Comparison of Some Speech Intelligibility Tests in the Evaluation of Hearing Aid Performance

1966 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Jerger ◽  
Carolyn Malmquist ◽  
Charles Speaks
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Harmonic Distortion ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Monosyllabic Word ◽  
Word Test ◽  
Intelligibility Test ◽  
Sentence Intelligibility

A sentence intelligibility test and three monosyllabic word intelligibility tests, recorded through three hearing aids, were presented to 36 subjects with diverse types of hearing loss. Although hearing aids were rank ordered meaningfully on the sentence intelligibility test-in inverse proportion to the harmonic distortion-performance differences were not systematically reflected in the monosyllabic word test results.

Hearing-Aid Performance and Hearing-Aid Selection

1966 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Jerger ◽  
Charles Speaks ◽  
Carolyn Malmquist
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Physical Characteristics ◽  
Rank Ordering ◽  
Intelligibility Test ◽  
Sentence Intelligibility

A sentence intelligibility test was used to evaluate listener performance with three hearing aids differing substantially in physical characteristics. Thirty six hard-of-hearing listeners, representing various types and degrees of hearing loss, were tested. Results showed that, although the sentence intelligibility test reflected meaningful average differences among the aids, the rank ordering of aids was essentially equivalent for all listeners.

Selection of the optimal first ear for sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in children

2021 ◽  
pp. 014556132110640
Author(s):  
Hantai Kim ◽  
Jungho Ha ◽  
Eun Sol Gil ◽  
Jeong Hun Jang ◽  
Hun Yi Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Monosyllabic Word ◽  
Intelligibility Test ◽  
Group A ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Group B ◽  
Selection Of

Objectives When there is a difference in hearing on both ears, where to perform the first cochlear implantation (CI) becomes an important issue. The purpose of the study was to evaluate which ear should be chosen for the first implantation in sequential bilateral CI with a long inter-implant period. Methods The study population consisted of 34 severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss pediatrics with the inter-implant period of ≥3 years between the first CI (CI-1) and the second CI (CI-2) before the age of 19 (mean of inter-implant period: 7.1-year). The patients were classified into Group A (CI-1 was performed on the ear with better hearing), Group B (CI-1 on the ear with worse hearing), or Group C (symmetrical hearing in both ears). Speech intelligibility test results were compared between the groups. Results The monosyllabic word scores of CI-1 were excellent in Groups A (91.7±7.9%) and B (92.5±3.6%) but slightly lower in Group C (85.7±14.9%) before the second implantation ( P = .487). At 3 years after the second implantation, all groups demonstrated excellent scores in the bilateral CI condition (95.9±3.0% in Group A; 99.1±.8% in Group B; 97.5±2.9% in Group C, P = .600). However, when the patients were tested in using CI-2 only in Groups A and B after using bilateral CI for 3 years, the scores were inconsistent in Group A (79.6±23.9%; range: 22.2-94.4%), while those were higher and more constant in Group B (92.9±4.8%; 86.8-100.0%). Conclusions The first CI is strongly recommended to perform on a worse hearing ear if they had different hearing levels between ears. Even with the first CI on a worse hearing ear, its performance never deteriorates. In addition, if they receive the second CI several years later, it will be likely that the second one functions better.

Modified Earpieces and CROS for High Frequency Hearing Losses

1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 204-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Dodds ◽  
Earl Harford
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Intensity Level ◽  
Test Results ◽  
High Frequency Hearing Loss ◽  
Increased Sensitivity ◽  
Difficult Cases

Persons with a high frequency hearing loss are difficult cases for whom to find suitable amplification. We have experienced some success with this problem in our Hearing Clinics using a specially designed earmold with a hearing aid. Thirty-five cases with high frequency hearing losses were selected from our clinical files for analysis of test results using standard, vented, and open earpieces. A statistical analysis of test results revealed that PB scores in sound field, using an average conversational intensity level (70 dB SPL), were enhanced when utilizing any one of the three earmolds. This result was due undoubtedly to increased sensitivity provided by the hearing aid. Only the open earmold used with a CROS hearing aid resulted in a significant improvement in discrimination when compared with the group’s unaided PB score under earphones or when comparing inter-earmold scores. These findings suggest that the inclusion of the open earmold with a CROS aid in the audiologist’s armamentarium should increase his flexibility in selecting hearing aids for persons with a high frequency hearing loss.

scholarly journals The use of speech sentence audiometry in a free sound field

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-39
Author(s):  
Mariya Yu. Boboshko ◽  
Irina P. Berdnikova ◽  
Natalya V. Maltzeva
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Normative Data ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Objectives -to determine the normative data of sentence speech intelligibility in a free sound field and to estimate the applicability of the Russian Matrix Sentence test (RuMatrix) for assessment of the hearing aid fitting benefit. Material and methods. 10 people with normal hearing and 28 users of hearing aids with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing loss were involved in the study. RuMatrix test both in quiet and in noise was performed in a free sound field. All patients filled in the COSI questionnaire. Results. The hearing impaired patients were divided into two subgroups: the 1st with high and the 2nd with low hearing aid benefit, according to the COSI questionnaire. In the 1st subgroup, the threshold for the sentence intelligibility in quiet was 34.9 ± 6.4 dB SPL, and in noise -3.3 ± 1.4 dB SNR, in the 2nd subgroup 41.7 ± 11.5 dB SPL and 0.15 ± 3.45 dB SNR, respectively. The significant difference between the data of both subgroups and the norm was registered (p

scholarly journals Evaluation of Hearing Aid Manufacturers' Software-Derived Fittings to DSL v5.0 Pediatric Targets

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (05) ◽  
pp. 354-362
Author(s):  
Paula Folkeard ◽  
Marlene Bagatto ◽  
Susan Scollie
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Chart Review ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Test Case ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Speech Intelligibility Index ◽  
Programming Software ◽  
Test Level

Abstract Background Hearing aid prescriptive methods are a commonly recommended component of evidence-based preferred practice guidelines and are often implemented in the hearing aid programming software. Previous studies evaluating hearing aid manufacturers' software-derived fittings to prescriptions have shown significant deviations from targets. However, few such studies examined the accuracy of software-derived fittings for the Desired Sensation Level (DSL) v5.0 prescription. Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of software-derived fittings to the DSL v5.0 prescription, across a range of hearing aid brands, audiograms, and test levels. Research Design This study is a prospective chart review with simulated cases. Data Collection and Analysis A set of software-derived fittings were created for a six-month-old test case, across audiograms ranging from mild to profound. The aided output from each fitting was verified in the test box at 55-, 65-, 75-, and 90-dB SPL, and compared with DSL v5.0 child targets. The deviations from target across frequencies 250-6000 Hz were calculated, together with the root-mean-square error (RMSE) from target. The aided Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) values generated for the speech passages at 55- and 65-dB SPL were compared with published norms. Study Sample Thirteen behind-the-ear style hearing aids from eight manufacturers were tested. Results The amount of deviation per frequency was dependent on the test level and degree of hearing loss. Most software-derived fittings for mild-to-moderately severe hearing losses fell within ± 5 dB of the target for most frequencies. RMSE results revealed more than 84% of those hearing aid fittings for the mild-to-moderate hearing losses were within 5 dB at all test levels. Fittings for severe to profound hearing losses had the greatest deviation from target and RMSE. Aided SII values for the mild-to-moderate audiograms fell within the normative range for DSL pediatric fittings, although they fell within the lower portion of the distribution. For more severe losses, SII values for some hearing aids fell below the normative range. Conclusions In this study, use of the software-derived manufacturers' fittings based on the DSL v5.0 pediatric targets set most hearing aids within a clinically acceptable range around the prescribed target, particularly for mild-to-moderate hearing losses. However, it is likely that clinician adjustment based on verification of hearing aid output would be required to optimize the fit to target, maximize aided SII, and ensure appropriate audibility across all degrees of hearing loss.

Performance of Individual Hearing Aids Utilizing Microphone and Induction Coil Input

1971 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 365-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard J. Sung ◽  
William R. Hodgson
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Response ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Harmonic Distortion ◽  
Physical Characteristics ◽  
Induction Coil ◽  
Body Type ◽  
High Frequency Response ◽  
Physical Measurements

Physical measurements of gain, maximum power output, frequency response, and harmonic distortion were made on each of two body-type hearing aids on both the microphone and induction coil settings. In addition, we investigated speech intelligibility through each aid, for both acoustic and magnetic input, using 32 normal-hearing subjects. Our findings indicated that different hearing aids provide different sensitivity for loop induction. For a given hearing aid, physical characteristics varied between the microphone and the telephone coil settings. The intelligibility of speech produced by a given mode of signal input, either microphone or telephone coil, was dependent on physical characteristics of the hearing aid. The usable high-frequency response and the configuration of the response curve in the region of 1500 to 3000 Hz appeared to be associated with the intelligibility of monosyllabic words.

scholarly journals The Effects of Manufacturer’s Prefit and Real-Ear Fitting on the Predicted Speech Perception of Children with Severe to Profound Hearing Loss

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (05) ◽  
pp. 346-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tian Kar Quar ◽  
Cila Umat ◽  
Yong Yee Chew
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
High Input ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
High Frequency Region ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractThe use of probe microphone measures in hearing aid verification is often neglected or not fully used by practitioners. Some practitioners rely on simulated gain and output provided by manufacturer's fitting software to verify hearing aids.This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of manufacturer’s prefit procedure in matching the prescribed real-ear targets. It also aims to study its correlated impact on the predicted speech perception in children with severe and profound hearing loss.This cross-sectional experiment was carried out by measuring the output of hearing aids based on prefit versus real-ear at low-, moderate-, and high-input levels. The predicted speech perception for different hearing aid fittings was determined based on the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII).Sixteen children (28 ears) aged between 4 and 7 yr, with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss took part in the study.Two different types of hearing aids (Phonak and Unitron) were programmed based on their respective manufacturers’ Desired Sensation Levels (DSL) v5 Child procedure. The hearing aids were then verified using coupler-based measurements and individual real-ear-to-coupler differences. The prefit outputs were compared with the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs at low-, moderate-, and high-input levels. The hearing aids were then adjusted to closely match the prescribed output. The SIIs were calculated for the fittings before and after adjustment.Sixty four percent of fittings that were based on the prefit procedure achieved the optimal fit-to-targets, with less than 5-dB RMS deviations from the DSL v5 Child targets. After adjusting the hearing aids to attempt to meet the DSL v5 Child targets, 75% of the ears tested achieved the optimal fit-to-targets. On average, hearing aid outputs generated by the manufacturer’s prefit procedure had good and reasonable agreement with the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs at low- and mid-frequencies. Nonetheless, at 4000 Hz, the hearing aid output mostly fell below the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs. This was still the case even after the hearing aid was adjusted to attempt to match with the targets. At low input level, some prefit outputs were found to be higher than the prescribed outputs. The deviations of prefit outputs from the prescribed outputs were dependent on the type of hearing aid and input levels. There was no significant difference between the SII calculated for fittings based on the prefit and adjusted fit.Prefit procedure tends to produce outputs that were below the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs, with the largest mean difference at 4000 Hz. Even though the hearing aid gains were adjusted to attempt to match with the targets, the outputs were still below the targets. The limitations of hearing aids to match the DSL v5 Child targets at high-frequency region have resulted in no improvement in the children’s predicted speech perception.

scholarly journals Speech Perception and Information-Carrying Capacity for Hearing Aid Users of Different Ages

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (Suppl. 1) ◽  
pp. 16-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulrich Hoppe ◽  
Thomas Hocke ◽  
Alexander Müller ◽  
Anne Hast
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Carrying Capacity ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Monosyllabic Word ◽  
Older Subjects

Hearing impairment in the elderly is usually treated with conventional hearing aids; however, a large number of older people do not achieve sufficient speech recognition with hearing aids. The aim of the study was to describe speech perception with hearing aids in comparison to pure-tone hearing loss and maximum speech recognition scores for phonemically balanced words. Data from 392 hearing aid users with different degrees of hearing loss were evaluated retrospectively. In particular, pure-tone thresholds, the maximum monosyllabic word score, and the monosyllabic word score in quiet at conversational level with a hearing aid were analysed. The results showed that speech perception scores decline with increasing age. Even when corrected for pure-tone hearing loss, a significant decline in speech recognition scores after the age of 80 years was observed. Regarding the maximum monosyllabic word score, the effect is smaller but still observable; thus, speech recognition with hearing aids is significantly lower for older subjects. This can be attributed partially to the reduction of the information-carrying capacity in this group.

scholarly journals Detection, Speech Recognition, Loudness, and Preference Outcomes With a Direct Drive Hearing Aid: Effects of Bandwidth

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 233121652199913
Author(s):  
Paula Folkeard ◽  
Maaike Van Eeckhoutte ◽  
Suzanne Levy ◽  
Drew Dundas ◽  
Parvaneh Abbasalipour ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Direct Drive ◽  
Hearing Devices ◽  
Within Subjects ◽  
Study Participants

Direct drive hearing devices, which deliver a signal directly to the middle ear by vibrating the tympanic membrane via a lens placed in contact with the umbo, are designed to provide an extension of audible bandwidth, but there are few studies of the effects of these devices on preference, speech intelligibility, and loudness. The current study is the first to compare aided speech understanding between narrow and extended bandwidth conditions for listeners with hearing loss while fitted with a direct drive hearing aid system. The study also explored the effect of bandwidth on loudness perception and investigated subjective preference for bandwidth. Fifteen adult hearing aid users with symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss participated in a prospective, within-subjects, randomized single-blind repeated-measures study. Participants wore the direct drive hearing aids for 4 to 15 weeks (average 6 weeks) prior to outcome measurement. Outcome measures were completed in various bandwidth conditions achieved by reducing the gain of the device above 5000 Hz or by filtering the stimuli. Aided detection thresholds provided evidence of amplification to 10000 Hz. A significant improvement was found in high-frequency consonant detection and recognition, as well as for speech in noise performance in the full versus narrow bandwidth conditions. Subjective loudness ratings increased with provision of the full bandwidth available; however, real-world trials showed most participants were able to wear the full bandwidth hearing aids with only small adjustments to the prescription method. The majority of participants had either no preference or a preference for the full bandwidth setting.

Investigation of Extended Bandwidth Hearing Aid Amplification on Speech Intelligibility and Sound Quality in Adults with Mild-to-Moderate Hearing Loss

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (03) ◽  
pp. 243-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angeline Seeto ◽  
Grant D. Searchfield
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Significant Benefit ◽  
Band Frequency ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Moderate Hearing Loss

AbstractAdvances in digital signal processing have made it possible to provide a wide-band frequency response with smooth, precise spectral shaping. Several manufacturers have introduced hearing aids that are claimed to provide gain for frequencies up to 10–12 kHz. However, there is currently limited evidence and very few independent studies evaluating the performance of the extended bandwidth hearing aids that have recently become available.This study investigated an extended bandwidth hearing aid using measures of speech intelligibility and sound quality to find out whether there was a significant benefit of extended bandwidth amplification over standard amplification.Repeated measures study designed to examine the efficacy of extended bandwidth amplification compared to standard bandwidth amplification.Sixteen adult participants with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss.Participants were bilaterally fit with a pair of Widex Mind 440 behind-the-ear hearing aids programmed with a standard bandwidth fitting and an extended bandwidth fitting; the latter provided gain up to 10 kHz.For each fitting, and an unaided condition, participants completed two speech measures of aided benefit, the Quick Speech-in-Noise test (QuickSIN™) and the Phonak Phoneme Perception Test (PPT; high-frequency perception in quiet), and a measure of sound quality rating.There were no significant differences found between unaided and aided conditions for QuickSIN™ scores. For the PPT, there were statistically significantly lower (improved) detection thresholds at high frequencies (6 and 9 kHz) with the extended bandwidth fitting. Although not statistically significant, participants were able to distinguish between 6 and 9 kHz 50% better with extended bandwidth. No significant difference was found in ability to recognize phonemes in quiet between the unaided and aided conditions when phonemes only contained frequency content <6 kHz. However significant benefit was found with the extended bandwidth fitting for recognition of 9-kHz phonemes. No significant difference in sound quality preference was found between the standard bandwidth and extended bandwidth fittings.This study demonstrated that a pair of currently available extended bandwidth hearing aids was technically capable of delivering high-frequency amplification that was both audible and useable to listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. This amplification was of acceptable sound quality. Further research, particularly field trials, is required to ascertain the real-world benefit of high-frequency amplification.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document