Masking, Temporal Integration, and Sensorineural Hearing Loss

1981 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 514-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Y. Chung
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
White Noise ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Frequency Dependence ◽  
Temporal Integration ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Noise Masking ◽  
Cochlear Hearing Loss ◽  
Principal Finding ◽  
Background White Noise

This study was undertaken basically to examine the effect of white noise masking on temporal integration and how the frequency dependence of temporal integration is related to hearing loss. The threshold differences between 500-msec and 20-msec at .5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz were found for 147 ears of 86 subjects with normal hearing and with various amounts of cochlear hearing loss. Thresholds were measured in three levels of background white noise—30, 60, and 90 dB SPL. The principal finding was that temporal integration is frequency dependent and this dependence is not an epiphenomenon of the decrease in temporal integration due to cochlear hearing loss.

The Effects of Hearing Loss and Noise Masking on the Masking Release for Speech in Temporally Complex Backgrounds

1998 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 549-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sid P. Bacon ◽  
Jane M. Opie ◽  
Danielle Y. Montoya
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Steady State ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
The Other ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Noise Masking ◽  
Masking Release

Speech recognition was measured in three groups of listeners: those with sensorineural hearing loss of (presumably) cochlear origin (HL), those with normal hearing (NH), and those with normal hearing who listened in the presence of a spectrally shaped noise that elevated their pure-tone thresholds to match those of individual listeners in the HL group (NM). Performance was measured in four backgrounds that differed only in their temporal envelope: steady-state (SS) speech-shaped noise, speech-shaped noise modulated by the envelope of multi-talker babble (MT), speech-shaped noise modulated by the envelope of single-talker speech (ST), and speech-shaped noise modulated by a 10-Hz square wave (SQ). Threshold signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) were typically best in the ST and especially the SQ conditions, indicating a masking release in those modulated backgrounds. SNRs in the SS and MT conditions were essentially identical to one another. The masking release was largest in the listeners in the NH group, and it tended to decrease as hearing loss increased. In 5 of the 11 listeners in the HL group, the masking release was nearly identical to that obtained in the NM group matched to those listeners; in the other 6 listeners, the release was smaller than that in the NM group. The reduced masking release was simulated best in those HL listeners for whom the masking release was relatively large. These results suggest that reduced masking release for speech in listeners with sensorineural hearing loss can only sometimes be accounted for entirely by reduced audibility.

scholarly journals Comparison of stacked tone-ABR and chirp ABR in individual with normal hearing and sensorineural hearing loss

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 550
Author(s):  
C. R. Vijay Bharath Reddy ◽  
M. Santhosh Reddy ◽  
K. Suresh
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Tone Burst ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Group I ◽  
Cochlear Hearing Loss

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> There are no published studies that compared amplitude of stacked-Tone ABR and Chirp ABR in hearing impaired individuals with sensorineural hearing loss, which need to be investigated. Objective of the study was to know whether amplitude of standard chirp evoked ABR is same as tone burst evoked stacked ABR in individuals with normal hearing listeners and individuals with sensorineural hearing loss.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> Present hospital based cross sectional study was carried out at Malla Reddy Institute of Medical Sciences, from January 2016 to December 2016. Two groups of subjects were taken. Group I consisted of 20 ears (14 males and 6 females) with normal hearing. Group II consisted of 20 ears (11 females and 9 males) with cochlear hearing loss.  </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Wave V Amplitude of stacked tone ABR was higher than Chirp stimuli evoked ABR wave V in both the groups. Amplitude of stacked tone ABR and chirp was smaller for individuals with sensorineural hearing loss than normal hearing. Between the 2 chirp stimuli, standard Chirp ABR amplitude was higher than modified Chirp in normal hearing listeners and individual with sensorineural hearing loss. For modified chirp in individuals with normal hearing and cochlear hearing loss. Latency obtained by standard chirp was longer compared to latency obtained by modified chirp, which is seen in both the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> Chirp ABR may be opted over stacked tone ABR in neurological investigations due to its lesser variability in amplitude and shorter duration of testing. </p>

scholarly journals Effect of sinusoidally amplitude modulated broadband noise stimuli on stream segregation in individuals with sensorineural hearing loss

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jawahar Antony P ◽  
Animesh Barman
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Amplitude Modulation ◽  
Modulation Frequency ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Broadband Noise ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Stream Segregation ◽  
Temporal Cues

Background and Aim: Auditory stream segre­gation is a phenomenon that splits sounds into different streams. The temporal cues that contri­bute for stream segregation have been previ­ously studied in normal hearing people. In peo­ple with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL), the cues for temporal envelope coding is not usually affected, while the temporal fine structure cues are affected. These two temporal cues depend on the amplitude modulation frequency. The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of sin­usoidal amplitude modulated (SAM) broadband noises on stream segregation in individuals with SNHL. Methods: Thirty normal hearing subjects and 30 subjects with mild to moderate bilateral SNHL participated in the study. Two experi­ments were performed; in the first experiment, the AB sequence of broadband SAM stimuli was presented, while in the second experiment, only B sequence was presented. A low (16 Hz) and a high (256 kHz) standard modulation fre­quency were used in these experiments. The subjects were asked to find the irregularities in the rhythmic sequence. Results: Both the study groups could identify the irregularities similarly in both the experi­ments. The minimum cumulative delay was sli­ghtly higher in the SNHL group. Conclusion: It is suggested that the temporal cues provided by the broadband SAM noises for low and high standard modulation frequencies were not used for stream segregation by either normal hearing subjects or those with SNHL. Keywords: Stream segregation; sinusoidal amplitude modulation; sensorineural 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

Reconstruction of the Audiogram Using Brain Stem Responses and High-Pass Noise Masking

1979 ◽  
Vol 88 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Don ◽  
Jos J. Eggermont ◽  
Derald E. Brackmann
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Brain Stem ◽  
Narrow Band ◽  
Pure Tone Audiometry ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Noise Masking ◽  
Specific Frequency ◽  
High Pass ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Air Conduction

Contributions to the brain stem electrical responses (BSER) presumably initiated from specific frequency regions of the cochlea with center frequencies similar to the major audiometric frequencies (0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 8 kHz) are derived by the application of a high-pass noise masking technique utilizing click stimuli. In normal hearing subjects, these derived narrow-band responses from the midfrequency regions (4, 2, and 1 kHz) can be recognized at click levels as low as 10 dB HL. For the frequency regions around 8 kHz and 0.5 kHz, these derived responses can be discerned at click levels of 30 dB HL and higher. When one uses the lowest click level at which these derived responses can be obtained from a given frequency region, the differences between a patient with a hearing loss and a normal hearing subject correlate well with the amount of hearing loss (air conduction) recorded by conventional pure tone audiometry. Use of the high-pass noise masking technique to reconstruct the audiogram may be of great potential value in assessing young children and other individuals who cannot or will not respond to conventional audiometry.

scholarly journals Quality of Life in Children with Sensorineural Hearing Loss

2019 ◽  
Vol 162 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evette A. Ronner ◽  
Liliya Benchetrit ◽  
Patricia Levesque ◽  
Razan A. Basonbul ◽  
Michael S. Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Pedsql 4.0 ◽  
Hearing Device ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal

Objective To assess quality of life (QOL) in pediatric patients with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) with the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0 (PedsQL 4.0) and the Hearing Environments and Reflection on Quality of Life 26 (HEAR-QL-26) and HEAR-QL-28 surveys. Study Design Prospective longitudinal study. Setting Tertiary care center. Subjects and Methods Surveys were administered to patients with SNHL (ages 2-18 years) from July 2016 to December 2018 at a multidisciplinary hearing loss clinic. Patients aged >7 years completed the HEAR-QL-26, HEAR-QL-28, and PedsQL 4.0 self-report tool, while parents completed the PedsQL 4.0 parent proxy report for children aged ≤7 years. Previously published data from children with normal hearing were used for controls. The independent t test was used for analysis. Results In our cohort of 100 patients, the mean age was 7.7 years (SD, 4.5): 62 participants had bilateral SNHL; 63 had mild to moderate SNHL; and 37 had severe to profound SNHL. Sixty-eight patients used a hearing device. Mean (SD) total survey scores for the PedsQL 4.0 (ages 2-7 and 8-18 years), HEAR-QL-26 (ages 7-12 years), and HEAR-QL-28 (ages 13-18 years) were 83.9 (14.0), 79.2 (11.1), 81.2 (9.8), and 77.5 (11.3), respectively. Mean QOL scores for patients with SNHL were significantly lower than those for controls on the basis of previously published normative data ( P < .0001). There was no significant difference in QOL between children with unilateral and bilateral SNHL or between children with SNHL who did and did not require a hearing device. Low statistical power due to small subgroup sizes limited our analysis. Conclusion It is feasible to collect QOL data from children with SNHL in a hearing loss clinic. Children with SNHL had significantly lower scores on validated QOL instruments when compared with peers with normal hearing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document