Hearing screening beyond the clinic: Childhood cancer survivors perceptions of a novel hearing screening program
Joerger, P.; Nigg, C.; Schreck, L.; Schindera, C.; Fessler, K.; Waespe, N.; Tomasikova, Z.; Ansari, M.; Frahsa, A.; Kuehni, C. E.
Show abstract
PurposeChildhood cancer survivors (CCS) are at risk for late effects including hearing loss due to ototoxic treatments. It is crucial to detect late effects like hearing loss early, but many adult CCS do not attend recommended follow-up care due to barriers such as accessibility and emotional concerns associated with revisiting medical facilities. To address those barriers, the HEAR-study piloted a new hearing screening program leveraging the extensive network of hearing aid shops across Switzerland. This study explored perspectives of CCS on this novel screening program. MethodsWe conducted semistructured interviews with 29 participants who completed pure-tone audiometric screening at a hearing aid shop as part of the HEAR-study. We used thematic analysis of interview transcripts, supported by MAXQDA for data analysis. ResultsThematic analysis revealed two key themes: First, participants appreciated the programs practicality, highlighting its efficiency and ease of integration into daily life. However, some noted concerns about the hearing test being an additional appointment. Some preferred centrally organized follow-up care, where different examinations are done at the same location within the same day. Second, participants valued the personal and approachable environment in hearing aid shops as a relaxed alternative to medical facilities, but some participants preferred hearing tests as part of an appointment with physicians, valuing immediate advice and contextual knowledge, especially in case hearing loss was found. ConclusionsFrom the perspectives of CCS, this screening program shows promise as a practicable, accessible way to evaluate hearing after childhood cancer. Further evaluation from the perspectives of health care providers is needed to comprehensibly assess its feasibility. Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov "NCT06036407", Registration date: 28.8.2023
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A country-wide health policy in Chile for deaf adults using cochlear implants: analysis of health determinants and social impacts 94%
- UK and US risk factors for hearing loss in neonatal intensive care unit infants 92%
- What do blind people "see" with retinal prostheses? Observations and qualitative reports of epiretinal implant users 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- The effectiveness of Ear Nose and Throat outreach programs for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: a systematic review 92%
- Evaluation on the Effectiveness on the Implementation of WHO-CST Programme in Hong Kong: A RCT Protocol 89%
- Exploring Vaccine Hesitancy in Care Home Employees in North West England: A Qualitative Study 89%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.