My name is Phil and I’m a Product Specialist with full-service tele-audiology company serving patients in the US.
Over the last several years, tele-care has become increasingly popular for its accessibility and convenience, so it was only natural that audiology would eventually follow suit.
In this thread, I’d like to discuss the benefits of tele-audiology, such as remote hearing aid adjustments and significantly lower out of pocket expense.
I also welcome any concerns or questions you might have about making the switch tele-audiology.
Whether you’re a current user or just curious, I invite you to share your experiences and ask questions.
Not at all. The sentiment is sincere. More than anything, want to open a dialogue and learn from people in this community.
Tele-care has been a thing for a long time; even extending into therapy. But for some reason, there still seems to be a bit of resistance to tele-audiology. I’m here to listen and get a better understanding of why.
Probably because it’s not the real option people are looking for, setting up appointments is a pain for most, especially when things need to be sorted quickly, waiting for some clinic to open and set a time up that suits them instead of the client, having to have an internet connection and a smartphone for older folks is not ideal, I think we need to remove the clinic right away from them thinking they know best, what actually needs to happen is to do away with “Tele-care” and get the manufacturers to step up and offer the solutions for this in their respective Apps, this is by far a better way as only the person using HAs could possibly know how they like things to sound, no Audiologist sitting in a clinical situation could possibly know this.
It’s also the final barrier to taking the market entirely online that gets in the way: clients want/need the tactile side of face to face part: despite however many manufacturers want to deny it.
Let’s be honest; the average client (Boomer/Gen-X) usually knows how to use their phone (a bit). They may have unidentified comms needs, possible dexterity issues (farmers fingers). Unknown levels of wax/awkward canals. Unknown volume canals and unknown programming skills.
Yet the industry wants to get this individual to select, program and use pretty complex devices by talking to a moron on a ‘support line’ who’s allegedly able to tweak the settings despite not even being able to see if the devices are physically blocked, inserted correctly or even if the ear is infected/blocked with wax. Yay! Go Morons!
@Phil_Injoy I’m bimodal, I’ve had remote checks on my CI now for the past 3 years. I’m not a fan at all, because the results I’ve gotten from the CI AuD is “your results are consistent with last year”. This result from the AuD tells me absolutely nothing, no WRS, CVC words or SRT results. It’s a totally useless result. And in my opinion it’s the biggest waste of my time doing it. I personally will never opt for having a remote check instead of a in-house, face to face mapping adjustment.
I am pretty much housebound with chronic illness, but would still not choose yet more remote healthcare. When I have a telephone appointment with the GP (a very rare event) I often leave feeling disappointed, fobbed off, not understood. Years ago I had a hip problem and was bounced from one professional to another for 5 years - until the time I sat in my GP’s office and waited, he said “you’re not going to leave until I do something are you?” my reply was no, he did then do something (a simple x ray) which got me the correct diagnosis,surgery and recovery. Now with remote consultations it is all too easy for the person on the other end to end the consultation as it’s as simple as putting the phone down rather than physically having to remove the client. I have now found a new audiologist who will do home consultations, more expensive, but hopefully better in the end.
@Um_bongo I agree that tele-audiology (like every other tele-care service) is not the right solution for everyone and don’t believe the market should or ever will be taken entirely online.
That said, I do believe there is a large number of patients who are good candidates for and can benefit greatly from online/OTP services.
I get the impression you think online providers are asking patients to program the hearing aids themselves… I can’t speak for other providers, but I can tell you that we program them using their most recent audiogram before shipping. From there, I’m sure you already know that newer hearing aid technology allows for remote adjustments.
You’re also correct in saying online services can’t physically clean and/or look into the patients’ canals; but I think there’s a lot to be said for a service and support staff who cares enough to ask questions in an effort to identify solutions when possible. That plus routine visits to an ENT for cleanings, etc can help overcome most of the issues you described…
So, you’re an online seller masquerading as a proponent of remote programming.
Most recent audiogram that you didn’t perform, have no working knowledge of their ears or underlying conditions and without doing any verification or actual in situ checks to even see if the most basic function of the aids is working.
As a DIY programmer, I see the benefit of remote programming for certain things, such as Program Options amendments.
I bought my Audeo P90-13Ts from an online provider. This was my Audiologists suggestion, as he couldn’t get near the price. They sent them with closed/vented domes to my Audiologists prescription. To be honest, the fitting wasn’t good, and wasn’t an improvement on my NHS Marvels. When I took them to my (then) Audiologist, he did (over 2 visits):
Took impressions for Slimtips
Avoided Feedback/Real ear (Target)
Completed Audiogram Direct
Did speech recognition tests
Battled with Phonaks feedback management
Took me outside in the traffic, to test his results, which were excellent, and well worth hos fees.
At this point I didn’t self programme these particular HAs, although I had the software. My next visit was just for programme options. This could easily have been done remotely. I had to show him what to do anyway, as Phonak wasn’t his preferred brand.
Peter
