6 (2017): Adaptive Processes in Hearing

Section

2017/4. Assessment of specific auditory functions and hearing ability

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a. Authors retain copyright* and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

*From the 2017 issue onward. The Danavox Jubilee Foundation owns the copyright of all articles published in the 1969-2015 issues. However, authors are still allowed to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.