The consequences of poorly managed hearing loss can be ameliorated with hearing aid use but rates of use are sub-optimal. The impact of audiologist behaviour on subsequent use, particularly over the long term, is unknown.
This study aimed to describe the role of the behaviour change wheel in developing an intervention to introduce and embed particular clinical behaviours into adult hearing aid fitting consultations, within the framework of the Medical Research Council guidance on complex interventions.
Following the steps of the behaviour change wheel, audiologist behaviours that might influence hearing aid use were identified based on a systematic review and qualitative work with audiologists. An analysis, using the COM-B model, identified potential drivers of the target behaviours. This was used to select intervention functions and behaviour change techniques likely to influence behaviour in this context.
The target behaviours were as follows: giving information about the benefits of hearing aid use and the negative consequences of non-use, providing prompts for use and engaging in collaborative behavioural planning for use. The behavioural analysis suggested that psychological capability, opportunity and motivation were potential drivers of these behaviours. The intervention functions of education, coercion, training, environmental restructuring, modelling and enablement were selected and combined to develop a single complex intervention that seeks to address the target behaviours.
This is the first study to use the behaviour change wheel to develop a complex intervention in the context of audiology. The theory-based development of the intervention will facilitate evaluation of its feasibility and effectiveness.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 October 2016.
All research outputs
#13,245,771
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#902
of 1,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,311
of 438,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#31
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,390 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 438,160 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
