Audiology Services

Download (PDF 617KB)

Summary of report content

Between March and December 2019, Healthwatch Bexley collected the views of local residents using local audiology services. They listened to over 130 people’s comments on services provided by Queen Mary’s Hospital Sidcup, Specsavers in Bexleyheath, Erith and Sidcup and Bexley Deaf Centre. They also received 51 questionnaire responses, from residents aged from 56 years upwards and visited 25 groups and locations throughout the London Borough of Bexley.

The key issues they identified included perception of need as a barrier preventing some residents from accessing services; patients were not sure if their hearing loss was flagged on their GP records so that reasonable adjustments could be made; over 30% of people with hearing loss felt isolated; respondents were generally happy with audiology services but only half were happy with their hearing aids; many patients had little knowledge or awareness of hearing loops and their benefit.

The report made three recommendations including audiology service providers to promote the use of the hearing loop setting on hearing aids, to collect patient experience feedback, paying particular attention to why patients may not be happy with their hearing aids and to signpost patients to other services in the community such as Bexley Deaf Centre, who may offer help and support with living with hearing loss and learning to lip read.


Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Audiology Services
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Bexley
Date of publication 
Tuesday, 17 March, 2020
Date evidence capture began 
Friday, 1 March, 2019
Date evidence capture finished 
Tuesday, 31 December, 2019
Type of report 
Key themes 
Health promotion
Information providing
Healthwatch reference number 

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
What type of organisation requested the work 
If this work has been done in partnership, who is the partner? 
Primary research method used 
Engagement event
How was the information collected? 
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced? 

Details of health and care services included in the report

Secondary care services 
Ear, nose and throat

Details about conditions and diseases

Types of disabilities 
Types of long term conditions 
Deafness or severe hearing impairment

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
Age group 
All people 18 and over
Not known
Sexual orientation 
Not known
Does the information include public's views? 
Does the information include carer's, friend's or relative's views? 
Not known
Does the information include staff's views? 
Types of health and care professionals engaged 
Does the information include other people's views? 
What was the main sentiment of the people who shared their views? 

Outcomes and impact

Were recommendations made by local Healthwatch in the report? 
Does the information contain a response from a provider? 
Yes action has been taken or promised
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
Is there evidence of impact external to the report? 
What type of impact was determined? 
Implied Impact

Network Impact
Relationships that exist locally, regionally, nationally have benefited from the work undertaken in the report
Implied Impact
Where it is implied that change may occur in the future as a result of Healthwatch work. This can be implied in a provider  response, press release or other source. Implied impact can become tangible impact once change has occurred.
Tangible Impact
There is evidence of change that can be directly attributed to Healthwatch work undertaken in the report.