
doi: 10.61409/a08230501
pmid: 38533878
INTRODUCTION. Capacity constraints in Danish hearing healthcare may lead to diagnostic delays and repetitive pre-treatment audiological exams for hearing-impaired patients. This study investigated the effectiveness of remote ear-nose-throat (ENT) specialist assessments (RESA) for complicated hearing loss, comparing the accuracy of private ENT specialists and medical audiologists. METHODS. RESA screening accuracy was determined for four ENT specialists, individually and as subspecialised groups. These assessments were benchmarked against “gold standard” in-person ENT assessments for 445 potential adult first-time hearing aid users. RESULTS. Medical audiologists initially recorded lower RESA screening specificity and positive predictive values than private ENT specialists. However, after making two adjustments to the dataset, these differences were neutralised. Screening sensitivity was consistent across individual and grouped subspecialities. CONCLUSIONS. RESA screening is a promising tool for timely diagnosis and treatment. The findings reveal that both private ENT specialists and medical audiologists may conduct RESA with high consistency and uniformity. FUNDING. This research was funded by the Danish Health Data Authority and the North Denmark Region, but does not reflect their views. The study received no commercial support. TRIAL REGISTRATION. Not relevant.
Adult, Hearing Aids, Hearing, Humans, Hearing Loss
Adult, Hearing Aids, Hearing, Humans, Hearing Loss
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
