Ricketts, Todd A.

Objective: To present key data from a private marketing report that characterizes US hearing aid (HA) utilization, HA candidate and user population sizes, and HA pricing. Patients: HA candidates and users in the United States. Interventions: Hearing amplification. Main Outcome Measures: HA utilization, HA candidate and user population sizes, HA market size and value, and HA pricing. Results: In 2015, an estimated 8.5 million HA users accounted for a total of 15.4 million individual HA devices in the United States. Approximately 81% of HA users owned bilateral devices. In 2015, approximately 87% of devices were purchased as replacements by current HA users, while the remaining 13% of devices were purchased by new HA users. HA utilization rates among the candidate population approximated 21% in 2015, which was stable over the 3-year study period. In 2015, there was a net increase of 696,060 individuals who met HA candidacy criteria but did not undergo treatment with HAs, adding to the backlog of 31.0 million untreated HA candidates who existed before that year. The HA market was valued at $6.0 billion in 2015, with an average retail selling price of $1798 per device ($3596 per pair). In the same year, the average manufacturer selling price was $495 per device ($990 per pair), or nearly 1 quarter of the retail price. Conclusions: HAs are substantially under-utilized in the United States with an annually growing backlog of untreated HA candidates.

PurposeSeveral studies have been devoted to understanding the frequency information available to adult users of cochlear implants when listening in quiet. The objective of this study was to construct frequency importance functions for a group of adults with cochlear implants and a group of adults with normal hearing both in quiet and in a +10 dB signal-to-noise ratio.MethodTwo groups of adults, 1 with cochlear implants and 1 with normal hearing, were asked to identify nonsense syllables in quiet and in the presence of 6-talker babble while “holes” were systematically created in the speech spectrum. Frequency importance functions were constructed.ResultsResults showed that adults with normal hearing placed greater weight on bands 1, 3, and 4 than on bands 2, 5, and 6, whereas adults with cochlear implants placed equal weight on all bands. The frequency importance functions for each group did not differ between listening in quiet and listening in noise.ConclusionsAdults with cochlear implants assign perceptual weight toward different frequency bands, though the weight assignment does not differ between quiet and noisy conditions. Generalizing these results to the broader population of adults with implants is constrained by a small sample size.