{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Outcomes of Aural Rehabilitation Provided in Person or by Telehealth Among Deaf/Hard of Hearing Young Children with Cochlear Implants or Hearing Aids.
{Author}: Grigsby J;Sharma A;Stredler-Brown A;Cavanaugh J;Elder S;Kahn GS;Min SJ;Schlenker R;Walker K;Withrow S;Hull F;
{Journal}: Telemed J E Health
{Volume}: 0
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 Jul 3
{Factor}: 5.033
{DOI}: 10.1089/tmj.2023.0634
{Abstract}: Background: Cochlear implants and hearing aids may facilitate the development of listening and spoken language (LSL) in deaf/hard of hearing young children, but they require aural rehabilitation therapy-often unavailable outside urban areas-for optimal outcomes. This trial assessed the relative effectiveness of LSL therapy delivered either in person or by interactive video. The hypothesis was that telehealth service delivery would be noninferior to in-person therapy. Methods: Most parents refused randomization of their children to telehealth or in-person conditions; therefore, randomization was impossible. In consultation with the funder (NIDCD), the study design was modified. Parents were allowed to select their preferred study condition, and the study team was blinded to group membership. Forty-two families were in the in-person group and 35 in telehealth (40 and 30, respectively, after attrition). Primary endpoints were total score, auditory comprehension, and expressive communication on the Preschool Language Scale, 5th edition. There were several secondary speech, hearing, and language outcome measures. Assessments occurred at baseline and at follow-up after 6 months of LSL therapy. Results: Propensity scores were used to create two matched groups. At baseline, groups did not differ on PLS-5 scores. Change from baseline to F/U on age-equivalents for all three scores was nearly identical for both groups, although the telehealth group was younger, on average, than the in-person group. Discussion: Telehealth was noninferior to in-person services for all primary endpoints. For secondary outcomes, neither group demonstrated a significant advantage. Magnitudes of estimated group differences were small, suggesting nonsignificant differences not predominantly because of sample size. The telehealth group showed greater improvement on 15/24 of secondary language outcome measures. The findings provide evidence that telehealth is equivalent to in-person care for providing LSL therapy to young children with cochlear implants and hearing aids.