Over-the-Counter (OTC) Hearing Aids
- Part 1
by Mark Ross, Ph.D.
Editor: The topic of over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids is heating up
again! There was a spike in interest last summer/fall with the Wall Street
Journal article and petition to the Food and Drug Administration, and then
things settled down again. Now I'm starting to see new activity on this
issue.
Here with a dispassionate look at the topic is Dr. Mark Ross. We would
be very interested in publishing responsible articles with additional
points of view on this topic!
This article first appeared in the September/October 2004 issue of
"Hearing Loss"; it is reprinted here with Dr. Ross' kind
permission.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Judging from the most recent edition of Audiology Today (May/June
2004), the issue of OTC hearing aids is still roiling the hearing aid
industry, particularly the dispensing community. Its present incarnation
began with a feature article in the March 24, 2004 issue of the Wall
Street Journal. The article implicates the high cost of hearing aids as
the most significant factor deterring people from obtaining hearing aids.
The author then refers to two citizen petitions to the Food and Drug
Administration: one to permit the sale of hearing aids over the counter
and the other to eliminate the requirement that adults obtain a medical
clearance before a hearing aid can be sold to them. (However, adults can
now sign a waiver in lieu of the medical clearance. More about this
later.)
The reasoning behind the petitions is the belief that the current cost
of hearing aids (average about $2300) is effectively pricing many people
out of the hearing aid market. The petitioners (Drs. Mead Killion and Gail
Gudmundsen) believe that people with mild to moderate hearing losses can
receive great benefit from a "one size fits most" type of
hearing aid - one that is inexpensive and convenient to acquire. At the
outset, it should be noted that neither of the petitioners believes,
considering the services required for the professional fitting of a modern
hearing aid, that hearing aids are currently overpriced. Rather, their
stated intention is to broaden the hearing aid market to reach many people
with hearing difficulties who are not currently receiving any help with
personal amplification.
In this article, I'd like to review the pros and cons of this debate in
as objective a fashion as I can. It's an issue that should be addressed,
not only for its implications for those presently unserved, but for the
entire hearing aid industry, particularly those who make their living
dispensing hearing aids. Although much of the debate has been framed in
black and white, often emotional terms, the issue is much more nuanced,
with the possibility of self-interest always lurking somewhere underneath
the surface. As the article proceeds, I'll also be discussing some of the
associated concerns arising from the Wall Street Journal article and the
two petitions.
It doesn't take too much research to discover that top-of-the-line
hearing aids are expensive. Nobody, not even the people who dispense them,
would dispute that. For example, one woman I know was quoted a figure of
$10,000 for two hearing aids, with FM boots and microphone/transmitter
included. A figure of this magnitude, even minus the cost of the personal
FM system (which I recommend), will produce palpitations in most people,
particularly those who are retirees on fixed incomes. At the dispenser
level, the rationale underlying this pricing structure is that it takes
time to test someone, fit the person with a hearing aid, and to provide
the required follow-ups. As, indeed, it does. Whether and how often this
high cost deters people from purchasing hearing aids is another question,
and, despite a number of marketing surveys, no good answer is available.
Common sense and numerous anecdotal reports suggest that asking people to
lay out four or five thousand dollars for two hearing aids is going to be
a deterrent. This also applies to people who would like to replace a
current set of hearing aids with more modern ones, but are postponing the
decision because of cost.
We should recognize that people do not purchase hearing aids for many
reasons other than their high cost. Some people may not even be fully
aware that they have a significant hearing loss (although their family and
associates will certainly know). Others deny the hearing loss entirely, or
believe that their degree of communication difficulty does not warrant the
"drastic" step of wearing hearing aids. Still others find the
notion that they are somehow "deficient" simply unacceptable and
refuse to advertise their "infirmity" by wearing a visible
hearing device. Indeed, many of these people would not wear hearing aids
even if they were free of charge.
It is difficult to estimate exactly how many people are deterred from
purchasing hearing aids by their cost. The results one could obtain from a
potential survey would vary according to respondents and phrasing of the
question. To arrive at the most accurate estimate, one would have to query
only those people who acknowledge their hearing loss and are favorably
inclined to purchase hearing aids, but for whom price is the primary
obstacle. Then the researcher would have to determine the point at which
these people would decide that the hearing difficulty they experience
warrants the cost of reducing its impact. Given sufficient difficulty,
cost becomes a lesser factor (witness people who acquire cochlear
implants).
The major rationale given for OTC hearing aids is that by reducing
their cost and making their acquisition more convenient, we can increase
the proportion of people who use hearing aids compared to those who need
them. Right now, this figure is about 20% and it has hovered around there
for many years. As it happens, we really don't know how many people with
hearing problems in this country (estimated to be between 20 and 28
million) can presumably benefit from amplification. All we know, by
extrapolating from various studies, are the proportions of people who fail
some predetermined hearing loss criteria, but we don't know how many can
be considered hearing aid candidates. However, we do have a better idea of
the number of people wearing hearing aids compared to the total number of
people in the U.S. Using this calculation, we find that a little more than
2% of our population now wear hearing aids. However, regardless of the
figure given and how it is computed, it is clear that many people with
hearing loss are not now wearing hearing aids, with some unknown number
being discouraged by their expense.
Next