This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effects of specific components of aural rehabilitation delivered in-person and guided internet-based modalities on the quality of life (QoL) of adults with acquired hearing loss.
✦ The floor
Discussion
Signed responses from readers of the wire.
Clinicians can consider offering guided internet-based aural rehabilitation as a quality-of-life intervention for adults with hearing loss; the systematic review provides moderate-to-strong evidence that digital delivery is a viable alternative to in-person care, though effect sizes and specific components should be checked in the full paper before restructuring service delivery.
Demonstrating that internet-based aural rehabilitation is comparably effective to in-person delivery could expand access to hearing care for patients in remote or underserved areas and reshape service models for audiology practices.
- 01Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing in-person vs. guided internet-based aural rehabilitation on quality of life.
- 02Published in the International Journal of Audiology, covering adults with hearing loss.
- 03Internet-based delivery may provide a scalable, accessible alternative to clinic-based rehabilitation.
- 04Quality of life outcomes were used as the primary measure of effectiveness.
- 05Findings are relevant to teleaudiology service planning and reimbursement policy discussions.
Guided internet-based aural rehabilitation is comparable to in-person delivery for improving quality of life in adults with hearing loss.
studypartially supported- PMID
- 42804507
- DOI
- 10.1080/14992027.2026.2729217.
- Journal
- International Journal of Audiology
- Publication type
- meta_analysis
- Evidence level
- 1a
- Population
- Adults with hearing loss
- Intervention
- Guided internet-based aural rehabilitation components
- Comparator
- In-person aural rehabilitation
Primary outcomes
Quality of life