Preference for and Performance With Damped and Undamped Hearing Aids by Listeners With Sensorineural Hearing Loss

1996 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynne A. Davis ◽  
Stephanie A. Davidson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Hearing Impairments ◽  
Acoustic Damping ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Made In

This study investigated the relationship between acoustic damping of hearing aid responses and listeners’ speech discrimination and judgments of preference and sound quality. Eighteen subjects with essentially equivalent hearing impairments participated. Subjects’ speech discrimination was evaluated for a male talker in quiet and in noise and for a female talker in the same conditions with hearing aids with 0 dB, −5 dB, and −10 dB of damping. Subjects also compared the damping levels using eight bipolar adjective pairs and provided judgments of overall preference. Measurements of the hearing aid responses were made in a 2-cm 3 coupler and in the subjects’ ears using probe microphone techniques. Smoothness of the responses was quantified using the Index of Response Irregularity (IRI) and the Frequency Response Smoothness Quantification Index (FReSQI). Subjects preferred the two damped hearing aid responses to the undamped. They also had better speech discrimination with damped hearing aid responses. The bipolar adjectives were of limited use in comparing hearing aids. A few questions about hearing aid sound quality and preference appear adequate for evaluating listeners’ choice of hearing aids. Smoothness of the hearing aid responses in the test box was higher for the damped hearing aids than for the undamped. However, for real ear responses measured using a probe microphone, smoothness did not change as a function of damping level.

The Relationship Between Hearing Loss Self-Management and Hearing Aid Benefit and Satisfaction

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Convery ◽  
Gitte Keidser ◽  
Louise Hickson ◽  
Carly Meyer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose Hearing loss self-management refers to the knowledge and skills people use to manage the effects of hearing loss on all aspects of their daily lives. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between self-reported hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Method Thirty-seven adults with hearing loss, all of whom were current users of bilateral hearing aids, participated in this observational study. The participants completed self-report inventories probing their hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Correlation analysis was used to investigate the relationship between individual domains of hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Results Participants who reported better self-management of the effects of their hearing loss on their emotional well-being and social participation were more likely to report less aided listening difficulty in noisy and reverberant environments and greater satisfaction with the effect of their hearing aids on their self-image. Participants who reported better self-management in the areas of adhering to treatment, participating in shared decision making, accessing services and resources, attending appointments, and monitoring for changes in their hearing and functional status were more likely to report greater satisfaction with the sound quality and performance of their hearing aids. Conclusion Study findings highlight the potential for using information about a patient's hearing loss self-management in different domains as part of clinical decision making and management planning.

Findings From EuroTrak Surveys From 2009 to 2015: Hearing Loss Prevalence, Hearing Aid Adoption, and Benefits of Hearing Aid Use

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (3S) ◽  
pp. 451-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolai Bisgaard ◽  
Stefan Ruf
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Use Patterns ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Product Features ◽  
Hearing Status ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Analyze Data

Purpose The purpose of this study was to analyze data from the EuroTrak surveys performed from 2009 to 2015 in Germany, France, and the United Kingdom to identify factors that could account for the growth in hearing aid sales over that period. Method Data of 132,028 people—approximately 15,000 for each of the 3 countries at 3-year intervals—were collected using a questionnaire. The sample in each country was weighted using the respective country age–gender populations to get balanced results. Furthermore, 11,867 persons with self-reported hearing impairment filled in a comprehensive questionnaire on hearing status and related matters; 4,631 were hearing aid owners. Data were pooled over the 3 countries for each of the years 2009, 2012, and 2015 and analyzed for developments over the 6-year period. In certain cases, data were pooled across countries and years. The analysis focused on hearing loss prevalence, hearing aid adoption rates, satisfaction with hearing aids, and benefits of hearing aid use. Results Hearing loss prevalence was stable over the period around 10%—slightly higher for men than for women. Hearing aid adoption overall increased from 33% to 37%, and bilateral use increased from 55% to 69%. Intervals between hearing aid renewals decreased. These factors contribute to increased hearing aid sales. Bilateral users are more satisfied with the hearing aid product features (76%) and performance (72%) and use their hearing aids 9.1 hr per day, compared with unilateral users where the corresponding numbers are 71%, 67%, and 7.8 hr, respectively. Satisfaction with hearing aid product features and performance in general is slightly increasing; hearing aid users are 14.5% less exhausted at the end of the day compared with nonusers with similar hearing loss and exhibit less depressive and forgetfulness symptoms. Conclusions The prevalence of self-reported hearing loss is 10.6% and stable, and hearing aid adoption has increased, particularly of bilateral fittings that are more satisfactory and exhibit higher daily use patterns. Higher uptake of hearing aids contributes to growing hearing aid sales.

scholarly journals Listener Performance with a Novel Hearing Aid Frequency Lowering Technique

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (09) ◽  
pp. 810-822 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. Kirby ◽  
Judy G. Kopun ◽  
Meredith Spratford ◽  
Clairissa M. Mollak ◽  
Marc A. Brennan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Signal Processing ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Processing Strategy ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
At Home

AbstractSloping hearing loss imposes limits on audibility for high-frequency sounds in many hearing aid users. Signal processing algorithms that shift high-frequency sounds to lower frequencies have been introduced in hearing aids to address this challenge by improving audibility of high-frequency sounds.This study examined speech perception performance, listening effort, and subjective sound quality ratings with conventional hearing aid processing and a new frequency-lowering signal processing strategy called frequency composition (FC) in adults and children.Participants wore the study hearing aids in two signal processing conditions (conventional processing versus FC) at an initial laboratory visit and subsequently at home during two approximately six-week long trials, with the order of conditions counterbalanced across individuals in a double-blind paradigm.Children (N = 12, 7 females, mean age in years = 12.0, SD = 3.0) and adults (N = 12, 6 females, mean age in years = 56.2, SD = 17.6) with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who were full-time hearing aid users.Individual performance with each type of processing was assessed using speech perception tasks, a measure of listening effort, and subjective sound quality surveys at an initial visit. At the conclusion of each subsequent at-home trial, participants were retested in the laboratory. Linear mixed effects analyses were completed for each outcome measure with signal processing condition, age group, visit (prehome versus posthome trial), and measures of aided audibility as predictors.Overall, there were few significant differences in speech perception, listening effort, or subjective sound quality between FC and conventional processing, effects of listener age, or longitudinal changes in performance. Listeners preferred FC to conventional processing on one of six subjective sound quality metrics. Better speech perception performance was consistently related to higher aided audibility.These results indicate that when high-frequency speech sounds are made audible with conventional processing, speech recognition ability and listening effort are similar between conventional processing and FC. Despite the lack of benefit to speech perception, some listeners still preferred FC, suggesting that qualitative measures should be considered when evaluating candidacy for this signal processing strategy.

Hearing Impaired Children's Preference for, and Performance with, Four Combinations of Directional Microphone and Digital Noise Reduction Technology

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (09) ◽  
pp. 832-844 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea L. Pittman ◽  
Mollie M. Hiipakka
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Directional Hearing ◽  
Short Period ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Noise Management

Background: Before advanced noise-management features can be recommended for use in children with hearing loss, evidence regarding their ability to use these features to optimize speech perception is necessary. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the relation between children's preference for, and performance with, four combinations of noise-management features in noisy listening environments. Research Design: Children with hearing loss were asked to repeat short sentences presented in steady-state noise or in multitalker babble while wearing ear-level hearing aids. The aids were programmed with four memories having an orthogonal arrangement of two noise-management features. The children were also asked to indicate the hearing aid memory that they preferred in each of the listening conditions both initially and after a short period of use. Study Sample: Fifteen children between the ages of 8 and 12 yr with moderate hearing losses, bilaterally. Results: The children's preference for noise management aligned well with their performance for at least three of the four listening conditions. The configuration of noise-management features had little effect on speech perception with the exception of reduced performance for speech originating from behind the child while in a directional hearing aid setting. Additionally, the children's preference appeared to be governed by listening comfort, even under conditions for which a benefit was not expected such as the use of digital noise reduction in the multitalker babble conditions. Conclusions: The results serve as evidence in support of the use of noise-management features in grade-school children as young as 8 yr of age.

Fitting Noise Management Signal Processing Applying the American Academy of Audiology Pediatric Amplification Guideline: Verification Protocols

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (03) ◽  
pp. 237-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Scollie ◽  
Charla Levy ◽  
Nazanin Pourmand ◽  
Parvaneh Abbasalipour ◽  
Marlene Bagatto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Verification Systems ◽  
Clinical Verification ◽  
Noise Management

Background: Although guidelines for fitting hearing aids for children are well developed and have strong basis in evidence, specific protocols for fitting and verifying some technologies are not always available. One such technology is noise management in children’s hearing aids. Children are frequently in high-level and/or noisy environments, and many options for noise management exist in modern hearing aids. Verification protocols are needed to define specific test signals and levels for use in clinical practice. Purpose: This work aims to (1) describe the variation in different brands of noise reduction processors in hearing aids and the verification of these processors and (2) determine whether these differences are perceived by 13 children who have hearing loss. Finally, we aimed to develop a verification protocol for use in pediatric clinical practice. Study Sample: A set of hearing aids was tested using both clinically available test systems and a reference system, so that the impacts of noise reduction signal processing in hearing aids could be characterized for speech in a variety of background noises. A second set of hearing aids was tested across a range of audiograms and across two clinical verification systems to characterize the variance in clinical verification measurements. Finally, a set of hearing aid recordings that varied by type of noise reduction was rated for sound quality by children with hearing loss. Results: Significant variation across makes and models of hearing aids was observed in both the speed of noise reduction activation and the magnitude of noise reduction. Reference measures indicate that noise-only testing may overestimate noise reduction magnitude compared to speech-in-noise testing. Variation across clinical test signals was also observed, indicating that some test signals may be more successful than others for characterization of hearing aid noise reduction. Children provided different sound quality ratings across hearing aids, and for one hearing aid rated the sound quality as higher with the noise reduction system activated. Conclusions: Implications for clinical verification systems may be that greater standardization and the use of speech-in-noise test signals may improve the quality and consistency of noise reduction verification cross clinics. A suggested clinical protocol for verification of noise management in children’s hearing aids is suggested.

scholarly journals The Sophono Bone-Conduction System: Surgical, Audiologic, and Quality-of-Life Outcomes

2017 ◽  
Vol 96 (7) ◽  
pp. E28-E33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Mclean ◽  
Irumee Pai ◽  
Andrew Philipatos ◽  
Michael Gordon
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Conductive Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Single Sided Deafness ◽  
Conductive Hearing

We prospectively evaluated the surgical, audiologic, and quality-of-life outcomes in 5 patients—2 men and 3 women, aged 22 to 64 years (mean: 41.8)—who were implanted with the Sophono Alpha 2 MPO Processor. The indications for implantation of this bone-conduction device included recurrent ear canal infections with hearing aids (n = 3), single-sided deafness (n = 1), and patient preference in view of difficulty using a conventional hearing aid (n = 1). In addition to the patient with single-sided deafness, 3 patients had a bilateral mixed hearing loss and 1 had a bilateral conductive hearing loss. Outcomes measures included surgical complications, functional gain (FG), speech discrimination in quiet and noise, and patient satisfaction as determined by the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and the Entific Medical Systems bone-anchored hearing aid questionnaire (BAQ). The only postsurgical complication noted was a minor skin reaction and pain in 1 patient that resolved with conservative management. In the 3 patients with the mixed hearing loss, the mean FG was 13.3, 20.0, 11.7, and 11.7 dB at 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz, respectively; in the patient with the bilateral conductive hearing loss, the FG was 10, 25, 10, and 15 dB at the same frequencies. Speech discrimination scores with the Sophono device were comparable to those seen with conventional hearing aids. After implantation, all 5 patients experienced a positive quality-of-life outcome according to the GBI, although 1 of them had only a marginal improvement. On follow-up, all patients reported that they remained satisfied with their implant and that they used their device all day long. We conclude that the Sophono bone-conduction system is a safe and effective option that should be considered for patients with a mixed or conductive hearing loss who are unable to use a conventional hearing aid, as well as for those with single-sided deafness.

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.

scholarly journals Evaluating the causative factors that lead to rejection of hearing aids among young adults having moderate to severe degree sensorineural hearing loss

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 54-57
Author(s):  
Hafiz Muhammad Usama Basheer ◽  
Atia Ur Rehman ◽  
Humaira Waseem ◽  
Wajeeha Zaib
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Situational Factors ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Financial Factors ◽  
Causative Factors

Background: Hearing loss in young adulthood causes real stigma and a state of denial. The crucial clinical management to sustain the hearing loss is hearing aid fitting, but most adult people reject it or do not use it. Many factors, including social, personal, and device problems, lessen the usage of hearing aid. The objective of this study was to evaluate the causative factors which can lead to the rejection of hearing aids.  Patients and methods: This was a cross-sectional survey carried out in 9 cities of Punjab, Pakistan, using a convenient sampling technique during summer 2018. A total of 171 participants were included who were young adults ranging from 19-40 years. A questionnaire with 11 factors and a further 35 sub-reasons was given to the participants. Questions were close-ended in yes or no. Data were analyzed through frequency and percentages tabulation with SPSS software. Results: Results showed that hearing aid value/speech clarity was the most problematic reason for patients to reject hearing aid. The given factor had four sub-reasons ('noisy situation,' 'poor benefit,' 'poor sound quality, and 'not suitable for the type of hearing loss). A total number n=154 (90.05%) marked yes for facing poor sound quality followed by poor benefit n=141 (82.45%), not suitable for the type of hearing loss n=121 (70.76%) and noisy situation n=118 (69.00%), thus making hearing aid value the leading cause of rejection. The second leading cause was financial factors followed by situational factors, appearance, fit and comfort, device factors, psychosocial factors, ear infections, care and maintenance, attitude, and family pressure to use a hearing aid.  Conclusion: Most prevalent cause of not taking up a hearing aid is the hearing aid value followed by financial factors, situational factors, appearance, fit, and comfort.

Exploring the Relationship Between Hearing Aid Self-Efficacy and Hearing Aid Management

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 56-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittney A. Dullard ◽  
Kathleen M. Cienkowski
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
Rehabilitation Outcomes ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Relationship

Hearing loss is a highly prevalent condition affecting a significant portion of the adult population. Hearing aids are an effective and common rehabilitation strategy for individuals with hearing loss. A wide range of factors, however, can hamper and even preclude successful hearing aid use. Self-efficacy, a concept that reflects perceptions of one's ability to perform particular tasks or behaviors, has been shown to be an important factor in the successful management of chronic illness including conditions such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease, as well as arthritis and other sources of chronic pain. Improving or strengthening patients' self-efficacy beliefs can improve health outcomes. The role of self-efficacy in the management of hearing loss and hearing aids is still being explored; hence, the extent to which, and the ways in which, self-efficacy may be related to audiologic outcomes remains largely unexplained. The purpose of this article is to examine emerging evidence regarding the relationship between perceived self-efficacy and rehabilitation outcomes among adult hearing aid users and to discuss an apparent discrepancy between patients' reported self-efficacy and their demonstrated skill in managing hearing aids.

Transitioning Hearing Aid Users with Severe and Profound Loss to a New Gain/Frequency Response: Benefit, Perception, and Acceptance

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (03) ◽  
pp. 168-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Convery ◽  
Gitte Keidser
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Frequency Response ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Paired Comparison ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Discrimination Performance ◽  
Gradual Change ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Experimental Group

Background: Adults with severe and profound hearing loss tend to be long-term, full-time users of amplification who are highly reliant on their hearing aids. As a result of these characteristics, they are often reluctant to update their hearing aids when new features or signal-processing algorithms become available. Due to the electroacoustic constraints of older devices, many severely and profoundly hearing-impaired adults continue to wear hearing aids that provide more low- and mid-frequency gain and less high-frequency gain than would be prescribed by the National Acoustic Laboratories’ revised formula with profound correction factor (NAL-RP). Purpose: To investigate the effect of a gradual change in gain/frequency response on experienced hearing-aid wearers with moderately severe to profound hearing loss. Research Design: Double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Study Sample: Twenty-three experienced adult hearing-aid users with severe and profound hearing loss participated in the study. Participants were selected for inclusion in the study if the gain/frequency response of their own hearing aids differed significantly from their NAL-RP prescription. Participants were assigned either to a control or to an experimental group balanced for aided ear three-frequency pure-tone average (PTA) and age. Intervention: Participants were fitted with Siemens Artis 2 SP behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids that were matched to the gain/frequency response of their own hearing aids for a 65 dB SPL input level. The experimental group progressed incrementally to their NAL-RP targets over the course of 15 wk, while the control group maintained their initial settings throughout the study. Data Collection and Analysis: Aided speech discrimination testing, loudness scaling, and structured questionnaires were completed at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 wk postfitting. A paired comparison between the old and new gain/frequency responses was completed at 1 and 15 wk postfitting. Statistical analysis was conducted to examine differences between the experimental and control groups and changes in objective performance and subjective perception over time. Results: The results of the study showed that participants in the experimental group were subjectively accepting of the changes to their amplification characteristics, as evidenced by nonsignificant changes in the ratings of device performance over time. Perception of loudness, sound quality, speech intelligibility, and own voice volume did not change significantly throughout the study. Objectively, participants in the experimental group demonstrated poorer speech discrimination performance as the study progressed, although there was no change in objective loudness perception. According to the paired comparison, there was an overall subjective preference for the original gain/frequency response among all participants, although participants in the experimental group did show an increase in preference for the NAL-RP response by the end of the study. Conclusions: Based on the findings of this study, we suggest that undertaking a gradual change to a new gain/frequency response with severely and profoundly hearing-impaired adults is a feasible procedure. However, we recommend that clinicians select transition candidates carefully and initiate the procedure only if there is a clinical reason for doing so. A validated prescriptive formula should be used as a transition target, and speech discrimination performance should be monitored throughout the transition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document