Hearing aids after 60: review suggests good value for money

What the researchers compared

The review brings together 27 studies reported in 28 articles. The researchers searched for trial-based or model-based economic evaluations of hearing interventions in adults aged 60 and over.

The analyses compared the costs and outcomes of interventions using several methods: cost-effectiveness, cost-utility or cost-benefit analysis. Costs were converted to 2024 US dollars to make comparisons easier. The source material provides only the PubMed abstract, not the full text.

Generally favourable results

The analyses generally concluded that hearing aids and cochlear implants were cost-effective compared with no intervention. For people eligible for a cochlear implant, implantation was also often cost-effective compared with hearing aids. This comparison does not mean that an implant is suitable for every type of hearing loss.

Support or rehabilitation after fitting also showed generally favourable economic results. Cost-benefit analyses reported positive net monetary benefits, but the abstract does not specify their amounts.

Cost-effective does not mean cheaper

An intervention can be considered cost-effective while still increasing spending: its benefits are then judged sufficient relative to its cost. This finding does not directly indicate out-of-pocket costs or affordability for any given person.

In this review, conclusions depended in particular on gains in quality of life, the cost of the intervention, age at fitting and actual device use. Economic value therefore rests not just on buying a device, but also on the benefits gained when it is used.

An assessment that remains incomplete

The authors highlight several blind spots: some subsequent costs were omitted, effects on caregivers and society received little attention, and quality-of-life measures lacked consistency. Model validation and the analysis of inequalities were also limited.

No evaluation covered people living in institutions or receiving long-term care. Nor does the abstract allow the conclusions to be applied directly to French funding arrangements. Finally, this economic review does not demonstrate that hearing devices prevent falls or cognitive decline.

What we can take away

Hearing interventions appear to offer good economic value after 60. That supports their value to society, but it is neither a guarantee of savings nor a sufficient basis for choosing a device.