Hanneke Van der Hoek-Snieders

Summary 185 hearing status was significantly associated with listening effort, but the interaction between hearing status and the subjective noise level was not. Hearing status nor the interaction between hearing status and the subjective noise level were significantly associated with NFR. Therefore, the Occupational Ear Check is expected to be unable to predict subjective listening difficulties at the workplace at an individual level. The predictive value of the occupational ear check for high need for recovery is expected to be even poorer. It was concluded that the value of occupational hearing screening appears to be early identification of hearing loss in employees, but not identification work functioning difficulties. Part II: Evaluation of professional functioning In chapter 3, we evaluated the need for recovery and listening effort of employees before and after they received aural rehabilitation at an audiological center using tools that are currently used in audiological practice. A total of 50 employees completed a questionnairebeforeandafterreceivingauralrehabilitation.Bothoutcomessignificantly improved on group level, although improvement was only accomplished in part of the employees. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses revealed that the change in the need for recovery could best be explained by change in personal adjustments, but also by change in listening effort and self-reported hearing ability. Change in listening effort was significantly associated with change in personal adjustments, auditory work demands, and self-reported hearing ability. It was concluded that improving current practices should be considered and evaluated, for example by applying a different combination of rehabilitation components. It was suggested that interventions that stimulate the use of effective personal adjustments may be promising to further reduce the need for recovery of employees with hearing loss. The use of personal adjustments and communication strategies was hypothesized to improve after a communication group-training which might also result in a reduction of the need for recovery. In chapter 4, we therefore evaluated the personal adjustments, need for recovery and communication strategies of employees with hearing loss before and after a communication group-training. The communication trainingof the twoparticipatingwasdifferent, for examplewithrespect to theduration and the content of the training. Nine employees were included at two audiological centers and completed a questionnaire before and directly after a communication group training. Descriptive results were provided, because the number of included

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw