“Do You See What I Hear?”: Designing for Collocated Patient–Practitioner Collaboration in Audiological Consultations

References

• Abrams, H., Edwards, B., Valentine, S., & Fitz, K. (2011). A patient-adjusted fine-tuning approach for optimizing hearing aid response. Hearing Review, 18(3), 18–27.
   Google Scholar
• Aggarwal, D., Ploderer, B., Vetere, F., Bradford, M., & Hoang, T. (2016). Doctor, Can You See My Squats?: Understanding bodily communication in video consultations for physiotherapy. Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. doi:10.1145/2901790.2901871
   Google Scholar
• Agnew, J. (1998). The causes and effects of distortion and internal noise in hearing aids. Trends in Amplification, 3(3), 82–118. doi:10.1177/108471389800300302
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Alsos, O. A., Das, A., & Svanæs, D. (2012). Mobile health IT: The effect of user interface and form factor on doctor-patient communication. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 81(1), 12–28. doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2011.09.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alsos, O. A., & Svanæs, D. (2006). Interaction techniques for using handhelds and PCs together in a clinical setting. Proceedings of the 4th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: changing roles. doi:10.1145/1182475.1182489
   Google Scholar
• Arlinger, S. (2003). Negative consequences of uncorrected hearing loss––a review. International Journal of Audiology, 42(sup2), S17–20. doi:10.3109/14992020309074639
   Google Scholar
• Bagalkot, N., & Sokoler, T. (2011). MyReDiary: Co-Designing for Collaborative Articulation in Physical Rehabilitation. Proceedings of the ECSCW 2011 European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. doi:10.1007/978-0-85729-913-0_7
   Google Scholar
• Barry, M. J., & Edgman-Levitan, S. (2012). Shared Decision Making — The Pinnacle of Patient-Centered Care. The New England Journal of Medicine, 366(9), 780–781. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1109283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernabeo, E., & Holmboe, E. S. (2013). Patients, providers, and systems need to acquire a specific set of competencies to achieve truly patient-centered care. Health Affairs, 32(2), 250–258. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y., Ngo, V., Harrison, S., & Duong, V. (2011). Unpacking exam-room computing: Negotiating computer-use in patient-physician interactions. Proceedings of the CHI 2011 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. doi:10.1145/1978942.1979438
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Cord, M., Baskent, D., Kalluri, S., & Moore, B. (2007). Disparity between clinical assessment and real-world performance of hearing aids. Hear Reviews, 14, 22–26.
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, Y., Alsos, O. A., & Svanæs, D. (2010). Fidelity considerations for simulation-based usability assessments of mobile ICT for hospitals. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 26(5), 445–476. doi:10.1080/10447311003719938
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl, Y., & Hanssen, G. K. (2016). Breaking the sound barrier: designing for patient participation in audiological consultations. Proceedings of the CHI 2016 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. doi:10.1145/2858036.2858126
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, Y., Linander, H., & Hanssen, G. K. (2014). Co-designing interactive tabletop solutions for active patient involvement in audiological consultations. Proceedings of the NordiCHI 2014 Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. doi:10.1145/2639189.2639221
   Google Scholar
• Dahl, Y., & Svanæs, D. (2008). A comparison of location and token-based interaction techniques for point-of-care access to medical information. Personal Ubiquitous Computation, 12(6), 459–478. doi:10.1007/s00779-007-0141-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalton, N., MacKay, G., & Holland, S. (2012). Kolab: Appropriation & improvisation in mobile tangible collaborative interaction. Proceedings of the DIS 2012 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. doi:10.1145/2317956.2317960
   Google Scholar
• Deppermann, A. (2012). Negotiating hearing problems in doctor-patient interaction: Practices and problems of accomplishing shared reality. In M. Egbert & A. Deppermann (Eds.), Hearing aids communication: Integrating social interaction, audiology and user centered design to improve communication with hearing loss and hearing technologies (pp. 90–103). Mannheim, Germany: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung.
   Google Scholar
• Dix, A. (2007). Designing for appropriation. Proceedings of the BCS-HCI 2007 British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers, University of Lancaster, United Kingdom — September 03 - 07, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Egbert, M., & Matthews, B. (2012). User centered design: From understanding hearing loss and hearing technologies towards understanding interaction. In M. Egbert & A. Deppermann (Eds.), Hearing aids communication: Integrating social interaction, audiology and user centered design to improve communication with hearing loss and hearing technologies (pp. 48–55). Mannheim, Germany: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung.
   Google Scholar
• Elberling, C., & Worsoe, K. (2006). fading sounds: about hearing and hearing aids. Bording A/S, DK-2730 The Oticon Foundation, Herlev, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, C. A., Gibbs, S. J., & Rein, G. (1991). Groupware: Some issues and experiences. Communications of the ACM, 34(1), 39–58. doi:10.1145/99977.99987
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• English, K. (2005). Get ready for the Next Big Thing in audiologic counseling. Hearing Journal, 58(7), 10–15. doi:10.1097/01.HJ.0000286416.66547.47
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, R. M., & Street, R. L. J. (2011). The values and value of patient-centered care. Annals of Family Medicine, 9(2), 100–103. doi:10.1370/afm.1239
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleck, R., Rogers, Y., Yuill, N., Marshall, P., Carr, A., Rick, J., & Bonnett, V. (2009). Actions speak loudly with words: Unpacking collaboration around the table. Proceedings of the ITS 2009 International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces. doi:10.1145/1731903.1731939
   Google Scholar
• Gilligan, J., & Weinstein, B. E. (2014). Health literacy and patient-centered care in audiology – implications for adult aural rehabilitation. Communicable Disorders Deaf Studies Hearing Aids, 2(110). doi:10.4172/2375-4427.1000110
   Google Scholar
• Goff, A. E. (2013). The use of hearing aid outcome measures in the audiologic treatment of older adults. Department of Speech and Hearing Science, Ohio State University, OH, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Grenness, C., Hickson, L., Laplante-Lévesque, A., & Davidson, B. (2014). Patient-centred audiological rehabilitation: Perspectives of older adults who own hearing aids. International Journal of Audiology, 53(Suppl 1), 68–75. doi:10.3109/14992027.2013.866280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grenness, C., Hickson, L., Laplante-Lévesque, A., Meyer, C., & Davidson, B. (2015). Communication patterns in audiologic rehabilitation history-taking: Audiologists, patients, and their companions. Ear and Hearing, 36(2), 191–204. doi:10.1097/AUD.0000000000000100
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanssen, G. K., & Dahl, Y. (2016). A participatory design approach to develop an interactive sound environment simulator. American Journal of Audiology, 25(3S), 268–271. doi:10.1044/2016_AJA-16-0005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinemann, T., Matthews, B., & Raudaskoski, P. (2012). Hearing aid adjustment: Translating symptom descriptions into treatment and dealing with expectations. In M. Egbert & A. Deppermann (Eds.), Hearing aids communication: Integrating social interaction, audiology and user centrered desighn to improve communication with hearing loss and hearing technologies (pp. 113–124). Mannheim, Germany: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung.
   Google Scholar
• Humes, L. E. (1999). Dimensions of hearing aid outcome. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 10(1), 26–39.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ISO 9241-210. (2010). Ergonomics of human-system interaction – Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. International organization for standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Jenstad, L. M., Van Tasell, D. J., & Ewert, C. (2003). Hearing aid troubleshooting based on patient’s descriptions. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 14, 7.
   Google Scholar
• Jerger, J. (2009). Ecologically valid measures of hearing aid performance. Starkey Audiology Series, 1(1), 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Keidser, G., & Convery, E. (2016). Self-fitting hearing aids: status quo and future predictions. Trends in Hearing, 20(1). doi:10.1177/2331216516643284
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kjeldsen, M. P., & Matthews, B. (2008). Talking about hearing: Designing from users’ problematisations. Proceedings of the NordiCHI 2008 Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. doi:10.1145/1463160.1463237
   Google Scholar
• Knutson, J. F., & Lansing, C. R. (1990). The relationship between communication problems and psychological difficulties in persons with profound acquired hearing loss. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55(8). doi:10.1044/jshd.5504.656
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Koschmann, T., Zemel, A., Conlee-Stevens, M., Young, N., Robbs, J., & Barnhart, A. (2005). How do people learn? Members’ methods and communicative mediation. In R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, & H. Spada (Eds.), Barriers and biases in computer-mediated knowledge communication—And how they may be overcome (pp. 265–294). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Lauritzen, S. O., & Hyden, L.-C. (2007). Medical technologies, the life world and normality. In S. O. Lauritzen & L.-C. Hyden (Eds.), Medical technologies and the life world: the social construction of normality. London, New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• Luff, P., & Heath, C. (1998). Mobility in collaboration. Proceedings of the CSCW 1998 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. doi:10.1145/289444.289505
   Google Scholar
• Martin, G. (2014). Pragmatics and medical discourse. In K. P. Schneider & A. Barron (Eds.), Pragmatics of discourse. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R. L. (2004). Wear your hearing aids or your brain will rust. The Hearing Journal, 57(1), 46. doi:10.1097/01.HJ.0000292405.09805.5a
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, B., & Heinemann, T. (2009). Technology use and patient participation in audiological consultations. Amj, 1(12), 174–180. doi:10.4066/AMJ.2009.99
   Google Scholar
• McCormack, A., & Fortnum, H. (2013). Why do people fitted with hearing aids not wear them? International Journal of Audiology, 52(5), 360–368. doi:10.3109/14992027.2013.769066
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meddis, R., Lecluyse, W., Tan, C. M., Panda, M. R., & Ferry, R. (2010). Beyond the audiogram: identifying and modeling patterns of hearing deficits. In E. A. Lopez-Poveda, A. R. Palmer, & R. Meddis (Eds.), The neurophysiological bases of auditory perception (pp. 631–640). New York, NY: Springer New York.
   Google Scholar
• Mishler, E. G. (1984). The discourse of medicine: dialectics of medical interviews. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Moroney, W. F., & Lilienthal, M. G. (2008). Human factors in simulation and training – an overview. In D. A. Vincenzi, J. A. Wise, M. Mouloua, & P. A. Hancock (Eds.), Human factors in simulation and training. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Moylan, W. (2007). Understanding and crafting the mix: the art of recording. Burlington, MA: Focal Press.
   Google Scholar
• Öberg, M. (2008). Approaches to Audiological Rehabilitation with Hearing Aids: Studies on pre-fitting strategies and assessment of outcomes ( Doctoral thesis). Division of Technical Audiology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Linköping University, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Pekkola, S. (2003). Designed for unanticipated use: Common artefacts as design principle for CSCW applications. Proceedings of the GROUP 2003 Conference on Supporting group work. doi:10.1145/958160.958218
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, Y., & Lindley, S. (2004). Collaborating around vertical and horizontal large interactive displays: Which way is best? Interacting with Computers, 16(6), 1133–1152. doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2004.07.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rommetveit, R. (1979). On the architecture of intersubjectivity. In R. Rommetveit & R. M. Blakar (Eds.), Studies of language, thought and verbal communication (pp. 147–161). London, UK: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roter, D., & Hall, J. A. (2006). Doctors talking with patients/patients talking with doctors: improving communication in medical visits. Westport, CT: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1978). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking for conversation. In J. N. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction. New York, NY: Academic Press (originally 1974).
   Google Scholar
• Sandman, L., & Munthe, C. (2010). Shared decision making, paternalism and patient choice. Health Care Analysis, 18(1), 60–84. doi:10.1007/s10728-008-0108-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, S. D., Carpendale, M. S. T., & Inkpen, K. M. (2004). Territoriality in collaborative tabletop workspaces. Proceedings of the CSCW 2004 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. doi:10.1145/1031607.1031655
   Google Scholar
• Stahl, G. (2016). From intersubjectivity to group cognition. Computation Supported Cooperative Work, 25(4–5), 355–384. doi:10.1007/s10606-016-9243-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘Translations’, and Boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals on Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420. doi:10.1177/030631289019003001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, M., Brown, J. B., Donner, A., McWhinney, I. R., Oates, J., Weston, W. W., & Jordan, J. (2000). The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes. The Journal of Family Practice, 49(9), 796–804.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Street, R. J., Gordon, H., Ward, M., Krupat, E., & Kravitz, R. (2005). Patient participation in medical consultations: Why some patients are more involved than others. Medical Care, 43(10), 960–969. doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000178172.40344.70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tchounikine, P. (2016). Designing for appropriation: a theoretical account. Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1–41. doi:10.1080/07370024.2016.1203263
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ten Have, P. (2007). Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide. London, UK: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Von Krogh, G. (1998). Care in knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 133–153. doi:10.2307/41165947
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb, H., Heath, C., Vom Lehn, D., & Gibson, W. (2013). Engendering response: professional gesture and the assessment of eyesight in optometry consultations. Symbolic Interaction, 36(2), 137–158. doi:10.1002/symb.55
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wyatt, J. C. (2001). Management of explicit and tacit knowledge. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 94(1), 6–9. doi:10.1177/014107680109400102
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar