Objetivo Avaliar os resultados do “Teste Prático de Habilidade de manuseio do aparelho de amplificação sonora individual AASI (PHAST)” em novos usuários deste dispositivo. Verificar a confiabilidade interavaliadores para o teste PHAST. Análise descritiva, longitudinal de dados de um estudo clínico randomizado controlado. O PHAST foi aplicado em 60 novos usuários de AASI retroauriculares e intra-aurais, imediatamente e cerca de dez dias após a concessão do dispositivo. As avaliações foram filmadas e, posteriormente, analisadas e pontuadas por um ou dois juízes independentes. Aproximadamente 55% dos participantes obtiveram desempenho variando de razoável a ruim. A troca da pilha e inserção do AASI foram as tarefas de maior dificuldade. A pontuação total e das tarefas de “abertura do compartimento de pilha” e “inserção do AASI” aumentaram significativamente entre as aplicações do PHAST, indicando melhora do manuseio ao longo do tempo. O desempenho no PHAST foi correlacionado com a idade dos participantes. A confiabilidade entre avaliadores foi alta e significativa para a pontuação total e para seis tarefas individuais do PHAST. Conclusão Novos usuários exibem diferentes dificuldades no manuseio do AASI, que são maiores nos períodos iniciais de uso. O PHAST pode ser utilizado na clínica audiológica a fim de propiciar um registro mais sistemático de tais habilidades.

Purpose To evaluate the results of the “Practical Hearing Aid Skills Test (PHAST)” in new HA users. To assess the inter-rater reliability of the PHAST. Methods Descriptive, longitudinal analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial. The PHAST was administered to 60 new users of behind-the-ear and in-the-ear instruments, immediately and 10 days after the hearing aid fitting. The assessments were recorded and later analyzed and scored by one or two independent evaluators. Results About 55% of the participants showed fair and poor performance on the PHAST. Battery replacement and hearing aid insertion tasks were the most difficult to complete. Total scores as well as “opening battery compartment” and “hearing aid insertion” tasks scores, improved significantly between the first and second administration of the PHAST. The PHAST performance was correlated with the participant’s age. Inter-rater reliability was high and significant concerning the total score and for six PHAST individual tasks. Conclusion New hearing aid users have different hearing aid handling skills that increase in the initial periods of HA use. The PHAST can be used in the audiology clinic, allowing for a more systematic record of such skills.

OBJETIVO: identificar o motivo da ausência no acompanhamento audiológico dos usuários de aparelhos de amplificação sonora individual do Sistema Único de Saúde e analisar o resultado da adaptação do dispositivo nesta população. MÉTODO: entrevista com 27 pacientes faltosos, realizando questões abertas sobre o motivo da ausência no atendimento e aplicação do Questionário Internacional de Aparelho de Amplificação Sonora Individual, para avaliação dos resultados pós-adaptação. A comparação dos resultados pós-adaptação dos pacientes faltosos foi realizada a partir da seleção aleatória de 30 questionários, de pacientes que compareceram no acompanhamento audiológico da Instituição, cadastrados em um banco de dados. Para análise dos resultados foi aplicada estatística descritiva e inferencial. RESULTADOS: a maioria dos faltosos (25,92%) refere não ter lembrado da data do retorno. Os resultados comparativos do questionário entre os grupos de faltosos e não faltosos evidenciam diferenças estatisticamente significantes em quase todos os domínios do questionário de auto-avaliação, exceto nos itens benefício, restrição da participação e qualidade de vida. CONCLUSÃO: dentre os motivos do não comparecimento ao serviço, destacam-se: esquecimento do atendimento, problemas de saúde e motivos de trabalho. Foi observado que os pacientes que não compareceram ao acompanhamento audiológico apresentam resultados pós-adaptação de aparelho de amplificação sonora individual aquém aos resultados dos pacientes que compareceram ao acompanhamento, de forma estatisticamente significante.

PURPOSE: to identify the reason for absence of the patients from the Unified Health System who use hearing aids at the audiology follow up and analyze the the device adaptation in this population. METHOD: 27 absent patients were interviewed with opened questions about their absence and the implementation of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids, a self-assessment questionnaire for post adaptation evaluation. Comparison of absent patients' post adaptation was performed from a random selection of 30 questionnaires from patients who attended the audiologic follow-up at the Institution (control group) who were registered in a database. Descriptive and inferential statistics (Mann-Whitney test - significance level of 5%) were applied for data analysis. RESULTS: the majority of absent patients (25.92%) say they didn't remember the return date for follow up. The questionnaire's comparative results between the absent and non-absent groups showed statistically significant differences in almost every area of self-assessment questionnaire, except on benefit items, participation restriction and quality of life CONCLUSION: among the reasons for not attending the service, we can highlight: forgetting the appointment, health problems and work reasons. It was observed that patients who did not attend the audiologic follow-up showed statistically significant post-adaptation results inferior when compared to the patients who attended the follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: The implementation of hearing screening programs can be facilitated by reducing operating costs, including the cost of equipment. The Telessaúde (TS) audiometer is a low-cost, software-based, and easy-to-use piece of equipment for conducting audiometric screening. AIM: To evaluate the TS audiometer for conducting audiometric screening. METHODS: A prospective randomized study was performed. Sixty subjects, divided into those who did not have (group A, n = 30) and those who had otologic complaints (group B, n = 30), underwent audiometric screening with conventional and TS audiometers in a randomized order. Pure tones at 25 dB HL were presented at frequencies of 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz. A "fail" result was considered when the individual failed to respond to at least one of the stimuli. Pure-tone audiometry was also performed on all participants. The concordance of the results of screening with both audiometers was evaluated. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of screening with the TS audiometer were calculated. RESULTS: For group A, 100% of the ears tested passed the screening. For group B, "pass" results were obtained in 34.2% (TS) and 38.3% (conventional) of the ears tested. The agreement between procedures (TS vs. conventional) ranged from 93% to 98%. For group B, screening with the TS audiometer showed 95.5% sensitivity, 90.4% sensitivity, and positive and negative predictive values equal to 94.9% and 91.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the TS audiometer were similar to those obtained with the conventional audiometer, indicating that the TS audiometer can be used for audiometric screening.