Influence of audibility and distortion on the recognition of reverberant speech for children and adults with hearing aid amplification

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Brennan ◽  
Ryan Mccreery ◽  
John Massey
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Nonsense Syllable ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Release Time ◽  
Spectral Distortion ◽  
Release Times ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Amplitude Compression ◽  
Adults And Children

Background: Adults and children with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) have trouble understanding speech in rooms with reverberation when using hearing aid amplification. While the use of amplitude compression signal processing in hearing aids may contribute to this difficulty, there is conflicting evidence on the effects of amplitude compression settings on speech recognition. Less clear is the effect of a fast release time for adults and children with SNHL when using compression ratios derived from a prescriptive procedure. Purpose: To determine whether release time impacts speech recognition in reverberation for children and adults with SNHL and to determine if these effects of release time and reverberation can be predicted using indices of audibility or temporal and spectral distortion. Research Design: A quasi-experimental cohort study. Participants used a hearing aid simulator set to the Desired Sensation Level algorithm m[i/o] for three different amplitude compression release times. Reverberation was simulated using three different reverberation times. Participants: Participants were 20 children and 16 adults with SNHL. Data Collection and Analyses: Participants were seated in a sound-attenuating booth and then nonsense syllable recognition was measured. Predictions of speech recognition were made using indices of audibility, temporal distortion, and spectral distortion and the effects of release time and reverberation were analyzed using linear mixed models. Results: While nonsense syllable recognition decreased in reverberation; release time did not significantly affect nonsense syllable recognition. Participants with lower audibility were more susceptible to the negative effect of reverberation on nonsense syllable recognition. Conclusions: We have extended previous work on the effects of reverberation on aided speech recognition to children with SNHL. Variations in release time did not impact the understanding of speech. An index of audibility best predicted nonsense syllable recognition in reverberation and, clinically, these results suggest that patients with less audibility are more susceptible to nonsense syllable recognition in reverberation.

scholarly journals Listening Effort and Speech Recognition with Frequency Compression Amplification for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (09) ◽  
pp. 823-837 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc A. Brennan ◽  
Dawna Lewis ◽  
Ryan McCreery ◽  
Judy Kopun ◽  
Joshua M. Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Nonsense Word ◽  
Spectral Distortion ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Frequency Compression ◽  
Low Pass ◽  
Adults And Children

AbstractNonlinear frequency compression (NFC) can improve the audibility of high-frequency sounds by lowering them to a frequency where audibility is better; however, this lowering results in spectral distortion. Consequently, performance is a combination of the effects of increased access to high-frequency sounds and the detrimental effects of spectral distortion. Previous work has demonstrated positive benefits of NFC on speech recognition when NFC is set to improve audibility while minimizing distortion. However, the extent to which NFC impacts listening effort is not well understood, especially for children with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL).To examine the impact of NFC on recognition and listening effort for speech in adults and children with SNHL.Within-subject, quasi-experimental study. Participants listened to amplified nonsense words that were (1) frequency-lowered using NFC, (2) low-pass filtered at 5 kHz to simulate the restricted bandwidth (RBW) of conventional hearing aid processing, or (3) low-pass filtered at 10 kHz to simulate extended bandwidth (EBW) amplification.Fourteen children (8–16 yr) and 14 adults (19–65 yr) with mild-to-severe SNHL.Participants listened to speech processed by a hearing aid simulator that amplified input signals to fit a prescriptive target fitting procedure.Participants were blinded to the type of processing. Participants' responses to each nonsense word were analyzed for accuracy and verbal-response time (VRT; listening effort). A multivariate analysis of variance and linear mixed model were used to determine the effect of hearing-aid signal processing on nonsense word recognition and VRT.Both children and adults identified the nonsense words and initial consonants better with EBW and NFC than with RBW. The type of processing did not affect the identification of the vowels or final consonants. There was no effect of age on recognition of the nonsense words, initial consonants, medial vowels, or final consonants. VRT did not change significantly with the type of processing or age.Both adults and children demonstrated improved speech recognition with access to the high-frequency sounds in speech. Listening effort as measured by VRT was not affected by access to high-frequency sounds.

Interactions of Hearing Aid Compression Release Time and Fitting Formula: Effects on Speech Acoustics

2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (02) ◽  
pp. 059-071 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C. Ellison ◽  
Frances P. Harris ◽  
Thomas Muller
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Release Time ◽  
Digital Instrument ◽  
Speech Acoustics ◽  
Release Times ◽  
Rms Amplitude ◽  
Fitting Hearing Aids ◽  
Composite Signal

The effects of the interaction of compression release time and prescribed gain on running speech processed through a hearing aid on KEMAR was investigated. A digital instrument was programmed to fit a mild to moderate sloping hearing loss using probe microphone measures to reach targets prescribed by NAL-NL1, DSL I/O, FIG.6 or ASA2p with release times of 40 and 640 ms for each condition. Recordings were made through KEMAR and analyzed to determine the long-term-average-speech spectra, consonant-to-vowel ratios and the RMS amplitude of 32 phonemic units. Aided and unaided results were compared. Within each prescriptive formula, changes in release time affected all of the speech measures subsequent to programming the instrument to a static-composite signal. The short release-time condition produced the greatest alteration to the speech signal. Release time may need consideration when fitting hearing aids to target gain prescriptions.

scholarly journals Interactions between Cognition and Hearing Aid Compression Release Time: Effects of Linguistic Context of Speech Test Materials on Speech-in-Noise Performance

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-149
Author(s):  
Jingjing Xu ◽  
Robyn M. Cox
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Release Time ◽  
Linguistic Context ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Release Times ◽  
Auditory Feature ◽  
Test Materials

Recent research has established a connection between hearing aid (HA) users’ cognition and speech recognition performance with short and long compression release times (RT). Contradictive findings prevent researchers from using cognition to predict RT prescription. We hypothesized that the linguistic context of speech recognition test materials was one of the factors that accounted for the inconsistency. The present study was designed to examine the relationship between HA users’ cognition and their aided speech recognition performance with short and long RTs using materials with various linguistic contexts. Thirty-four older HA users’ cognitive abilities were quantified using a reading span test. They were fitted with behind-the-ear style HAs with adjustable RT settings. Three speech recognition tests were used: the word-in-noise (WIN) test, the American four alternative auditory feature (AFAAF) test, and the Bamford-Kowal-Bench speech-in-noise (BKB-SIN) test. The results showed that HA users with high cognitive abilities performed better on the AFAAF and the BKB-SIN than those with low cognitive abilities when using short RT. None of the speech recognition tests produced significantly different performance between the two RTs for either cognitive group. These findings did not support our hypothesis. The results suggest that cognition might not be important in prescribing RT.

Effects of Training on the Use of a Manual Microphone Shutoff on a BiCROS Device

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (05) ◽  
pp. 478-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis Kuk ◽  
Eric Seper ◽  
Chi Lau ◽  
Bryan Crose ◽  
Petri Korhonen
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Final Visit ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise ◽  
Study Participants

Background: Bilateral contralateral routing of signals (BiCROS) hearing aids function to restore audibility of sounds originating from the side of the unaidable ear. However, when speech is presented to the side of the aidable ear and noise to the side of the unaidable ear, a BiCROS arrangement may reduce intelligibility of the speech signal. This negative effect may be circumvented if an on/off switch is available on the contralateral routing of signals (CROS) transmitter. Purpose: This study evaluated if the proper use of the on/off switch on a CROS transmitter could enhance speech recognition in noise and sound localization abilities. The participants’ subjective reactions to the use of the BiCROS, including the use of the on/off switch in real-life were also evaluated. Research Design: A between-subjects, repeated-measures design was used to assess differences in speech recognition (in quiet and in noise) and localization abilities under four hearing aid conditions (unaided, unilaterally aided, fixed BiCROS setting, and adjusted BiCROS setting) with speech and noise stimuli presented from different azimuths. Participants were trained on the use of the on/off switch on the BiCROS transmitter before testing in the adjusted BiCROS settings. Subjective ratings were obtained with the Speech, Spatial, and Sound Quality (SSQ) questionnaire and a custom questionnaire. Study Sample: Nine adult BiCROS candidates participated in this study. Data Collection and Analysis: Participants wore the Widex Dream-m-CB hearing aid on the aidable ear for 1 week. They then wore the BiCROS for the remainder of the study. Speech recognition and localization testing were completed in four hearing aid conditions (unaided, unilateral aided, fixed BiCROS, and adjusted BiCROS). Speech recognition was evaluated during the first three visits, whereas localization was evaluated over the course of the study. Participants completed the SSQ questionnaire before each visit. The CROS questionnaire was completed at the final visit. A repeated measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni post hoc analysis was used to evaluate the significance of the results on speech recognition, localization, and the SSQ. Results: The results revealed that the adjusted BiCROS condition improved speech recognition scores by 20 rau (rationalized arcsine unit) when speech was presented to the aidable ear and localization by 37% when sounds are presented from the side of the unaidable ear over the fixed BiCROS condition. Statistically significant benefit on the SSQ was also noted with the adjusted BiCROS condition compared to the unilateral fitting. Conclusions: These findings supported the value of an on/off switch on a CROS transmitter because it allows convenient selective transmission of sounds. It also highlighted the importance of instructions and practice in using the BiCROS hearing aid successfully.

Reliability and Stability of Various Hearing-Aid Outcome Measures in a Group of Elderly Hearing-Aid Wearers

1996 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 923-935 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry E. Humes ◽  
Dan Halling ◽  
Maureen Coughlin
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Nonsense Syllable ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Elderly Persons ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Hearing Handicap

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.

scholarly journals Unilateral hearing loss and the use of hearing aid: speech recognition, benefit, self-perception of functional performance and satisfaction

Revista CEFAC ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lidiéli Dalla Costa ◽  
Sinéia Neujahr dos Santos ◽  
Maristela Julio Costa
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Functional Performance ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Brazilian Portuguese ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Life Questionnaire ◽  
Self Perception ◽  
Sound Amplification

ABSTRACT Purpose: to investigate speech recognition in silence and in noise in subjects with unilateral hearing loss with and without hearing aids, and to analyze the benefit, self-perception of functional performance, satisfaction and the use of hearing aids in these subjects. Methods: eleven adults with unilateral, mixed and sensorineural, mild to severe hearing loss participated in this study. Speech recognition was evaluated by the Brazilian Portuguese sentences lists test; functional performance of the hearing was assessed by using the Speech Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale questionnaire; satisfaction was assessed by the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life questionnaire, both in Brazilian Portuguese; and to assess the use of hearing aids, the patient's report was analyzed. Results: the adaptation of hearing aids provided benefits in speech recognition in all positions evaluated, both in silence and in noise. The subjects did not report major limitations in communication activities with the use of hearing aids. They were satisfied with the use of sound amplification. Most of the subjects did not use hearing aids, effectively. The discontinuity of hearing aids use can be justified by the difficulty on perceiving participation’s restriction caused by hearing loss, as well as the benefit of the hearing aid, besides the concern with batteries’ costs and aesthetic aspects. Conclusion: although showing benefits in speech recognition, in silence and in noise, and satisfaction with sound amplification, most subjects with unilateral hearing loss do not effectively use hearing aids.

Low-level Speech Recognition of Children with Hearing Aids

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jace Wolfe ◽  
Mila Duke ◽  
Sharon Miller ◽  
Erin Schafer ◽  
Christine Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss

Background: For children with hearing loss, the primary goal of hearing aids is to provide improved access to the auditory environment within the limits of hearing aid technology and the child’s auditory abilities. However, there are limited data examining aided speech recognition at very low (40 dBA) and low (50 dBA) presentation levels. Purpose: Due to the paucity of studies exploring aided speech recognition at low presentation levels for children with hearing loss, the present study aimed to 1) compare aided speech recognition at different presentation levels between groups of children with normal hearing and hearing loss, 2) explore the effects of aided pure tone average (PTA) and aided Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) on aided speech recognition at low presentation levels for children with hearing loss ranging in degree from mild to severe, and 3) evaluate the effect of increasing low-level gain on aided speech recognition of children with hearing loss. Research Design: In phase 1 of this study, a two-group, repeated-measures design was used to evaluate differences in speech recognition. In phase 2 of this study, a single-group, repeated-measures design was used to evaluate the potential benefit of additional low-level hearing aid gain for low-level aided speech recognition of children with hearing loss. Study Sample: The first phase of the study included 27 school-age children with mild to severe sensorineural hearing loss and 12 school-age children with normal hearing. The second phase included eight children with mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Intervention: Prior to the study, children with hearing loss were fitted binaurally with digital hearing aids. Children in the second phase were fitted binaurally with digital study hearing aids and completed a trial period with two different gain settings: 1) gain required to match hearing aid output to prescriptive targets (i.e., primary program), and 2) a 6-dB increase in overall gain for low-level inputs relative to the primary program. In both phases of this study, real-ear verification measures were completed to ensure the hearing aid output matched prescriptive targets. Data Collection and Analysis: Phase 1 included monosyllabic word recognition and syllable-final plural recognition at three presentation levels (40, 50, and 60 dBA). Phase 2 compared speech recognition performance for the same test measures and presentation levels with two differing gain prescriptions. Results and Conclusions: In phase 1 of the study, aided speech recognition was significantly poorer in children with hearing loss at all presentation levels. Higher aided SII in the better ear (55 dB SPL input) was associated with higher CNC word recognition at a 40 dBA presentation level. In phase 2, increasing the hearing aid gain for low-level inputs provided a significant improvement in syllable-final plural recognition at very low-level inputs and resulted in a non-significant trend toward better monosyllabic word recognition at very low presentation levels. Additional research is needed to document the speech recognition difficulties children with hearing aids may experience with low-level speech in the real world as well as the potential benefit or detriment of providing additional low-level hearing aid gain

scholarly journals Evidence of Acclimatization in Persons with Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss

2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (02) ◽  
pp. 084-099 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis K. Kuk ◽  
Lisa Potts ◽  
Michael Valente ◽  
Lidia Lee ◽  
Jay Picirrillo
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Secondary Purpose ◽  
Objective Performance ◽  
Recognition Testing ◽  
The One ◽  
Better Than

The present study examined the phenomenon of acclimatization in persons with a severe-to-profound hearing loss. A secondary purpose was to examine the efficacy of a digital nonlinear power hearing aid that has a low compression threshold with expansion for this population. Twenty experienced hearing aid users wore the study hearing aids for three months and their performance with the study hearing aids was evaluated at the initial fitting, one month, and three months after the initial fitting. Performance of their current hearing aids was also evaluated at the initial fitting. Speech recognition testing was conducted at input levels of 50 dB SPL and 65 dB SPL in quiet, and 75 dB SPL in noise at a +10 SNR. Questionnaires were used to measure subjective performance at each evaluation interval. The results showed improvement in speech recognition score at the one-month evaluation over the initial evaluation. No significant improvement was seen at the three-month evaluation from the one-month visit. In addition, subjective and objective performance of the study hearing aids was significantly better than the participants' own hearing aids at all evaluation intervals. These results provided evidence of acclimatization in persons with a severe-to-profound hearing loss and reinforced the precaution that any trial of amplification, especially from linear to nonlinear mode, should consider this phenomenon.

The Effects of Changes in Head Angle on Auditory and Visual Input for Omnidirectional and Directional Microphone Hearing Aids

2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Henry ◽  
Todd Ricketts
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Visual Cues ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Increase Signal Intensity ◽  
Visual Mode

Improving the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for individuals with hearing loss who are listening to speech in noise provides an obvious benefit. Although binaural hearing provides the greatest advantage over monaural hearing in noise, some individuals with symmetrical hearing loss choose to wear only one hearing aid. The present study tested the hypothesis that individuals with symmetrical hearing loss fit with one hearing aid would demonstrate improved speech recognition in background noise with increases in head turn. Fourteen individuals were fit monaurally with a Starkey Gemini in-the-ear (ITE) hearing aid with directional and omnidirectional microphone modes. Speech recognition performance in noise was tested using the audiovisual version of the Connected Speech Test (CST v.3). The test was administered in auditory-only conditions as well as with the addition of visual cues for each of three head angles: 0°, 20°, and 40°. Results indicated improvement in speech recognition performance with changes in head angle for the auditory-only presentation mode at the 20° and 40° head angles when compared to 0°. Improvement in speech recognition performance for the auditory + visual mode was noted for the 20° head angle when compared to 0°. Additionally, a decrement in speech recognition performance for the auditory + visual mode was noted for the 40° head angle when compared to 0°. These results support a speech recognition advantage for listeners fit with one ITE hearing aid listening in a close listener-to-speaker distance when they turn their head slightly in order to increase signal intensity.

scholarly journals Differences in Word and Phoneme Recognition in Quiet, Sentence Recognition in Noise, and Subjective Outcomes between Manufacturer First-Fit and Hearing Aids Programmed to NAL-NL2 Using Real-Ear Measures

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (08) ◽  
pp. 706-721 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Valente ◽  
Kristi Oeding ◽  
Alison Brockmeyer ◽  
Steven Smith ◽  
Dorina Kallogjeri
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Monosyllabic Word ◽  
Phoneme Recognition ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Sentence Recognition ◽  
Subjective Outcomes ◽  
Fitting Hearing Aids

AbstractThe American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) and American Academy of Audiology (AAA) have created Best Practice Guidelines for fitting hearing aids to adult patients. These guidelines recommend using real-ear measures (REM) to verify that measured output/gain of hearing aid(s) match a validated prescriptive target. Unfortunately, approximately 70–80% of audiologists do not routinely use REM when fitting hearing aids, instead relying on a manufacturer default “first-fit” setting. This is problematic because numerous studies report significant differences in REM between manufacturer first-fit and the same hearing aids using a REM or programmed-fit. These studies reported decreased prescribed gain/output in the higher frequencies for the first-fit compared with the programmed fit, which are important for recognizing speech. Currently, there is little research in peer-reviewed journals reporting if differences between hearing aids fitted using a manufacturer first-fit versus a programmed-fit result in significant differences in speech recognition in quiet, noise, and subjective outcomes.To examine if significant differences were present in monosyllabic word and phoneme recognition (consonant-nucleus-consonant; CNC) in quiet, sentence recognition in noise (Hearing in Noise Test; HINT), and subjective outcomes using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing (SSQ) questionnaires between hearing aids fit using one manufacturer’s first-fit and the same hearing aids with a programmed-fit using REM to National Acoustic Laboratories Nonlinear Version 2 (NAL-NL2) prescriptive target.A double-blind randomized crossover design was used. Throughout the study, one investigator performed all REM whereas a second investigator measured speech recognition in quiet, noise, and scored subjective outcome measures.Twenty-four adults with bilateral normal sloping to moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss with no prior experience with amplification.The hearing aids were fit using the proprietary manufacturer default first-fit and a programmed-fit to NAL-NL2 using real-ear insertion gain measures. The order of the two fittings was randomly assigned and counterbalanced. Participants acclimatized to each setting for four weeks and returned for assessment of performance via the revised CNC word lists, HINT, APHAB, and SSQ for the respective fitting.(1) A significant median advantage of 15% (p < 0.001; 95% CI: 9.7–24.3%) for words and 7.7% (p < 0.001; 95% CI: 5.9–10.9%) for phonemes for the programmed-fit compared with first-fit at 50 dB sound pressure level (SPL) and 4% (p < 0.01; 95% CI: 1.7–6.3%) for words at 65 dB SPL; (2) No significant differences for the HINT reception threshold for sentences (RTS); (3) A significant median advantage of 4.2% [p < 0.04; 95% confidence interval (CI): −0.6–13.2%] for the programmed-fit compared with the first-fit for the background noise subscale problem score for the APHAB; (4) No significant differences on the SSQ.Improved word and phoneme recognition for soft and words for average speech in quiet were reported for the programmed-fit. Seventy-nine percent of the participants preferred the programmed-fitting versus first-fit. Hearing aids, therefore, should be verified and programmed using REM to a prescriptive target versus no verification using a first-fit.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document