A comparison of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on communication among individuals with and without hearing impairment

Abstract

Objective: This study assessed the impact of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) preventative measures on hearing and communication among individuals with normal and impaired hearing. We also evaluated the use of digital communication tools between these groups.

Design: For this cross-sectional study, participants completed an online digits-in-noise test and survey. Survey topics included understanding through masks, behind plastic screens, from a 1.5-m distance, and use of social network sites/apps, direct messaging, and video calling. Logistic regressions assessed the odds of disagreeing versus agreeing with survey statements.

Study Sample: A total of 880 adults from the National Longitudinal Study on Hearing completed a survey and hearing test. Based on speech reception threshold scores, participants were categorised into “good” (reference group for all analyses), “insufficient”, or “poor” hearing groups.

Results: Those with insufficient and poor hearing had more difficulty understanding others through facemasks, plastic screens, and from 1.5 m. Those with poor hearing had a higher odds of video calling more to contact family/friends/acquaintances during the pandemic, but also had more difficulty hearing sufficiently through video calls.

Conclusions: This study addresses methodological weaknesses in previous studies. Results strengthen current evidence of the burden COVID-19 measures place on individuals with hearing impairment.

Keywords:

• Hearing impairment
• communication
• COVID-19
• facemasks
• social distancing

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the participants who provided valuable time and data to this study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, S.E. Kramer, upon reasonable request.

Additional information

Funding

Data collection was funded by the research program ‘Quality of Care’ of the Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute. Analysis and publication as funded by Stichting Het Heinsius-Houbolt Fonds (Heinsius-Houbolt Funds).