Part II: Evaluation of professional functioning 87 The secondary analysis revealed a significant difference for two of the three personal adjustment subscales, respectively for acceptance of loss and for the subscale stress and withdrawal (Table 5). No significant differences were found in the three communication strategies subscales. Table 5. Paired t-tests of CPHI subscales before and after receiving aural rehabilitation (n = 50) Baseline (T0) Follow up (T1) Difference T1 - T0 t p Personal adjustments Self-acceptancea 3.70 (1.04) 3.91 (0.91) 0.21 (0.72) 1.87 .07 Acceptance of lossa 3.17 (0.93) 3.62 (1.67) 0.45 (1.32) 2.87 .01 Stress and withdrawala 3.05 (0.88) 3.28 (0.98) 0.23 (0.51) 2.17 .04 Communication strategies Maldaptive behaviora 4.02 (0.76) 4.07 (0.73) 0.05 (0.53) 0.54 .59 Verbal strategiesa 2.97 (0.89) 3.09 (0.89) 0.12 (0.76) 1.01 .32 Non-verbal strategiesa 3.84 (0.96) 3.84 (0.85) 0.00 (0.64) 0.10 .92 SSQ indicates Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of hearing scale. a Higher scores indicate more adequate coping behavior. In 29 patients, the difference between the NFR score at T0 and T1 was 5.77 or less (Figure 3). In 2 patients, the NFR scores increased more than 5.77. In 16 patients, the NFR score decreased more than 5.77. There were no obvious differences in the improvement in NFR between patients receiving different hearing aid interventions. Figure 3. Scatterplot of need for recovery scores at T0 and T1 for employees who received different hearing aid interventions. Icons on the diagonal represent need for recovery scores that were exactly the same at T0 and T1. The two other lines show the smallest detectable change of 5.77. The icons are colored in for the employees in which the need for recovery score had changed more than the smallest detectable change. HA indicates Hearing Aid.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw