Introduction

Age-related hearing loss, known as presbycusis, is one of the most common sensory changes affecting older adults. Far from being merely a biological issue, such hearing loss carries profound communicative, social, and subjective implications. The present reflection emerges from a research trajectory focused on Communication Disorders, with emphasis on linguistic mediation and the effects of communicative exclusion across different stages of life particularly at the intersections of language, identity, and belonging.

Population aging is a global phenomenon with far-reaching implications for public policies, health systems, and ways of living and communicating. Among the many challenges faced by older adults, hearing loss stands out because of its silent and progressive impact, affecting not only sound perception but, above all, the quality of social interaction, personal autonomy, and the construction of meaning in everyday life.

The World Health Organization (WHO, 2014) has emphasized that “aging well” should be a global priority and that the right to accessible and meaningful communication is an essential part of this process. In the Brazilian context, recent studies suggest that hearing loss in old age should not be understood merely as a sensory limitation, but rather as a complex phenomenon involving emotional, social, and symbolic dimensions (Santos, 2022). Listening to older adults, therefore, must go beyond the provision of hearing devices; it requires recognition of their life histories, their strategies of resilience, and their own ways of constructing meaning.

In dialogue with Massi et al. (2019), this article proposes a reflection on the new meanings attributed to hearing loss in later life, grounded in dialogical practices that strengthen participation, belonging, and the subjective reconstruction of older individuals.

This article aims to analyze and discuss recent research on hearing loss and its implications for the socialization of older adults in an increasingly digital, fast-paced, and interconnected world, a world that, paradoxically, still leaves older adults with hearing loss as overlooked members of its communicative structure. By understanding listening as an act of care and as a mechanism of inclusion, space is opened to rethink interdisciplinary public policies that respect aging as a living and communicative experience, rather than merely as functional decline.

Methodology

Study design and guiding question

An integrative review with narrative synthesis was conducted, guided by the classical principles of research synthesis (Cooper, 2017). The guiding question was: how is hearing loss in old age related to social participation, identity, and mental health, and what interdisciplinary strategies and public policy implications emerge from the recent literature?

Information sources and time frame

Searches were carried out in the PubMed/Medline, SciELO, Scopus, CAPES Journal Portal, and Google Scholar databases, covering publications from 2020 to 2025. To increase sensitivity, studies published from 2020 onward were included when they were directly relevant to the guiding question, such as systematic reviews considered central to the topic.

Search strategy

Descriptors in Portuguese, English, and Spanish were used, combined with Boolean operators and adjusted according to the characteristics of each database:

Synonyms and free terms were also tested, such as hearing impairment, social engagement, and loneliness. In addition, the references of key articles were examined through snowballing in order to identify further relevant studies.

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria were as follows:

1. studies whose main population was aged 60 years or older;

2. studies focused on hearing loss or presbycusis;

3. studies addressing outcomes related to social participation, isolation/loneliness, mental health, cognition, quality of life, and/or interdisciplinary strategies, technologies, or public policies;

4. systematic reviews, scoping reviews, or observational studies (longitudinal or cross-sectional) with explicit methodological procedures;

5. publications in Portuguese, English, or Spanish;

6. publication period between 2020 and 2025.

Exclusion criteria included exclusively technical studies on calibration or engineering without social outcomes, studies with non-older adult samples, commentaries or opinion papers without explicit methodology, duplicates, and isolated case reports without communicative implications.

Selection process

Screening was conducted in two stages:

1. title and abstract screening;

2. full-text reading.

Two reviewers worked independently, and disagreements were resolved by consensus. Nine studies fully met the eligibility criteria and were included in the corpus for analysis and discussion.

Data extraction and study appraisal

A standardized spreadsheet was developed including the following items: country, study design, sample, age range, hearing loss assessment, social and psychological outcomes, main findings, and limitations.

Since the purpose of the synthesis was critical interpretation rather than meta-analysis, a heuristic quality appraisal was adopted, considering clarity of study design, adequacy of the sample, control of confounding variables, validity of measures, and analytical coherence, thus informing the interpretive weight assigned to each study in the discussion (Cooper, 2017). No study was excluded based on quality score alone; rather, quality influenced the degree of emphasis given to the findings.

Synthesis and analysis

The study followed Cooper’s synthesis logic: problem formulation, literature search, screening, appraisal, analysis, interpretation, and presentation. The integration of the nine selected studies was carried out through thematic analysis with axial coding around the following axes:

1. overcoming the biomedical paradigm (the biopsychosocial experience of presbycusis);

2. interdisciplinary practices (speech-language pathology, psychology, education, and technology) and coping strategies;

3. responsive public policies (going beyond the provision of hearing aids to include follow-up and communicative inclusion).

The heterogeneity of contexts and study designs was addressed through a critical narrative synthesis, highlighting convergences, tensions, and gaps, such as Brazilian qualitative studies on digital socialization.

Ethical considerations and limitations

As this was a literature review, submission to a Research Ethics Committee was not required. The main limitations include heterogeneity of measures and designs, possible publication bias, temporal and linguistic restrictions, and the absence of protocol registration. As a counterbalance, a multi-database search, multilingual search strategy, and triangulation of study designs were employed, thereby strengthening the interpretive robustness of the review.

max width=

Discussion

The reviewed literature points to a clear consensus: hearing loss in old age transcends the biomedical domain, emerging as a social, communicative, and identity-related phenomenon. On the one hand, international systematic reviews associate presbycusis with social isolation, loneliness, and depressive symptoms (Shukla et al., 2020; Li et al., 2023). On the other hand, Brazilian studies, especially those conducted by Massi and collaborators, reveal how older adults themselves reconstruct meanings in the face of hearing loss (Massi et al., 2019).

Massi et al. (2019) emphasize that self-perception of hearing is shaped by subjective coping strategies, such as physical proximity to the interlocutor, lip-reading, and intensified attention. These findings directly support the notion that listening, rather than being merely a sensory function, is also an act of care, since it entails an active repositioning of the individual within social space. Thus, older adults do not perceive themselves simply as “carriers of a deficit,” but as agents who continuously rework their communication in everyday life.

In the same direction, Camargo et al. (2018), in a study involving older adults who did not use hearing aids, showed that restrictions in social participation are experienced intensely, especially among men and among those with moderate hearing loss. This finding challenges the biomedical paradigm: it is not enough to provide assistive technologies. Public policies must also recognize the symbolic and relational barriers that shape the experience of using or not using hearing devices. Similar results were found in a Brazilian study showing that poorer self-perceived health is associated with greater social restriction (Associação entre restrição à participação., 2022).

Likewise, Keretch et al. (2019) identified that older adults who do not use hearing amplification devices develop a creative repertoire of communicative strategies, such as asking for repetition, maintaining eye contact, and choosing quieter environments. These findings converge with recent reviews on digital technologies in hearing healthcare, which point to the potential of digital resources to improve well-being, provided that they are articulated with human support networks and with the communicative autonomy of older adults (Digital Therapeutics..., 2024).

In addition, the theme of social participation appears strongly in recent scoping reviews and longitudinal studies. One review mapped barriers and facilitators to the participation of older adults with hearing loss, demonstrating that social, cultural, and community support factors are as important as the degree of hearing loss itself (Influence of Hearing Loss..., 2023). In a similar vein, a longitudinal study conducted in China showed that reduced social participation mediated increased depressive symptoms (The Effect of Hearing Impairment..., 2023).

In the Brazilian context, studies have also explored cognitive repercussions. It has been found, for example, that educational level interacts with hearing loss in speech perception under noisy conditions (Idosos com perda auditiva e declínio cognitivo..., 2024), and that the subjective perception of disability correlates more strongly with suffering than the clinical degree of hearing loss itself (Função auditiva..., 2022). Convergently, an international study identified social isolation as a partial mediator between hearing loss and cognitive decline, reinforcing the need for policies that care not only for hearing, but also for social inclusion (Does Social Isolation Mediate..., 2024).

Therefore, the discussion on hearing loss in old age must advance in three fundamental directions:

Overcoming the biomedical paradigm by broadening understanding toward social, subjective, and cultural dimensions

The understanding of hearing loss in old age is still strongly anchored in a biomedical model in which presbycusis is treated as an organic failure localized in the auditory system, measured through clinical examinations and corrected with hearing aids or cochlear implants. Although essential for clinical practice, this perspective is limited because it tends to reduce the experience of older adults to diagnosis, rendering invisible the richness of meanings that permeate their everyday lives. The risk is that the older individual becomes merely a “patient,” a passive category deprived of recognition of his or her coping strategies, multiple identities, and social contexts.

Authors such as Moraes (2020) and Pereira (2014) reinforce the need to shift this perspective, emphasizing that the impacts of hearing loss go beyond the physiological dimension and directly affect self-esteem, family interaction, community belonging, and participation in spaces of sociability. Vianna et al. (2022) add that the historical framing of deafness in Brazilian health policies has prioritized technical rehabilitation, especially through the distribution of hearing devices, while neglecting subjective and cultural dimensions. This finding reveals the weight of biomedical reductionism in the national context.

Added to this are the criticisms raised by Melo (2025), who identifies ageism, structural prejudice against old age as a significant barrier in healthcare services. Deafness, often naturalized as “something that comes with age,” is treated with neglect, reinforcing discriminatory practices that reduce communication to a secondary detail. This position compromises not only the quality of clinical care, but also the dignity of older adults, for whom communication is an essential human right.

The international literature supports this argument. Shukla et al. (2020), in a systematic review, demonstrated that hearing loss is strongly associated with loneliness and social isolation, showing that its effects extend far beyond the physiological dimension. Longitudinal studies such as that of Li et al. (2023), conducted in China, confirm that reduced social participation resulting from hearing loss intensifies depressive symptoms, establishing a clear link between hearing health, subjectivity, and emotional well-being. This evidence converges with Brazilian findings, in which self-perception of hearing loss proved decisive for the degree of social restriction (Associação entre restrição., 2022).

Overcoming the biomedical paradigm, therefore, implies recognizing presbycusis as a biopsychosocial and cultural phenomenon. It means valuing the creative strategies older adults develop in order to communicate such as lip reading, choosing quiet environments, or asking for repetition (Keretch et al., 2019), and integrating such practices into inclusive public policies. It also means understanding that hearing loss is not merely the absence of sound, but the presence of new ways of constructing meaning, reworking bonds, and repositioning oneself in the world. Only through this expanded approach is it possible to combat biomedical reductionism and guarantee older adults the right to listen and to be listened to as whole subjects.

Strengthening interdisciplinary practices in which speech-language pathology, psychology, education, and technology converge to create spaces for participation

Hearing loss in old age is a complex phenomenon that requires equally complex responses. The isolated work of a single field of knowledge is insufficient to address the multiple dimensions involved in aging with hearing loss. In this context, interdisciplinarity emerges not merely as a theoretical guideline, but as a necessary practice for ensuring inclusion, participation, and dignity.

França and Rechenberg (2025) argue that speech-language pathology in public health must move beyond a narrowly individualized model of care and develop dialogical practices in partnership with psychology, education, social assistance, and technology. The aim is to expand the notion of listening beyond the adaptation of devices, transforming it into a social and community-based practice. This perspective is reinforced by Rebellato et al. (2021), who show that the integration of different professionals makes it possible to transform theory into effective, personalized, and humanized care.

In the field of psychology, Silva (2023) reminds us that disability cannot be understood merely as lack or limitation, but as an experience that mobilizes affects, stigma, and processes of identity re-signification. Incorporating psychology into the care of hearing loss in older adults means offering spaces of listening and subjective elaboration in which feelings of isolation and insecurity can be addressed. This support complements speech-language pathology, which deals with clinical rehabilitation but alone cannot account for emotional and social dimensions.

Education, in turn, plays a fundamental role by promoting communicative literacy among older adults, enabling them to develop new strategies of interaction in digital or community environments. In this sense, Ribeiro (2024) argues that healthy aging is linked to the strengthening of life purpose, a concept that can only be recovered when older adults perceive themselves as integrated, participatory, and endowed with meaning. Interdisciplinarity, by offering educational and therapeutic spaces, fosters this recovery.

Finally, technology emerges as a strategic tool. Recent reviews, such as Digital Therapeutics in Hearing Healthcare (2024), show that digital resources may expand communicative autonomy, provided that they are integrated into human practices of care. Interdisciplinarity, therefore, ensures that technology is not reduced to a technical resource, but becomes a means of social inclusion.

Thus, strengthening interdisciplinary practices means recognizing that older adults with hearing loss need not only diagnosis and hearing aids, but also an articulated support network capable of promoting emotional health, social integration, communicative literacy, and digital participation. By bringing together speech-language pathology, psychology, education, and technology, space is created for deafness not only to be compensated for, but to be re-signified in practices of belonging and social agency.

Consolidating responsive public policies that go beyond the provision of hearing aids and ensure follow-up processes, training, and support for older adults’ communicative strategies

Public policies on hearing healthcare in Brazil, although they have advanced since the creation of the National Policy for Hearing Healthcare (2004), remain excessively centered on the provision of hearing aids and diagnostic examinations. This logic, as pointed out by De Melo and Vieira (2022), is guided by quantitative targets and invests little in processes of continuous follow-up, family guidance, or social inclusion. As a result, many older adults receive devices but do not find support to use them meaningfully in their life contexts.

Brandão et al. (2023), in a bibliometric review, reinforce this problem by showing that hearing screening strategies, although essential, are not connected to longitudinal follow-up programs. The risk is that early diagnosis becomes a statistical number without real impact on quality of life, especially when cultural, emotional, and social barriers remain unaddressed. The gap between screening and communicative support perpetuates the exclusion of older adults who, even after diagnosis, remain isolated in their daily lives.

Romero (2022) expands this debate by proposing new epidemiological paradigms for aging. For the author, old age cannot be viewed merely as a stage of decline, but rather as a phase that demands sustainable and inclusive policies. Applied to hearing healthcare, this perspective means shifting the focus from disease to communication as a right of citizenship. To listen and to be listened to is not merely a biological function, but a condition for political participation, affective ties, and the preservation of autonomy.

International evidence corroborates this urgency. Recent studies have shown that hearing loss is associated with social isolation and frailty (Hearing and Sociality., 2023; Relationship of Hearing Impairment., 2023), which reinforces the importance of public policies that link hearing healthcare to programs of social inclusion and psychosocial support. The absence of such measures contributes to aggravating cognitive decline, as demonstrated in systematic reviews that identified social isolation as a mediator between hearing loss and dementia (Does Social Isolation Mediate., 2024).

Consolidating responsive public policies therefore means building strategies that are not limited to the distribution of hearing aids. It is necessary to ensure individualized follow-up, continuing education for professionals in interdisciplinary practices, support for the communicative strategies that older adults themselves develop, and intersectoral articulation involving health, education, culture, and technology. Only then will aging with hearing loss be experienced in a dignified, inclusive, and participatory way.

Conclusion

The analysis developed in this study demonstrates that hearing loss in old age cannot be reduced to a merely biomedical issue of sensory deficit. Although clinical diagnosis and technological resources, such as hearing aids and digital therapeutics, play an important role, they are insufficient to encompass the full complexity of aging with hearing loss. As the reviewed studies have shown, this phenomenon involves social, subjective, and cultural dimensions that directly shape older adults’ identity, sense of belonging, and civic participation.

The first necessary step is to move beyond the biomedical paradigm by shifting the understanding of presbycusis from a perspective centered exclusively on rehabilitation to a broader approach capable of recognizing older adults as active subjects, producers of meaning, and bearers of their own communicative strategies. At the same time, it is essential to strengthen interdisciplinary practices that bring together speech-language pathology, psychology, education, and technology in order to provide plural responses to a multifaceted reality. Interdisciplinarity should not be viewed as a mere sum of isolated areas of knowledge, but as a field of collaborative creation capable of generating spaces of listening, care, and belonging.

Finally, the consolidation of responsive public policies is an indispensable condition for ensuring that technical advances are translated into effective social inclusion. This implies shifting the focus from quantitative targets to continuous follow-up, professional training, and support for the communicative strategies developed by older adults themselves. Listening, understood as a human right, should be incorporated as a central axis of health and aging policies, thus ensuring dignity, autonomy, and participation.

Thus, by integrating biopsychosocial perspectives, interdisciplinary practices, and inclusive public policies, it becomes possible to re-signify the experience of hearing loss in old age. More than correcting a deficit, the challenge is to promote a culture of listening and care in which aging with hearing loss does not mean isolation, but rather an opportunity to construct new forms of communication, identity, and social belonging.

This study was conducted under the affiliation of the Federal Institute of Paraná (IFPR), Curitiba Campus, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.