Improved Quality of Life
Research has shown that participation in Group AR resulted in improved outcomes on the "mental component subscale" of a health related quality of life measure in new hearing aid users who also participated in Group AR.
A cost-utility analysis of adult group audiologic rehabilitation: are the benefits worth the cost?
The purpose of this study was to conduct a cost-utility analysis comparing two treatment approaches: (1) hearing aid use alone (HA) and (2) hearing aid use with short-term group postfitting audiologic rehabilitation (HA + AR). A total of 105 veterans, 67 males and 38 females, with at least a mild sensorineural hearing loss participated in this study. The SF-36V was administered to each participant before and after treatment. This instrument measures both mental component summary (MCS) scales and physical component summary (PCS) scales of quality of life. As a whole, the participants exhibited a statistically significant improvement in mean MCS scores pre- to postintervention, with average improvements of 1.4 and 3.0 points for the HA and HA + AR groups, respectively. With the use of the MCS scores, the results of a cost-utility analysis revealed that HA treatment cost $60.00 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, while HA + AR cost only $31.91 per QALY gained, making HA + AR the more cost-effective treatment.
Abrams, H. B., Chisolm, T. H., & McArdle, R. (2002). A cost-utility analysis of adult group audiologic rehabilitation: are the benefits worth the cost? Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 39, 549-558.