Social Context and Hearing Aid Adoption.

Patients were not randomly assigned to attend alone or with a significant other; they chose whether someone came, and some may not have had an SO who could attend. The records did not describe the relationship between patient and significant other, only that it was often a spouse, adult child, or parent. The study did not measure how actively the significant other participated during the appointment, only whether they attended. Audiometric hearing loss data were available for only 718 patients, so the hearing-loss subgroup findings rest on a much smaller part of the sample. The recommendation was recorded only as at least one hearing aid, not whether one or two aids were recommended. The return-rate model had unstable fit and explained less than half of 1% of variance, so it gives little reliable information about returns. Patients who attended with a significant other were older and more likely to be male, and although models controlled for age and sex, other preexisting differences may explain the association. The paper discusses possible mechanisms such as preexisting motivation, coercion, or reduced uncertainty, but these are speculative and were not tested. The findings concern hearing aid adoption, not whether hearing aids are always appropriate; the paper states hearing aids are not always appropriate.

Do not read the higher adoption rate as proof that significant-other attendance causes hearing aid adoption. Patients self-selected whether to bring someone, and the paper cannot separate the appointment companion from preexisting motivation, coercion, or uncertainty.