Summary
Two deaf volunteers' checks of the hearing loops listed at a large English hospital trust, finding most not working or unknown to staff, with recommendations on responsibility, training and new loops.
Key findings
- On 31 January 2017, Harry Dymond and Steve Beale, volunteers with hearing loss, visited locations with Sarah Halcrow and asked staff set questions. The Method describes Dymond listening through a telecoil and Beale through earbuds connected to a loop receiver. The Results say the chapel was tested separately by Dymond; its date and separate equipment are unstated. Therapies was not audited (Background, Method and Results, PDF page 3).
- Recommendations on PDF page 4 ask for a small volume increase at main reception and no further action at cardiothoracic/oncology. They identify C6 TYA and C7 Haematology day unit, say their loop types were unknown and recommend investigation, training and clearer signs; C6's sign was attached to movable equipment and C7's loop should remain on during reception hours. No separate listening result is supplied for C6 or C7.
- At Wellcome Trust CRF reception, staff thought a unit existed, but none was present. An electrical point suggested a counter loop; the visitors did not establish whether wire was installed under the counter (Recommendations, PDF page 4).
- The main reception loop worked and its staff knew it, though it had first been installed incorrectly and had to be reinstalled. The only working loop in a clinical area was a shared outpatient reception loop, which the same volunteers had earlier found not working and had shown staff how to use. The chapel's room loop worked, provided the lectern microphone was used.
- A therapies outpatient loop was reported faulty and was not tested; loops at two unit receptions needed investigation and staff training; at a research facility reception, staff believed a loop was present but no unit could be found.
- Recommended a named person responsible for loops, staff training, a record of each loop's location and regular tests, leaving reception loops on whenever reception is open, and new loops at receptions including the emergency department.
- Gave prices of about £100 for a portable loop and about £100 plus installation for a counter loop.
- Recommends a temporary portable loop for emergency-department reception, movable elsewhere once a fixed counter loop is installed, and the same approach at X-ray reception (Recommendations, PDF pages 4-5).
- Recommends recording loop locations, staff familiar with them and regular tests, with a named first contact for failures. It asks for more visible signs at C6 and C7, and for the C6 sign to be fixed somewhere other than movable equipment (Recommendations, PDF page 4).
- The introductory page identifies two Healthwatch Southampton Strategy Group members with hearing loss; the Method and Results sections describe their listening checks and the three working loops. The report gives no separate funding statement for this audit.
- The Method and Results sections say a questionnaire was completed at each location and the completed forms were submitted to the Head of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion; the report does not reproduce that instrument.
- Of four clinical reception locations checked, one had a working loop; two others were referred for investigation and staff training, and at the fourth it was unclear whether a loop unit existed.
- The Method and Results sections describe four clinical reception locations visited: cardiothoracic/oncology (one shared loop, working), C6, C7 and the Wellcome Trust facility (where no unit could be found). The therapies loop was reported faulty in advance and was not audited. This is a count of locations checked, not four confirmed installed loop units.
Limits
A small, single-site audit by two volunteers, without published field-strength measurements; results were judged by listening. Its Method and Results sections describe set questions and a questionnaire completed at each location and submitted to the trust, but do not reproduce the questionnaire. The report does not identify funding for this particular audit; the funding label describes Healthwatch's organisational status. The report prints no date; two Healthwatch library entries give 1 and 2 May 2017, so month precision is retained. The Method section dates the accompanied visits to 31 January 2017; the chapel check is described separately without a date. Prices are the authors' estimates.
Read the original
Cited in
- Can Auracast serve ticket windows, service counters and reception desks?Open
- How is an installed hearing loop checked against IEC 60118-4, and how often does it pass?Partly answered
- Where do hearing loops fall short: metal, spill, noise and upkeep?Partly answered
- What does each system cost to install and to run over its life?Open
- How do listeners learn that a venue has assistive listening, and which signs and symbols do the rules ask for?Partly answered
- What works for announcements and ticket counters on buses, trains, stations and airports?Partly answered
- What works in hospitals, clinics and pharmacies, where a misheard word can matter most?Partly answered
- Do portable and counter loops work, and how should they be set up and used?Partly answered
Cite this source
Dymond HF, for the sensory loss group and Healthwatch Southampton. Hearing Loops at UHS FT: Audit of Hearing Loops. Healthwatch Southampton (reports library of Healthwatch England). May 2017. https://nds.healthwatch.co.uk/sites/default/files/reports_library/20170502_Southampton__Hearing-Loops-at-UHS-FT-Report.pdf (accessed 13 October 2026).
Every finding here cites its source, and who funded each source is labelled. This site does not recommend products. Found an error or a missing study? Suggest a correction.