The purpose of this article is to propose 4 dimensions for consideration in hearing aid fittings and 4 tests to evaluate those dimensions. The 4 dimensions and tests are (a) working memory, evaluated by the Revised Speech Perception in Noise test (Bilger, Nuetzel, & Rabinowitz, 1984); (b) performance in noise, evaluated by the Quick Speech in Noise test (QSIN; Killion, Niquette, Gudmundsen, Revit, & Banerjee, 2004); (c) acceptance of noise, evaluated by the Acceptable Noise Level test (ANL; Nabelek, Tucker, & Letowski, 1991); and (d) performance versus perception, evaluated by the Perceptual–Performance test (PPT; Saunders & Cienkowski, 2002). The authors discuss the 4 dimensions and tests in the context of improving the quality of hearing aid fittings.
AbstractThere are discrepancies in the literature regarding the course of central auditory processes (CAP) maturation in typically developing children and adolescents. The purpose of the study was to provide an overview of age – related improvement in CAP in Polish primary and secondary school students aged 7–16 years. 180 children/adolescents, subdivided into 9 age categories, and 20 adults (aged 18–24 years) performed the Dichotic Digit Test (DDT), Duration Pattern Test (DPT), Frequency Pattern Test (FPT), Gap Detection Test (GDT) and adaptive Speech-in-Noise (aSpN). The 12-year-olds was retested after w week. We found the age effects only for the DDT, DPT and FPT. In the right ear DDT the 7-year-olds performed more poorly than all groups ≥12. In the left ear DDT both 7- and 8-year-olds achieved less correct responses compared with the 13-, 14-, 15-year-olds and with the adults. The right ear advantage was greater in the 7-year-olds than in the 15-year-olds and adult group. At the age of 7 there was lower DPT and FPT scores than in all participants ≥13 whereas the 8-year-olds obtained less correct responses in the FPT than all age categories ≥12. Almost all groups (except for the 7-year-olds) performed better in the DPT than FPT. The test-retest reliability for all tests was satisfactory. The study demonstrated that different CAP have their own patterns of improvement with age and some of them are specific for the Polish population. The psychoacoustic battery may be useful in screening for CAP disorders in Poland.
Abstract
Background
The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of “Spatially separated speech in noise” auditory training on the ability of speech perception in noise among bimodal fitting users.
The assumption was that the rehabilitation can enhance spatial hearing and hence speech in noise perception. This study was an interventional study, with a pre/post-design. Speech recognition ability was assessed with the specific tests. After performing the rehabilitation stages in the intervention group, the speech tests were again implemented, and by comparing the pre- and post-intervention data, the effect of auditory training on the speech abilities was assessed.
Twenty-four children of 8–12 years who had undergone cochlear implantation and continuously used bimodal fitting were investigated in two groups of control and intervention.
Results
The results showed a significant difference between the groups in different speech tests after the intervention, which indicated that the intervention group have improved more than the control group.
Conclusion
It can be concluded that “Spatially separated speech in noise” auditory training can improve the speech perception in noise in bimodal fitting users. In general, this rehabilitation method is useful for enhancing the speech in noise perception ability.
Communication in noise is a complex process requiring efficient neural encoding throughout the entire auditory pathway as well as contributions from higher-order cognitive processes (i.e., attention) to extract speech cues for perception. Thus, identifying effective clinical interventions for individuals with speech-in-noise deficits relies on the disentanglement of bottom-up (sensory) and top-down (cognitive) factors to appropriately determine the area of deficit; yet, how attention may interact with early encoding of sensory inputs remains unclear. For decades, attentional theorists have attempted to address this question with cleverly designed behavioral studies, but the neural processes and interactions underlying attention’s role in speech perception remain unresolved. While anatomical and electrophysiological studies have investigated the neurological structures contributing to attentional processes and revealed relevant brain–behavior relationships, recent electrophysiological techniques (i.e., simultaneous recording of brainstem and cortical responses) may provide novel insight regarding the relationship between early sensory processing and top-down attentional influences. In this article, we review relevant theories that guide our present understanding of attentional processes, discuss current electrophysiological evidence of attentional involvement in auditory processing across subcortical and cortical levels, and propose areas for future study that will inform the development of more targeted and effective clinical interventions for individuals with speech-in-noise deficits.
In hearing research, pupillometry is an established method of studying listening effort. The focus of this study was to evaluate several pupil measures extracted from the Task-Evoked Pupil Responses (TEPRs) in speech-in-noise test. A range of analysis approaches was applied to extract these pupil measures, namely (a) pupil peak dilation (PPD); (b) mean pupil dilation (MPD); (c) index of pupillary activity; (d) growth curve analysis (GCA); and (e) principal component analysis (PCA). The effect of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR; Data Set A: –20 dB, –10 dB, +5 dB SNR) and luminance (Data Set B: 0.1 cd/m2, 360 cd/m2) on the TEPRs were investigated. Data Sets A and B were recorded during a speech-in-noise test and included TEPRs from 33 and 27 normal-hearing native Dutch speakers, respectively. The main results were as follows: (a) A significant effect of SNR was revealed for all pupil measures extracted in the time domain (PPD, MPD, GCA, PCA); (b) Two time series analysis approaches (GCA, PCA) provided modeled temporal profiles of TEPRs (GCA); and time windows spanning subtasks performed in a speech-in-noise test (PCA); and (c) All pupil measures revealed a significant effect of luminance. In conclusion, multiple pupil measures showed similar effects of SNR, suggesting that effort may be reflected in multiple aspects of TEPR. Moreover, a direct analysis of the pupil time course seems to provide a more holistic view of TEPRs, yet further research is needed to understand and interpret its measures. Further research is also required to find pupil measures less sensitive to changes in luminance.
Development of central auditory processes in Polish children and adolescents at the age from 7 to 16 years