Noise Exposure Associated With Hearing Aid Use in Industry

1996 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas G. Dolan ◽  
James F. Maurer

Although noise may be innocuous in many vocational environments, there is a growing concern in industry that it can reach hazardous levels when amplified by hearing aids. This study examined the daily noise exposures associated with hearing aid use in industry. This was done by both laboratory and site measurements in which hearing aids were coupled to the microphone of an integrating sound level meter or dosimeter. The former method involved the use of recorded railroad and manufacturing noise and a Bruel and Kjaer 4128 Head and Torso simulator. In the latter procedure, a worker wore one of three hearing aids coupled to a dosimeter during 8-hour shifts in a manufacturing plant. Both methods demonstrated that even when amplified by mild-gain hearing aids, noise exposures rose from time-weighted averages near 80 dBA to well above the OSHA maximum of 90 dBA. The OSHA maximum was also exceeded when moderate and high gain instruments were worn in non-occupational listening environments. The results suggest that current OSHA regulations that limit noise exposure in sound field are inappropriate for hearing aid users.

2008 ◽  
Vol 19 (10) ◽  
pp. 758-773 ◽  
Author(s):  
H Gustav Mueller ◽  
Benjamin W.Y. Hornsby ◽  
Jennifer E. Weber

Background: While there have been many studies of real-world preferred hearing aid gain, few data are available from participants using hearing aids with today's special features activated. Moreover, only limited data have been collected regarding preferred gain for individuals using trainable hearing aids. Purpose: To determine whether real-world preferred hearing aid gain with trainable modern hearing aids is in agreement with previous work in this area, and to determine whether the starting programmed gain setting influences preferred gain outcome. Research Design: An experimental crossover study. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups. Following initial treatment, each subject crossed to the opposite group and experienced that treatment. Study Sample: Twenty-two adults with downward sloping sensorineural hearing loss served as participants (mean age 64.5; 16 males, 6 females). All were experienced users of bilateral amplification. Intervention: Using a crossover design, participants were fitted to two different prescriptive gain conditions: VC (volume control) start-up 6 dB above NAL-NL1 (National Acoustic Laboratories—Non-linear 1) target or VC start-up 6 dB below NAL-NL1 target. The hearing aids were used in a 10 to 14 day field trial for each condition, and using the VC, the participants could “train” the overall hearing aid gain to their preferred level. During the field trial, daily hearing aid use was logged, as well as the listening situations experienced by the listeners based on the hearing instrument's acoustic scene analysis. The participants completed a questionnaire at the start and end of each field trial in which they rated loudness perceptions and their satisfaction with aided loudness levels. Results: Because several participants potentially experienced floor or ceiling effects for the range of trainable gain, the majority of the statistical analysis was conducted using 12 of the 22 participants. For both VC-start conditions, the trained preferred gain differed significantly from the NAL-NL1 prescriptive targets. More importantly, the initial start-up gain significantly influenced the trained gain; the mean preferred gain for the +6 dB start condition was approximately 9 dB higher than the preferred gain for the −6 dB start condition, and this difference was statistically significant (p < .001). Partial eta squared (η2) = 0.919, which is a large effect size.Deviation from the NAL-NL1 target was not significantly influenced by the time spent in different listening environments, amount of hearing aid use during the trial period, or amount of hearing loss. Questionnaire data showed more appropriate ratings for loudness and higher satisfaction with loudness for the 6 dB below target VC-start condition. Conclusions: When trainable hearing aids are used, the initial programmed gain of hearing instruments can influence preferred gain in the real world.


2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly L. Tremblay

Purpose The purpose of this article is to review recent research from our laboratory on the topic of aging, and the ear–brain system, as it relates to hearing aid use and auditory rehabilitation. The material described here was presented as part of the forum on the brain and hearing aids, at the 2014 HEaling Across the Lifespan (HEAL) conference. Method The method involves a narrative review of previously reported electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) data from our laboratory as they relate to the (a) neural detection of amplified sound and (b) ability to learn new sound contrasts. Conclusions Results from our studies add to the mounting evidence that there are central effects of biological aging as well as peripheral pathology that affect a person's neural detection and use of sound. What is more, these biological effects can be seen as early as middle age. The accruing evidence has implications for hearing aid use because effective communication relies not only on sufficient detection of sound but also on the individual's ability to learn to make use of these sounds in ever-changing listening environments.


1991 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 661-670 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Macrae

There is a definite risk of overamplification by hearing aids. Guidelines should therefore be established that will minimize the risk of damage to hearing involved in hearing aid use. A mathematical model that can be used for this purpose is derived from equations for predicting noise-induced permanent threshold shift given in International Standard ISO 1999 combined with the Modified Power Law. The model implies that any noise exposure that would cause deterioration of the hearing threshold levels of a person with normal hearing would also be harmful to the hearing of a person with sensorineural hearing impairment. It follows that, in order to ensure that no deterioration occurs in the hearing of a hearing aid user, the output levels from the aid must be such that they would not cause any damage to a person with normal hearing. This constraint can be met for hearing aid users with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss but cannot be met for users with severe-to-profound loss because it would result in the provision of insufficient gain, particularly at the higher frequencies. If the model is valid, then for this group, some appropriately small amount of hearing damage must be accepted as the cost of the advantages gained from the use of a hearing aid. Verification of the model is essential before the model is used in clinical practice to determine the risk of deterioration in hearing due to hearing aid use.


1989 ◽  
Vol 100 (2) ◽  
pp. 154-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carissa D. Bennett

This Study evaluated the use of hearing aids by patients with hearing threshold levels of 20 dB or less at 500 and 1000 Hz and 35 dB or less at 2000 Hz. Ninety-eight patients completed a 30-day trial with amplification. Six months later, patients were interviewed by telephone and questioned on hearing aid use and perceived unaided and aided difficulty in various listening environments. Results of the study demonstrated that patients with minimal high-frequency hearing loss can benefit from the use of hearing aids. Ninety-two percent of the patients elected to purchase the hearing aids and 85% considered the aids a worthwhile investment after 6 months of use. Patients showed a mean improvement from moderate unaided to slight aided difficulty at work and in general social situations. The only variable that predicted success with hearing aids was degree of unaided difficulty at work. Patients who perceived less unaided difficulty at work were less likely to obtain benefit from the use of the hearing aids.


1993 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 365-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Macrae

Temporary threshold shift (TTS) over a wide range of frequencies was found after 4 hours of hearing aid use by a 15-year-old student with severe sensorineural hearing loss who was using real-ear insertion gains 10 to 20 dB greater than those recommended by the current National Acoustic Laboratories (NAL) procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of hearing aids. Measurements were made of her noise exposure during hearing aid use with a noise dosimeter. The real-ear insertion response and input-output function of her hearing aid were measured with a real-ear gain analyzer and were used to calculate in-ear noise levels from the noise levels measured by the dosimeter. The amount of TTS could be predicted from the in-ear noise levels and the student’s hearing levels (HLs) by means of a mathematical model consisting of the Modified Power Law (MPL) of Humes and Jesteadt (1991) combined with equations for predicting TTS in listeners with normal hearing published by Mills, Gilbert, and Adkins (1979). The mean of the instantaneous A-weighted in-ear noise levels proved to be the appropriate equivalent continuous level (ECL) for use in the predictions. The MPL was also used to determine safety limits for TTS due to hearing aid use. The observed TTS exceeded the safety limits at all frequencies up to and including 2000 Hz. It was therefore considered desirable for the girl to use less gain at frequencies from 500 to 1500 Hz.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 419-428
Author(s):  
Jasleen Singh ◽  
Karen A. Doherty

Purpose The aim of the study was to assess how the use of a mild-gain hearing aid can affect hearing handicap, motivation, and attitudes toward hearing aids for middle-age, normal-hearing adults who do and do not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. Method A total of 20 participants (45–60 years of age) with clinically normal-hearing thresholds (< 25 dB HL) were enrolled in this study. Ten self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise, and 10 did not self-report difficulty hearing in background noise. All participants were fit with mild-gain hearing aids, bilaterally, and were asked to wear them for 2 weeks. Hearing handicap, attitudes toward hearing aids and hearing loss, and motivation to address hearing problems were evaluated before and after participants wore the hearing aids. Participants were also asked if they would consider purchasing a hearing aid before and after 2 weeks of hearing aid use. Results After wearing the hearing aids for 2 weeks, hearing handicap scores decreased for the participants who self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise. No changes in hearing handicap scores were observed for the participants who did not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. The participants who self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise also reported greater personal distress from their hearing problems, were more motivated to address their hearing problems, and had higher levels of hearing handicap compared to the participants who did not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. Only 20% (2/10) of the participants who self-reported trouble hearing in background noise reported that they would consider purchasing a hearing aid after 2 weeks of hearing aid use. Conclusions The use of mild-gain hearing aids has the potential to reduce hearing handicap for normal-hearing, middle-age adults who self-report difficulty hearing in background noise. However, this may not be the most appropriate treatment option for their current hearing problems given that only 20% of these participants would consider purchasing a hearing aid after wearing hearing aids for 2 weeks.


1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 204-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Dodds ◽  
Earl Harford

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.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 883-892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha J. Gustafson ◽  
Todd A. Ricketts ◽  
Anne Marie Tharpe

Background: Consistency of hearing aid and remote microphone system use declines as school-age children with hearing loss age. One indicator of hearing aid use time is data logging, another is parent report. Recent data suggest that parents overestimate their children’s hearing aid use time relative to data logging. The potential reasons for this disparity remain unclear. Because school-age children spend the majority of their day away from their parents and with their teachers, reports from teachers might serve as a valuable and additional tool for estimating hearing aid use time and management. Purpose: This study expands previous research on factors influencing hearing aid use time in school-age children using data logging records. Discrepancies between data logging records and parent reports were explored using custom surveys designed for parents and teachers. Responses from parents and teachers were used to examine hearing aid use, remote microphone system use, and hearing aid management in school-age children. Study Sample: Thirteen children with mild-to-moderate hearing loss between the ages of 7 and 10 yr and their parents participated in this study. Teachers of ten of these children also participated. Data Collection and Analysis: Parents and teachers of children completed written surveys about each child’s hearing aid use, remote microphone system use, and hearing aid management skills. Data logs were read from hearing aids using manufacturer’s software. Multiple linear regression analysis and an intraclass correlation coefficient were used to examine factors influencing hearing aid use time and parent agreement with data logs. Parent report of hearing aid use time was compared across various activities and school and nonschool days. Survey responses from parents and teachers were compared to explore areas requiring potential improvement in audiological counseling. Results: Average daily hearing aid use time was ˜6 hr per day as recorded with data logging technology. Children exhibiting greater degrees of hearing loss and those with poorer vocabulary were more likely to use hearing aids consistently than children with less hearing loss and better vocabulary. Parents overestimated hearing aid use by ˜1 hr per day relative to data logging records. Parent-reported use of hearing aids varied across activities but not across school and nonschool days. Overall, parents and teachers showed excellent agreement on hearing aid and remote microphone system use during school instruction but poor agreement when asked about the child’s ability to manage their hearing devices independently. Conclusions: Parental reports of hearing aid use in young school-age children are largely consistent with data logging records and with teacher reports of hearing aid use in the classroom. Audiologists might find teacher reports helpful in learning more about children’s hearing aid management and remote microphone system use during their time at school. This supplementary information can serve as an additional counseling tool to facilitate discussion about remote microphone system use and hearing aid management in school-age children with hearing loss.


1996 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 923-935 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry E. Humes ◽  
Dan Halling ◽  
Maureen Coughlin

Twenty elderly persons with hearing impairment were fit with binaural in-the-ear hearing aids and followed for a 6-month period post-fit. Several hearing-aid outcome measures were obtained at 0, 7, 15, 30, 60, 90, and 180 days post-fit. Outcome measures included (a) objective measures of benefit obtained with nonsense-syllable materials in quiet (CUNY Nonsense Syllable Test, NST) and sentences in multitalker babble (Hearing in Noise Test, HINT); (b) two subjective measures of benefit, one derived from pre-fit/post-fit comparisons on a general scale of hearing handicap (Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly, HHIE) and the other based on a subjective scale of post-fit hearing-aid benefit (Hearing Aid Performance Inventory, HAPI); (c) a questionnaire on hearing-aid satisfaction; (d) an objective measure of hearing-aid use; and (e) a subjective measure of hearing-aid use. Reliability and stability of each measure were examined through repeated-measures analyses of variance, a series of test-retest correlations, and, where possible, scatterplots of the scores against their corresponding 95% critical differences. Many of the measures were found to be both reliable and stable indicators of hearing-aid outcome.


2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 127-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Line Vestergaard Knudsen ◽  
Marie Öberg ◽  
Claus Nielsen ◽  
Graham Naylor ◽  
Sophia E. Kramer

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document