The Ear Foundation has recently released two parts of a study focusing on the challenges of adults living with hearing loss, and what initiatives can be taken to improve their quality of life. The reports were led by Ida Institute Advisory Board member Sue Archbold for the UK-based charity, which specializes in cochlear implants and family centered care.
The second and latest installment of the study focuses on the cost of not treating hearing loss. Rather than calculating how much would be spent on implants and doctors’ visits, they have instead calculated what is lost because of unemployment, lost tax revenues and lost expenditures.
“Ciaran O’Neill is the guy who does that for us,” says Sue Archbold in a phone call. “He worked with us to get the cost effectiveness of cochlear implantation. Years ago we did some work looking at the costs of managing the costs of children with cochlear implants and looking at the costs of managing children without cochlear implants educationally. That proved to NICE [National Institute for Health and Care Excellence] that it was cheaper to provide cochlear implants.”
O’neill previously used the same methodologies on work he published with obesity.
“We’re putting together a whole range of evidence to move forward with this action group about adults with cochlear implants,” says Archbold. “We have clinical commissioning groups now, and one of them has recently decided that they would not fit hearing aids for adults with mild to moderate hearing loss. We’re currently fighting that battle. Some of the ammunition that we have in that report and the first report that we did is being used there. There are a number of groups of us fighting that, but we’re not winning at the moment. It’s all about short term. It’s all about cutting the budget without looking at the bigger picture.”
The report also examines long-term health consequences, taking into consideration that hearing loss is associated with increased susceptibility to injury and illness.
The first part of the study is an assessment of the gaps in availability of hearing care to people, citing, for example, that 45% of those who seek help with the hearing from a general practitioner are not referred for an audiological assessment. The reports, as well as sharing findings, also recommend that current NICE guidelines for unilateral and bilateral cochlear implant candidacy – currently based on out-of-date technologies – be reviewed and that a national hearing loss screening program for adults be introduced.
“We’ve now set up a strategy group to move on with adult cochlear implantation, particularly in the UK, and getting NICE to change the guidelines,” says Archbold.
While the study estimated the costs of these interventions at £255 million over 10 years, the Ear Foundation believes the savings to the UK economy could be £30 billion per year.
As the Ear Foundation is based in the UK, it is mostly tailored to the needs of the British people and the impact on both the British economy and the NHS. However, there is supporting data from different countries that demonstrates that the concerns and potential losses are universal. A survey by the National Family Opinion in the US shows individual income loss for untreated hearing loss at up to $12,000 per year, depending on the degree, contributing to a 2-3% loss to the Gross National Product. They project that hearing aids could mitigate the effect by up to 50%.
In Australia, the social cost is estimated at $10.49 billion, 57% of which is made up by productivity loss. In Italy, it has been determined that the medical cost of deafness only account for 3.8% of expenses, where as 96.2% come from impacts on the welfare and educational systems.
The reports were put together by Archbold, O’Neill, and Brian Lamb. Reports One and Two are available to read in their entirety on the Ear Foundation website. The third installment, about increasing access to cochlear implants, will be presented in October 2015.