South African hearing conservation programmes in the context of tele-audiology: A scoping review.

The review became a scoping review because too few studies met the criteria, so it cannot show whether tele-audiology works in hearing conservation programmes. No included study directly tested tele-audiology in occupational noise-induced hearing loss or hearing conservation programmes, so the findings are about mapping a gap, not about effectiveness. The search was limited to English and only the first 10 Google Scholar hits were screened, so relevant non-English or lower-ranked work may have been missed. The indirect evidence mostly came from general audiology, position papers, or booth-less audiometry studies, not from occupational audiology contexts where legal and policy issues matter. The authors note low tele-audiology use, access and connectivity problems, reimbursement questions, and unresolved health technology assessment policy, all of which would limit implementation.

Do not conclude that tele-audiology is validated for hearing conservation programmes because booth-less audiometry studies were positive. The review found no study specifically testing tele-audiology in occupational noise-induced hearing loss or hearing conservation programmes, and it says efficacy requires future investigation.