Defining barriers in caring for seriously-ill children in a resource-limited setting: An observational study of 2 children's hospitals in Haiti

Background. According to the WHO 2007 country report, Haiti lags behind the Millennium Development Goal of reducing child mortality and maintains the highest under-5 mortality rate in the Western hemisphere. 3 Overall, few studies exist that seek to better grasp barriers in caring for a seriously ill child in a resource-limited setting and only a handful propose sustainable, effective interventions. ^ Objectives. The objectives of this study are to describe the prevalence of serious illnesses among children hospitalized at 2 children's hospitals in Port au Prince, to determine the barriers faced when caring for seriously ill children, and to report hospital outcomes of children admitted with serious illnesses. ^ Methods. Data were gathered from 2 major children's hospitals in Port au Prince, Haiti (Grace Children's Hospital [GCH] and Hopital d l'Universite d'Etat d'Haiti [HUEH]) using a triangulated approach of focus group discussions, physician questionnaires, and retrospective chart review. 23 pediatric physicians participated in focus group discussions and completed a self-administered questionnaire evaluating healthcare provider knowledge, self-efficacy, and perceived barriers relating to the care of seriously ill children in a resource-limited setting. A sample of 240 patient charts meeting eligibility criteria was abstracted for pertinent elements including sociodemographics, documentation, treatment strategies, and outcomes. Factors associated with mortality were analyzed using χ2 test and Fisher exact test [Minitab v.15]. ^ Results. The most common primary diagnoses at admission were gastroenteritis with moderate dehydration (35.5%), severe malnutrition (25.8%), and pneumonia (19.3%) for GCH, and severe malnutrition (32.6%), sepsis (24.7%), and severe respiratory distress (18%) for HUEH. Overall, 12.9% and 27% of seriously ill patients presented with shock to GCH and HUEH, respectively. ^ Shortage of necessary materials and equipment represented the most commonly reported limitation (18/23 respondents). According to chart data, 9.4% of children presenting with shock did not receive a fluid bolus, and only 8% of patients presenting with altered mental status or seizures received a glucose check. 65% of patients with meningitis did not receive a lumbar puncture due to lack of materials. ^ Hospital mortality rates did not differ by gender or by institution. Children who died were more likely to have a history of prematurity (OR 4.97 [95% CI 1.32-18.80]), an incomplete vaccination record (OR 4.05 [95% CI 1.68-9.74]), or a weight for age ≤3rd percentile (OR 6.1 [95% CI 2.49-14.93]. Case-fatality rates were significantly higher among those who presented with signs of shock compared with those who did not (23.1% vs. 10.7%, RR=2.16, p=0.03). Caregivers did not achieve shock reversal in 21% of patients and did not document shock reversal in 50% of patients. ^ Conclusions. Many challenges face those who seek to optimize care for seriously ill children in resource-limited settings. Specifically, in Haiti, qualitative and quantitative data suggest major issues with lack of supplies, pre-hospital factors, including malnutrition as a comorbidity, and early recognition and management of shock. A tailored intervention designed to address these issues is needed in order to prospectively evaluate improvements in child mortality in a high-risk population.^

An exploratory study of screening practices and barriers for postpartum depression in Texas

Purpose. To evaluate the prevalence of Postpartum Depression (PPD) screening among practicing obstetrician-gynecologists in Texas, and to identify factors and barriers associated with routine depression screening practices.^ Subjects. One hundred and eighty-nine fellows and junior fellows of the Texas Association of Obstetricians & Gynecologists (District XI).^ Methods. A survey questionnaire was developed and sent to 2,028 obstetriciangynecologists, asking about their current screening practices related to PPD. The survey questions were related to the physician's demographics, the patient population, screening practices, barriers to screening, and perceptions about resources in the community. Responses were analyzed to determine associations between these factors and the physician's screening practices. ^ Results. The respondents (n=189) constituted 9.3% of the surveyed population, thus the findings cannot be considered representative of all practicing Ob-Gyns in Texas. However, the following trends were observed. Of the respondents, 85.4% reported routinely screening for PPD, while 14.6% did not. However, of those that screened, only 20.2% used the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and 7.6% screened with the Postpartum Depression Screening Scale, both validated screening tools. The majority (77.2%) reported using an informal patient interview to screen. For those who did not routinely screen, inadequate training and inadequate resources to screen for PPD were the top two barriers. Physician's age was associated with routine screening practice, as older physicians were less likely to screen routinely. Primary insurance coverage of the patient population was also associated with screening practice; physicians with Medicaid and uninsured patients were less likely to screen routinely. Lastly, physicians that believed that adequate resources existed in their communities for the treatment of PPD were more likely to screen than those that did not.^ Conclusions. The present study is the first attempt at assessing Postpartum Depression screening practices and barriers in Texas. Although the response rate was low, the findings related to informal screening methods and inadequate training indicated that education and training with regards to PPD screening and validated screening tools among Ob-Gyns stand to be improved. Connecting physicians to psychiatric resources may also improve screening rates. This first look at screening practices in Texas serves as a platform for future research in order to gain definitive insight into the diagnosis and treatment of PPD, and ultimately design interventions to improve detection rates and treatment.^

Hispanic physicians' tobacco intervention practices: a cross-sectional survey study

Background U.S. Hispanic physicians constitute a considerable professional collective, and they may be most suited to attend to the health education needs of the growing U.S. Hispanic population. These educational needs include tobacco use prevention and smoking cessation. However, there is a lack of information on Hispanic physicians' tobacco intervention practices, their level of awareness and use of cessation protocols, and the type of programs that would best address their tobacco training needs. The purpose of this study was to assess the tobacco intervention practices and training needs of Hispanic physicians. Methods Data was collected through a validated survey instrument among a cross-sectional sample of self-reported Hispanic physicians. Data analyses included frequencies, descriptive statistics, and factorial analyses of variance. Results The response rate was 55.5%. The majority of respondents (73.3%) were middle-age males. Less than half of respondents routinely performed the most basic intervention: asking patients about smoking status (44.4%) and advising smoking patients to quit (42.2%). Twenty-five percent assisted smoking patients by talking to them about the health risks of smoking, providing education materials or referring them to cessation programs. Only 4.4% routinely arranged follow-up visits or phone calls for smoking patients. The majority of respondents (64.4%) indicated that they prescribe cessation treatments to less than 20% of smoking patients. A few (4.4%) routinely used behavioral change techniques or programs. A minority (15.6%) indicated that they routinely ask their patients about exposure to tobacco smoke, and 6.7% assisted patients exposed to secondhand smoke in understanding the health risks associated with environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). The most frequently encountered barriers preventing respondents from intervening with patients who smoke included: time, lack of training, lack of receptivity by patients, and lack of reimbursement by third party payers. There was no significant main effect of type of physician, nor was there an interaction effect (gender by type of physician), on tobacco-related practices. Conclusion The results indicate that Hispanic physicians, similarly to U.S. physicians in general, do not meet the level of intervention recommended by health care agencies. The results presented will assist in the development of tobacco training initiatives for Hispanic physicians.

Low-Income Fathers’ Barriers to Participation in Family and Parenting Programs

This exploratory study used semi-structured focus groups to examine: 1) where and from whom fathers obtain information about parenting; 2) the types of parenting services men are aware of, and their attitudes about participating in such services; and 3) fathers’ perceived norms about the acceptability and utility of various parenting practices. Low-income men (N = 17) were recruited from a human services agency in Detroit, Michigan. Four major themes emerged. First was the need for male-focused community resources for fathers. Second was that men were aware of and used positive disciplinary strategies. Third was emphasis on fathers’ positive and effective communication, with male children in particular. Finally, men suggested that constructive and concrete activities, such as engaging with children in activities or mentorship programs with other adult men in the community, were preferable to traditional parenting class such as those offered through Child Protective Services.

Barriers and facilitators to nurses' acceptance of and implications for injury rates of an IV catheter safety device

This study has the purpose of determining the barriers and facilitators to nurses' acceptance of the Johnson and Johnson Protectiv®* Plus IV catheter safety needle device and implications for needlestick injuries at St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Houston, Texas. A one-time cross-sectional survey of 620 responding nurses was conducted by this researcher during December, 2000. The study objectives were to: (1) describe the perceived (a) organizational and individual barriers and facilitators and (b) acceptance of implementation of the IV catheter device; (2) examine the relative importance of these predictors; (3) describe (a) perceived changes in needlestick injuries after implementation of the device; (b) the reported incidence of injuries; and (c) the extent of underreporting by nurses; and (4) examine the relative importance of (a) the preceding predictors and (b) acceptance of the device in predicting perceived changes in needlestick injuries. Safety climate and training were evaluated as organizational factors. Individual factors evaluated were experience with the device, including time using it and frequency of use, and background information, including nursing unit, and length of time as a nurse in this hospital and in total nursing career. The conceptual framework was based upon the safety climate model. Descriptive statistics and multiple and logistic regression were utilized to address the study objectives. ^ The findings showed widespread acceptance of the device and a strong perception that it reduced the number of needlesticks. Acceptance was notably predicted by adequate training, appropriate time between training and device use, solid safety climate, and short length of service, in that order. A barrier to acceptance was nurses' longtime of use of previous needle technologies. Over four-fifths of nurses were compliant in always using the device. Compliance had two facilitators: length of time using device and, to a lesser extent, safety climate. Rates of compliance tended to be lower among nurses in units in which the device was frequently used. ^ High quality training and an atmosphere of caring about nurse safety stand out as primary facilitators that other institutions would need to adopt in order to achieve maximum success in implementing safety programs involving utilization of new safety devices. ^

Depression, interpersonal violence and lack of social support as barriers to cervical cancer screening among recently immigrated Latinas

Background. Various psychosocial factors have been demonstrated to be barriers for cervical cancer screening among Latinas in the United States, but few studies have researched whether depression and interpersonal violence act as psychosocial barriers to cervical cancer screening. ^ Methods. The proposed study assessed whether depression, interpersonal violence, lack of social support and demographic characteristics such as age, income, education and years in the United States acted as barriers to cervical cancer screening among cantineras in Houston, TX. This secondary data analysis utilized data from a previous cross-sectional study called Project GIRASOL- Community Outreach to Prevent Cervical Cancer among Latinas. The data from the baseline survey (sample size 331) was analyzed using Pearson chi-square and multiple logistic regression. ^ Results. Multiple logistic regression indicates that none and low levels of social support from relatives, depression, and total IPV are significant predictors of non-compliance to cervical cancer screening. ^ Conclusions. Future health interventions or physicians that promote cervical cancer screening among cantineras or recently immigrated Latinas with similar socio-demographic characteristics should try to identify whether Latinas are suffering from depression, interpersonal violence or lack of social support and provide proper referrals to alleviate the problems and positively influence screening behavior. ^

Barriers to cross-border research projects: A prelude to improving professional collaborations between the United States and Mexico

Study objective. This was a secondary data analysis of a study designed and executed in two phases in order to investigate several questions: Why aren't more investigators conducting successful cross-border research on human health issues? What are the barriers to conducting this research? What interventions might facilitate cross-border research? ^ Methods. Key informant interviews and focus groups were used in Phase One, and structured questionnaires in Phase Two. A multi-question survey was created based on the findings of focus groups and distributed to a wider circle of researchers and academics for completion. The data was entered and analyzed using SPSS software. ^ Setting. El Paso, TX located on the U.S-Mexico Border. ^ Participants. Individuals from local academic institutions and the State Department of Health. ^ Results. From the transcribed data of the focus groups, eight major themes emerged: Political Barriers, Language/Cultural Barriers, Differing Goals, Geographic Issues, Legal Barriers, Technology/Material Issues, Financial Barriers, and Trust Issues. Using these themes, the questionnaire was created. ^ The response rate for the questionnaires was 47%. The largest obstacles revealed by this study were identifying a funding source for the project (47% agreeing or strongly agreeing), difficulties paying a foreign counterpart (33% agreeing or strongly agreeing) and administrative changes in Mexico (31% agreeing or strongly agreeing). ^ Conclusions. Many U.S. investigators interested in cross-border research have been discouraged in their efforts by varying barriers. The majority of respondents in the survey felt financial issues and changes in Mexican governments were the most significant obstacles. While some of these barriers can be overcome simply by collaboration among motivated groups, other barriers may be more difficult to remove. Although more evaluation of this research question is warranted, the information obtained through this study is sufficient to support creation of a Cross-Border Research Resource Manual to be used by individuals interested in conducting research with Mexico. ^

Refugees from Myanmar and their health care needs in the US: A qualitative study at a refugee-resettlement agency

In response to the recent rapid influx of refugees from Myanmar, Interfaith Ministries for Greater Houston (IM), a refugee resettlement agency, started to support them in June 2007. The study looked at the refugees' perspectives and identified the gaps in their understanding on US health care system, health seeking behaviors and challenges in utilizing health care in United States. The major issues identified were non-compliance with tuberculosis prevention medication due to barriers in obtaining medication refills, barriers in accessing specialty care services, transportation issues, written and oral language barrier, difficulties in the application for and use of Medicaid and Gold Card, misunderstanding of emergency health services, lack of resources for health education, self-treatment with Western medicine and income too low to buy private health insurance. In order to transform them to healthy citizens able to contribute to the US workforce, several multi-faceted and comprehensive approaches and better coordination among agencies are recommended. ^

Latino perceptions of and barriers to preventive healthcare maintenance in the southwest United States

Between the 1990 and 2000 Censuses, the Latino population accounted for 40% of the increase in the nation’s total population. The growing population of Latinos underscores the importance for understanding factors that influence whether and how Latinos take care of their health. According to the U.S. Department of Human Health Service’s Office of Minority Health (OMH), Latinos are at greater risk for health disparities (2003). Factors such as lack of health insurance and access to preventive care play a major role in limiting Latino use of primary health care (Institute of Medicine, 2005). Other significant barriers to preventive health care maintenance behaviors have been identified in current literature such as primary care physician interaction, self-perceived health status, and socio-cultural beliefs and traditions (Rojas-Guyler, King, Montieth and 2008; Meir, Medina, and Ory, 2007; Black, 1999). Despite these studies, there remains less information regarding interpersonal perceptions, environmental dynamics and individual and cultural attitudes relevant to utilization of healthcare (Rojas-Guyler, King, Montieth and 2008; Aguirre-Molina, Molina and Zambrana, 2001). Understanding the perceptions of Latinos and the barriers to health care could directly affect healthcare delivery. Improved healthcare utilization among Latinos could reduce the long term health consequences of many preventable and manageable diseases. The purpose of this study was to explore Latino perceptions of U.S. health care and desired changes by Latinos in the U.S. healthcare system. The study had several objectives, including to explore perceived barriers to healthcare utilization and the resulting effects on health among Latinos, to describe culturally influenced attitudes about health care and use of health care services among Latinos, and to make recommendations for reducing disparities by improving healthcare and its utilization. The current study utilized data that were collected as part of a larger study to examine multidimensional, cross-cultural issues relevant to interactions between healthcare consumers and providers. Qualitative methods were used to analyze four Spanish-language focus group transcripts to interpret cultural influences on perceptions and beliefs among Latinos. Direct coding of transcript content was carried out by two reviewers, who conducted independent reviews of each transcript. Team members developed and refined thematic categories, positive and negative cases, and example text segments for each theme and sub-theme. Incongruities of interpretations were resolved through extensive discussion. Study participants included 44 self-identified Latino adults (16 male, 28 female) between age 18 and 64 years. Thirty seven (84.1%) of the participants were immigrants. The study population comprised eight ethnic subgroups. While 31% of the participants reported being employed on a full-time basis, only 18.4% had medical insurance that was private or employee sponsored. Five major themes regarding the perceptions and healthcare utilization behaviors of Latinos were consistent across all focus groups and were identified during the analysis. These were: (1) healthcare utilization, experience, and access; (2) organizational and institutional systems; (3) communication and interpersonal interactions between healthcare provider, staff, and patient; (4) Latinos’ perception of their own health status; (5) cultural influences on healthcare utilization, which included an innovation termed culturally-bound locus of control. Healthcare utilization was directly influenced by healthcare experience, access, current health status, and cultural factors and indirectly influenced by organizational systems. There was a strong interdependence among the main themes. The ability to communicate and interact effectively with healthcare providers and navigate healthcare systems (organizational and institutional access) significantly influenced the participant’s health care experience, most often (indirectly) impacting utilization negatively. ^ Research such as this can help to identify those perceptions and attitudes held by Latinos concerning utilization or underutilization of healthcare systems. These data suggest that for healthcare utilization to improve among Latinos, healthcare systems must create more culturally competent environments by providing better language services at the organizational level and more culturally sensitive providers at the interpersonal level. Better understanding of the complex interactions between these impediments can aid intervention developments, and help health providers and researchers in determining appropriate, adequate, and effective measurers of care to better increase overall health of Latinos.^

Comparing barriers and predictors for colorectal cancer screening between African Americans and Whites

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has been one of the leading causes of cancer death in the United States. Although incidence and mortality rates of colorectal cancer in the United States have decreased in recent years, the disparity in CRC incidence and mortality between African Americans and Whites remain. Disparity in CRC screening rates is believed to be one of the causes that contribute to the disparity in CRC incidence and mortality between these two races. Finding the differences in CRC screening barriers and predictors between these two groups can help us to design more effective intervention programs to improve CRC screening rates for African Americans. However, most of the previous studies have investigated different types of CRC screening barriers for African Americans and/or Whites, but no studies have compared the same CRC screening barriers between African Americans and Whites. The purpose of this study is to describe and compare the same CRC screening barriers between these two races. Using chi-square analysis, significant differences between African Americans and Whites were found for marital status, income and education. Compared to Whites, African Americans were less aware of CRC screening procedures and lacked CRC knowledge. Significant differences were found between African Americans and Whites in the awareness of sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy and barium enema. After adjusting for sex, education, marital status, and household income, six out of thirteen CRC screening barriers and two out of nine CRC screening predictors remained to be statistically significantly different between African Americans and Whites. The results of this study indicated that different CRC screening barriers and predictors had different impact on African Americans, and African Americans had more CRC barriers to overcome than Whites.^

Factors contributing to the attrition of women in the African-American Nutrition for Life study

Background. There is currently a push to increase the number of minorities in cancer clinical trials in an effort to reduce cancer health disparities. Overcoming barriers to clinical trial research for minorities is necessary if we are to achieve the goals of Healthy People 2010. To understand the unexpectedly high rate of attrition in the A NULIFE study, the research team examined the perceived barriers to participation among minority women. The purpose of this study was to determine if either personal or study-related factors influenced healthy pre-menopausal women aged 25-45 years to terminate their participation in the A NULIFE Study. We hypothesized that personal factors were the driving forces for attrition rates in the prevention trial.^ Methods. The target population consisted of eligible women who consented to the A NULIFE study but withdrew prior to being randomized (N= 46), as well as eligible women who completed the informed consent process for the A NULIFE study and withdrew after randomization (N= 42). Examination of attrition rates in this study occurred at a time point when 10 out of 12 participant groups had completed the A NULIFE study. Data involving the 2 groups that were actively engaged in study activities were not used in this analysis. A survey instrument was designed to query the personal and study-related factors that were believed to have contributed to the decision to terminate participation in the A NULIFE study.^ Results. Overall, the highest ranked personal reason that influenced withdrawal from the study was being “too busy” with other obligations. The second highest ranked factor for withdrawal was work obligations. Whereas, more than half of all participants agreed that they were well-informed about the study and considered the study personnel to be approachable, 54% of participants would have been inclined to remain in the study if it were located at a local community center.^ Conclusions. Time commitment was likely a major factor for withdrawal from the A NULIFE study. Future investigators should implement trials within participant communities where possible. Also, focus group settings may provide detailed insight into factors that contribute to the attrition of minorities in cancer clinical trials.^

Barriers to adolescent and young men's access of reproductive health care

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to identify the health needs and barriers that young men face in accessing health care and family planning services and to identify what health centers can do to attract young men to the clinic. A focus group format was used to elicit ideas from participants. ^ Methods. Forty-eight young men participated in nine focus groups. The young men were asked about the health issues they have, the barriers they face in accessing reproductive health care, and what clinics can do to attract young men to the clinic. Thematic analysis principles were used to identify the main themes that emerged in the focus groups. ^ Results. Sexually transmitted infections (STIs), mental health problems, and drug use were the major health issues that were mentioned in the majority of the focus groups. The main barriers discussed in the focus groups were attitudinal factors such as young men thinking it is unmanly to seek help, emotional factors such as young men not seeking help because of their ego or pride, and institutional factors such as the location of the clinic. The main suggestions for improvements in the health clinic included decreasing waiting times, emphasizing the fact that the clinics are free for males, having more female nurses, and encouraging clinic staff to treat the young men with respect. Young men suggested advertising and promoting the clinic in schools, in the community, and through the media. Focus group participants also provided their input about the design and format of the clinic flyer. ^ Conclusions. Many studies focus on the reproductive health care needs of adolescent and young females. This study has helped to show that young men also have health care needs and face barriers to accessing reproductive health care services.^

A study of the determinants of the utilization of preventive health care service among Chicanos

This study examines the individual and health care system determinants of two types of preventive health care practice behaviors, having a routine physical exam or a preventive dental exam, in the past year among Chicanos in the Southwestern United States. The study utilizes the Health System Model, developed by Aday and Andersen in 1974, to analyze the relative effect of education, income and occupation on the use of discretionary health care, controlling for other individual and health care system determinants.^ The study is based on a sample of 4,111 Mexican origin adults, drawn from the Hispanic Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (HHANES). This sample is representative of Mexican American residing in the Southwestern United States.^ The study tests the hypothesis that education is the most important social class predictor of preventive health care practice behavior. The fully elaborated model tests the hypothesis that individual determinants alone are insufficient to explain the use of preventive health care services among Chicanos.^ The study found that education and income are statistically significant social class indicators only as it relates to having a preventive dental exam. Education is not the most important social class predictor of either preventive health care practice behavior. Health care system determinants are key predictors of both behaviors. Need, as measured by self-perceived health status of teeth and gender, is as important a determinant as having dental insurance coverage as it relates to having a preventive dental exam. Implications for health programs to effectively reach Chicano target groups and remove access barriers to their use of discretionary health care services are discussed. ^

A qualitative and quantitative assessment of cancer patients' perceptions of barriers to treatment

This study examined barriers that cancer patients experience in obtaining treatment. The principal aim of the study was to conduct a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative assessment of barriers to cancer treatment for Texas cancer patients. The three specific aims of the study were to: (1) conduct a review and critique of published and unpublished research on barriers to cancer treatment; (2) conduct focus groups for the qualitative assessment of cancer patients' perceived barriers to cancer treatment; and (3) survey a representative sample of cancer patients regarding perceived barriers to treatment. The study was guided by the Aday and Andersen access framework of predisposing, enabling, and need determinants of care-seeking.^ To address the first specific aim, a total of 732 abstracts were examined, from which 154 articles were selected for review. Of these 154 articles, 57 that related directly to research on barriers to cancer treatment were chosen for subsequent analysis. Criteria were applied to each article to evaluate the strength of the study design, sampling and measurement procedures. The major barriers that were consistently documented to influence whether or not cancer patients sought or continued required treatment included problems with communication between the patient and provider, lack of information on side effects, the cost of treatment and associated difficulties in obtaining and maintaining insurance coverage, and the absence of formal and informal networks of social support. Access barriers were generally greater for older, minority women, and patients of lower socioeconomic status.^ To address the second specific aim, a total of eight focus groups (n = 44) were conducted across the State of Texas with cancer patients identified by the Texas Community Oncology Network, American Cancer Society, and community health centers. One important finding was that cost is the greatest hurdle that patients face. Another finding was that with the health care/insurance crisis, an increasing number of physicians are working with their patients to develop individually-tailored payment plans. For people in rural areas, travel to treatment sites is a major barrier due to the travel costs as well as work time forfeited by patients and their family members. A third major finding was the patients' family and church play important roles in providing social and emotional support for cancer patients.^ To address the third aim, a total of 910 cancer patients were surveyed during October and November, 1993. Approximately 65% of the cancer patients responded to the survey. The findings showed that the major barriers to treatment included costs of medications and diagnostic tests, transportation, lack of social support, problems understanding the written information regarding their disease as well as losing coverage or having higher premiums or copayments once they were diagnosed (particularly among blacks).^ Significant differences in reported barriers were found between racial groups. The minority respondents (i.e., blacks and Hispanics) tended to experience more barriers to treatment compared to the white respondents. More specifically, Hispanics were more likely to report transportation as a barrier to treatment than both white and blacks. Future research is needed to better understand the problems that minority cancer patients experience in receiving treatment. (Abstract shortened by UMI.) ^

Hearing aid use and adherence: A systematic review of the literature concerning the socioeconomic and psychological influences on hearing aid use and barriers to use

The current hearing health situation in the United States does not provide adequate support to individuals with hearing loss. More research is needed to give more support to these individuals. By conducting a systematic review of relevant literature from 1990 to present, I identified many factors that influence an individual's use of hearing aids. There are two research questions in this study: 1. Does the provision of screening and access to hearing aids decrease the negative effects of hearing loss? 2. Why is it difficult for people with hearing loss to adapt to and use hearing aids? The population of interest was adults (>18 years old) with hearing loss. Factors that influenced use of hearing aids for this population included age, gender, socioeconomic status, education, perceived severity of hearing loss, cost of hearing aids, screening, perceived benefit, stigmatization, perceived control, cognitive capability, personality, and social support. Research suggests that more efficient screening of at-risk individuals and the provision of better access to these individuals would prevent many of the negative effects of hearing loss.^