Speech perception with hearing aids: Effects of noise reduction and directional microphone systems on amplified signals

2009 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvano Prosser ◽  
Mauro Pulga ◽  
Antonio Mancuso ◽  
Lorenzo Picinali
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Directional Microphone

Evaluation of a Second-Order Directional Microphone Hearing Aid: I. Speech Perception Outcomes

2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (03) ◽  
pp. 179-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Bentler ◽  
Catherine Palmer ◽  
Gustav H. Mueller
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Directional Microphones ◽  
Noise Environment ◽  
Directional Microphone ◽  
Nonlinear Version ◽  
Omnidirectional Microphones

This clinical trial was undertaken to evaluate the benefit obtained from hearing aids employing second-order adaptive directional microphone technology, used in conjunction with digital noise reduction. Data were collected for 49 subjects across two sites. New and experienced hearing aid users were fit bilaterally with behind-the-ear hearing aids using the National Acoustics Laboratory—Nonlinear version 1 (NAL-NL1) prescriptive method with manufacturer default settings for various parameters of signal processing (e.g., noise reduction, compression, etc.). Laboratory results indicated that (1) for the stationary noise environment, directional microphones provided better speech perception than omnidirectional microphones, regardless of the number of microphones; and (2) for the moving noise environment, the three-microphone option (whether in adaptive or fixed mode) and the two-microphone option in its adaptive mode resulted in better performance than the two-microphone fixed mode, or the omnidirectional modes.

scholarly journals Effect of Digital Noise Reduction of Hearing Aids on Music and Speech Perception

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 180-190
Author(s):  
Hyo Jeong Kim ◽  
Jae Hee Lee ◽  
Hyun Joon Shim
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Music Perception ◽  
Objective Assessment ◽  
Subjective Assessment ◽  
Pitch Discrimination ◽  
Korean Music ◽  
Sentence Recognition ◽  
Assessment Tests

Background and Objectives: Although many studies have evaluated the effect of the digital noise reduction (DNR) algorithm of hearing aids (HAs) on speech recognition, there are few studies on the effect of DNR on music perception. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the effect of DNR on music, in addition to speech perception, using objective and subjective measurements. Subjects and Methods: Sixteen HA users participated in this study (58.00±10.44 years; 3 males and 13 females). The objective assessment of speech and music perception was based on the Korean version of the Clinical Assessment of Music Perception test and word and sentence recognition scores. Meanwhile, for the subjective assessment, the quality rating of speech and music as well as self-reported HA benefits were evaluated. Results: There was no improvement conferred with DNR of HAs on the objective assessment tests of speech and music perception. The pitch discrimination at 262 Hz in the DNR-off condition was better than that in the unaided condition (<i>p</i>=0.024); however, the unaided condition and the DNR-on conditions did not differ. In the Korean music background questionnaire, responses regarding ease of communication were better in the DNR-on condition than in the DNR-off condition (<i>p</i>=0.029). Conclusions: Speech and music perception or sound quality did not improve with the activation of DNR. However, DNR positively influenced the listener’s subjective listening comfort. The DNR-off condition in HAs may be beneficial for pitch discrimination at some frequencies.

Effectiveness of Directional Microphones and Noise Reduction Schemes in Hearing Aids: A Systematic Review of the Evidence

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (07) ◽  
pp. 473-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth A. Bentler
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Small Sample Size ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Experimental Conditions ◽  
Directional Microphones ◽  
Directional Microphone

A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to find evidence of real-world effectiveness of directional microphone and digital noise reduction features in current hearing aids. The evidence was drawn from randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized intervention studies, and descriptive studies. The quality of each study was evaluated for factors such as blinding, power of statistical analyses, and use of psychometrically strong outcome measures. Weaknesses in the identified studies included small sample size, resultant poor power to detect potentially worthwhile differences, and overlapping experimental conditions. Nine studies were identified for directional microphones, and the evidence (albeit weak) supports effectiveness. Two studies were identified for the noise reduction feature, and the evidence was equivocal. For the researcher, such a systematic review should encourage the careful consideration of appropriate methodologies for assessing feature effectiveness. For the clinician, the outcomes reported herein should encourage use of such a systematic review to drive clinical practice.

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.

Acoustical and Perceptual Analysis of Noise Reduction Strategies in Individuals With Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorders

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (12) ◽  
pp. 4208-4218
Author(s):  
Priyanka Jaisinghani ◽  
P. Manjula
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
Auditory Neuropathy ◽  
Moderate Degree ◽  
Group I ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Reduction Strategies ◽  
Short Time

Purpose The conventional amplification devices render minimal or no benefit at abating the speech perception problems of individuals with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD). This study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of noise reduction strategies (multiband spectral subtraction, Wiener-as, Karhunen–Loeve transform [Subspace], and ideal binary mask [IdBM] algorithm) on speech using speech perception measures and acoustic measure among individuals with ANSD. Method Two groups of participants (age: 17–43 years) were recruited in the study. Group I comprised 12 individuals with a confirmed diagnosis of ANSD and not exceeding moderate degree of hearing loss and Group II of 10 individuals with normal hearing in both ears. The signal-to-noise required for 50% speech recognition (SNR-50) was measured for the participants in five conditions, that is, unprocessed speech and speech processed with four noise reduction strategies. Additionally, an acoustic objective measure Extended Short-Time Objective Intelligibility algorithm was employed to estimate the intelligibility index across the conditions. Results Significant difference was found across conditions in both the groups. Pairwise comparison revealed significantly better speech perception on SNR-50 measure with IdBM strategy, for both the groups. No significant difference in SNR-50 was observed with other noise reduction strategies. IdBM condition also gave the highest intelligibility index ( d ) values using Extended Short-Time Objective Intelligibility algorithm. This finding needs to be verified on a larger group of individuals with ANSD. Conclusions IdBM noise reduction strategy rendered significantly lower SNR-50 compared to other noise reduction strategies for individuals with ANSD in this study. This provides clinical evidence for the same and also recommends trying on a larger group of participants before its implementation in hearing devices. Apart from this, the current strategies used in hearing aids provide no improvement in speech identification in noise for this population. Hence, though the present hearing aids may show benefit in quiet condition, chances of its rejection are high in noisy backgrounds.

Quantification of Directional Benefit across Different Polar Response Patterns

2004 ◽  
Vol 15 (09) ◽  
pp. 649-659 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth A. Bentler ◽  
Jessica L.M. Egge ◽  
Jill L. Tubbs ◽  
Andrew B. Dittberner ◽  
Gregory A. Flamme
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Response Patterns ◽  
Directional Microphones ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Directional Microphone ◽  
Hearing In Noise ◽  
The Right

The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between the directivity of a directional microphone hearing aid and listener performance. Hearing aids were fit bilaterally to 19 subjects with sensorineural hearing loss, and five microphone conditions were assessed: omnidirectional, cardioid, hypercardioid, supercardioid, and "monofit," wherein the left hearing aid was set to omnidirectional and the right hearing aid to hypercardioid. Speech perception performance was assessed using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) and the Connected Speech Test (CST). Subjects also assessed eight domains of sound quality for three stimuli (speech in quiet, speech in noise, and music). A diffuse soundfield system composed of eight loudspeakers forming the corners of a cube was used to output the background noise for the speech perception tasks and the three stimuli used for sound quality judgments. Results indicated that there were no significant differences in the HINT or CST performance, or sound quality judgments, across the four directional microphone conditions when tested in a diffuse field. Of particular interest was the monofit condition: Performance on speech perception tests was the same whether one or two directional microphones were used.

The Effects of Hearing Aid Directional Microphone and Noise Reduction Processing on Listening Effort in Older Adults with Hearing Loss

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (01) ◽  
pp. 029-041 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamie L. Desjardins
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Directional Microphone

Background: Older listeners with hearing loss may exert more cognitive resources to maintain a level of listening performance similar to that of younger listeners with normal hearing. Unfortunately, this increase in cognitive load, which is often conceptualized as increased listening effort, may come at the cost of cognitive processing resources that might otherwise be available for other tasks. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the independent and combined effects of a hearing aid directional microphone and a noise reduction (NR) algorithm on reducing the listening effort older listeners with hearing loss expend on a speech-in-noise task. Research Design: Participants were fitted with study worn commercially available behind-the-ear hearing aids. Listening effort on a sentence recognition in noise task was measured using an objective auditory–visual dual-task paradigm. The primary task required participants to repeat sentences presented in quiet and in a four-talker babble. The secondary task was a digital visual pursuit rotor-tracking test, for which participants were instructed to use a computer mouse to track a moving target around an ellipse that was displayed on a computer screen. Each of the two tasks was presented separately and concurrently at a fixed overall speech recognition performance level of 50% correct with and without the directional microphone and/or the NR algorithm activated in the hearing aids. In addition, participants reported how effortful it was to listen to the sentences in quiet and in background noise in the different hearing aid listening conditions. Study Sample: Fifteen older listeners with mild sloping to severe sensorineural hearing loss participated in this study. Results: Listening effort in background noise was significantly reduced with the directional microphones activated in the hearing aids. However, there was no significant change in listening effort with the hearing aid NR algorithm compared to no noise processing. Correlation analysis between objective and self-reported ratings of listening effort showed no significant relation. Conclusions: Directional microphone processing effectively reduced the cognitive load of listening to speech in background noise. This is significant because it is likely that listeners with hearing impairment will frequently encounter noisy speech in their everyday communications.

scholarly journals The Effect of Digital Noise Reduction on Annoyance and Speech Perception in Low and High Acceptable Noise Level Groups

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (04) ◽  
pp. e433-e439
Author(s):  
Hemanth Narayan Shetty ◽  
Navya Bilijagalemole Nanjundaswamy
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Strong Negative Correlation ◽  
Acceptable Noise Level ◽  
Group A ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Introduction Studies have reported that although speech perception in noise was unaltered with and without digital noise reduction (DNR), the annoyance toward noise measured by acceptable noise level (ANL) was significantly improved by DNR with the range between 2.5 and 4.5 dB. It is unclear whether a similar improvement would be observed in those individuals who have an ANL ≥ 14 dB (predictive of poor hearing aid user) often rejects their aid because of annoyance toward noise. Objectives (a) To determine the effect of activation of DNR on the improvement in the aided ANL from low- and high-ANL groups; and (b) to predict the change in ANL when DNR was activated. Method Ten bilateral mild to severe sloping sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) participants in each of the low- and high-ANL groups were involved. These participants were bilaterally fitted with receiver in canal (RIC) hearing aids (Oticon, Smorum, Egedal, Denmark) with a DNR processor. Both SNR-50% (Signal to noise ratio (in dB) required to achieve 50 % speech recognition) and ANL were assessed in DNR-on and DNR-off listening conditions. Results Digital noise reduction has no effect on SNR-50 in each group. The annoyance level was significantly reduced in the DNR-on than DNR-off condition in the low-ANL group. In the high-ANL group, a strong negative correlation was observed between the ANL in DNR off and a change in ANL after DNR was employed in the hearing aid (benefit). The benefit of DNR on annoyance can be effectively predicted by baseline-aided ANL by linear regression. Conclusion Digital noise reduction reduced the annoyance level in the high-ANL group, and the amount of improvement was related to the baseline-aided ANL value.

Evaluation of a Second-Order Directional Microphone Hearing Aid: II. Self-Report Outcomes

2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (03) ◽  
pp. 190-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Palmer ◽  
Ruth Bentler ◽  
Gustav H. Mueller
Keyword(s):  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Subjective Ratings ◽  
Directional Microphone ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Nonlinear Version ◽  
Automatic Switching

This clinical trial was undertaken to evaluate the subjective benefit obtained from hearing aids employing automatic switching second-order adaptive directional microphone technology, used in conjunction with digital noise reduction, as compared to a fixed directional microphone or omnidirectional microphone response with the same digital noise reduction. Data were collected for 49 participants across two sites. Both new and experienced hearing aid users were fit bilaterally with behind-the-ear hearing aids using the NAL-NL1 (National Acoustics Laboratory—Nonlinear version 1) prescriptive method with manufacturer default settings for various signal processing (e.g., noise reduction, compression parameters, etc.). During ten days of hearing aid use, participants responded to daily journal questions. Subjective ratings for each of the three hearing aid responses (omnidirectional, automatic-adaptive directional, and automatic-fixed directional) were similar. Overall preference for a microphone condition was equally distributed between no preference, omnidirectional, and automatic adaptive and/or fixed directional.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document