Objective: A shortened version of the 66-item Profile of Hearing Aid Performance (PHAP), consisting of the 24 items from the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, was evaluated as an alternative to the full PHAP questionnaire as a measure of hearing aid performance. Objectives were to: 1) statistically determine factors underlying Abbreviated PHAP (APHAP) scores; 2) recommend modifications to the questionnaire, if indicated by the factor analysis; 3) compare scores for the PHAP and APHAP; and 4) determine the suitability of the abbreviated questionnaire for New Zealand hearing aid users. The relationship between hearing aid performance and subjective variables and other measures of hearing aid success also was investigated.
Design: PHAP data, hearing aid satisfaction ratings, and reported daily hearing aid use were obtained from experienced adult hearing aid users. Factor analysis was carried out for the 24 APHAP items, and two items were excluded because of low factor loadings. After this modification, APHAP and PHAP scores were compared. Pearson's correlation values were determined for PHAP and APHAP data and degree of hearing loss, hearing aid satisfaction, and hours of hearing aid use.
Results: APHAP hearing aid performance was better described as three factors rather than four subscales. PHAP and APHAP results were consistent with previous studies and showed that hearing aid performance was best for easy listening situations and poorest for noisy and/or reverberant conditions. Similar trends were seen for PHAP and APHAP data. APHAP scores were correlated with hours of hearing aid use and overall hearing aid satisfaction.
Conclusions: A shortened, 22-item APHAP is a preferred alternative to the full PHAP, producing data representing several dimensions of hearing aid performance. Modified APHAP scores can be used together with overall satisfaction and estimates of daily hearing aid use to measure success with hearing aids.