scholarly journals The Effects of Hearing Aid Digital Noise Reduction and Directionality on Acceptable Noise Level

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 267-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roghayeh Ahmadi ◽  
Hamid Jalilvand ◽  
Mohammad Ebrahim Mahdavi ◽  
Fatemeh Ahmadi ◽  
Ali Reza Akbarzade Baghban
Keyword(s):  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Acceptable Noise Level

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.

scholarly journals Predicting three-month and 12-month post-fitting real-world hearing-aid outcome using pre-fitting acceptable noise level (ANL)

2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 285-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Hsiang Wu ◽  
Hsu-Chueh Ho ◽  
Shih-Hsuan Hsiao ◽  
Ryan B. Brummet ◽  
Octav Chipara
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Acceptable Noise Level

Intertester Reliability of the Acceptable Noise Level

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (07) ◽  
pp. 534-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Gordon-Hickey ◽  
Elizabeth Adams ◽  
Robert Moore ◽  
Ashley Gaal ◽  
Katie Berry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Noise Level ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Random Order ◽  
Instruction Set ◽  
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Acceptable Noise Level ◽  
Quasi Experimental

Background: The acceptable noise level (ANL) serves to accurately predict the listener's likelihood of success with amplification. It has been proposed as a pre–hearing aid fitting protocol for hearing aid selection and counseling purposes. The ANL is a subjective measure of the listener's ability to accept background noise. Measurement of ANL relies on the tester and listener to follow the instructions set forth. To date, no research has explored the reliability of ANL as measured across clinicians or testers. Purpose: To examine the intertester reliability of ANL. Research Design: A descriptive quasi-experimental reliability study was completed. ANL was measured for one group of listeners by three testers. Study Sample: Three participants served as testers. Each tester was familiar with basic audiometry. Twenty-five young adults with normal hearing served as listeners. Data Collection/Analysis: Each tester was stationed in a laboratory with the needed equipment. Listeners were instructed to report to these laboratories in a random order provided by the experimenters. The testers assessed most comfortable listening level (MCL) and background noise level (BNL) for all 25 listeners. Results: Intraclass correlation coefficients were significant and revealed that MCL, BNL, and ANLs are reliable across testers. Additionally, one-way ANOVAs for MCL, BNL, and ANL were not significant. These findings indicate that MCL, BNL, and ANL do not differ significantly when measured by different testers. Conclusions: If the ANL instruction set is accurately followed, ANL can be reliably measured across testers, laboratories, and clinics. Intertester reliability of ANL allows for comparison across ANLs measured by different individuals. Findings of the present study indicate that tester reliability can be ruled out as a factor contributing to the disparity of mean ANLs reported in the literature.

Measurement and prediction of the acceptable noise level for single-microphone noise reduction algorithms

2012 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 299-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Fredelake ◽  
Inga Holube ◽  
Anne Schlueter ◽  
Martin Hansen
Keyword(s):  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Acceptable Noise Level

Loudness as a Cue for Acceptable Noise Levels

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (06) ◽  
pp. 605-623 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karrie L. Recker ◽  
Martin F. McKinney ◽  
Brent W. Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Matching Task ◽  
Small Subset ◽  
Acceptable Noise Level ◽  
Matched Data ◽  
High Degree ◽  
Different Levels

Background/Purpose: The acceptable noise level (ANL) test is the only test that is known to predict success with hearing aids with a high degree of accuracy. A person’s ANL is the maximal amount of background noise that he or she is “willing to put up with” while listening to running speech. It is defined as the speech level minus the noise level, in decibels (dB). People who are willing to put up with high levels of background noise are generally successful hearing-aid wearers, whereas people who are not willing to put up with high levels of background noise are generally unsuccessful hearing-aid wearers. If it were known what cues that listeners are using to decide how much background noise they are willing to tolerate, then it might be possible to create technology that reduces these cues and improves listeners’ chances of success with hearing aids. As a first step toward this goal, this study investigated whether listeners are using loudness as a cue to determine their ANLs. Research Design and Study Sample: Twenty-one individuals with normal hearing and 21 individuals with sensorineural hearing loss participated in this study. In each group of 21 participants, 7 had a low ANL (<7 dB), 7 had a mid ANL (7–13 dB), and 7 had a high ANL (>13 dB). Data Collection/Analysis: Participants performed a modified version of the ANL in which the speech was fixed at four different levels (50, 63, 75 and 88 dBA), and participants adjusted the background noise (multitalker babble) to the maximal level at which they were willing to listen while following the speech. These results were compared with participants’ equal-loudness contours for the multitalker babble in the presence of speech. Equal-loudness contours were measured by having the participants perform a loudness-matching task in which they matched the level of the background noise (multitalker babble), played concurrently with speech, to a reference condition (also multitalker babble). During the test condition, the speech played at 50, 63, 75, or 88 dBA. All testing was performed in a sound booth with the speech and the noise presented from a loudspeaker at a 0° azimuth, 3 feet in front of the participant. Each condition was presented multiple times, and the results were averaged. Presentation order was randomized. Participants were tested unaided. Results: Participants' ANLs were compared with their equal-loudness contours for the background noise. ANLs that ran parallel to the equal-loudness contours were considered consistent with a loudness-based listening strategy. This pattern was observed for only two participants – both hearing-impaired. Conclusions: The majority of listeners showed no consistent trend between their ANLs and their loudness-matched data, suggesting that they are using cues other than loudness to determine their ANLs. ANLs were consistent with loudness-matched data for a small subset of listeners, suggesting that they may be using loudness as a cue for determining their ANLs.

scholarly journals Application of Acceptable Noise Level to Confirm Fitting Strategy for Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-76
Author(s):  
Sunghwa You ◽  
Jihyun Lee ◽  
Woojae Han ◽  
Young Joon Seo
Keyword(s):  
Noise Level ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Fitting Procedure ◽  
Permissible Range ◽  
Acceptable Noise Level ◽  
Fitting Procedures ◽  
Bone Anchored Hearing Aid ◽  
Present Case Study

Since there is no standardized fitting procedure for bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) patients, many clinics have failed to perform their successful fitting. The present case study tried to identify whether acceptable noise level (ANL) was clinically applied as one of fitting procedures for the BAHA users. Four hearing-impaired adults with BAHA (3 female and 1 male) who had a period of hearing deprivation for at least 8 years and the BAHA experience of more than 1 year participated. They conducted ANL in their unaided and aided BAHA conditions after being familiar with the ANL instruction. Also, the subjects responded to a self-report of Korean version of Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (K-PHAB) to subjectively check amount of satisfaction with BAHA. Compared to the unaided condition, two out of four BAHA users showed a decreased ANL in the aided condition whereas the other users had a slightly increased ANL. Regardless, their levels were examined within the permissible range except for one subject. Their K-PHAB scores were similar to the ANL results in the aided condition. Although measured ANLs were slightly differed from the users, the current results suggest that ANL might be a tool to measure individual’s inherent value when the BAHA fitting being appropriated while also supported by K-PHAB scores. In the following study, we need to confirm a typical pattern of many BAHA users with longitudinal measures of ANL.

Effect of Maximum Power Output and Noise Reduction on Speech Recognition in Noise

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (05) ◽  
pp. 265-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis Kuk ◽  
Heidi Peeters ◽  
Chi Lau ◽  
Petri Korhonen
Keyword(s):  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Maximum Power ◽  
Maximum Power Output ◽  
Bonferroni Adjustment

Background: The maximum power output (MPO) of a hearing aid was typically discussed in the context of avoiding loudness discomfort. However, an MPO that is too low, as in the cases to avoid discomfort for people with a severe loudness tolerance problem and hearing losses that exceed the fitting range of the hearing aids, could negatively affect sound quality and speech intelligibility in noise. Purpose: The current study was designed to demonstrate the degradation in speech intelligibility in noise on the HINT (Hearing in Noise Test) when the MPO of the wearers' hearing aids was lowered by 10 dB from the default. The interactions with noise reduction (NR) algorithms (classic [NR-classic] and Speech Enhancer [NR-SE]) were also examined. Research Design: A single-blinded, factorial repeated-measures design was used to study the effect of noise input level (68 dBC, 75 dBC), MPO setting (default and default-10), and NR algorithm (off, classic, SE) on HINT performance. Study Sample: Eleven adults with a severe sensorineural hearing loss participated. Intervention: Participants were fit with the Widex m4-19 behind-the-ear hearing aids binaurally in the default frequency response and MPO settings. The hearing aids were adjusted to six MPO (default, default-10) by NR (off, classic, SE conditions). Testing was completed within one 2 hr session. Data Collection and Analysis: The RTS (reception threshold for speech) for 50% correct on the HINT was measured in each of the six hearing aid conditions at two input levels (68 and 75 dBC) with speech and noise stimuli presented from the front. Repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted using SPSS software to examine significant differences. Results: A repeated-measures ANOVA showed that noise level was not significant while NR algorithm and MPO were significant. The interaction between noise level and NR algorithm was also significant. Post hoc analysis with Bonferroni adjustment for the effect of NR algorithm showed that performance with NR-off was significantly poorer than performance with NR-classic and NR-SE (p < 0.05). However, NR-classic and NR-SE were not significantly different from each other (p > 0.05). Conclusions: An MPO that was 10 dB lower than the default could negatively affect the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the listening environment. However, NR could compensate for the degradation in SNR.

Comparison of Speech Perception in Background Noise With Acceptance of Background Noise in Aided and Unaided Conditions

2004 ◽  
Vol 47 (5) ◽  
pp. 1001-1011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna K. Nabelek ◽  
Joanna W. Tampas ◽  
Samuel B. Burchfield
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Noise Level ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Speech Perception In Noise ◽  
Speech Understanding In Noise ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Acceptable Noise Level

Background noise is a significant factor influencing hearing-aid satisfaction and is a major reason for rejection of hearing aids. Attempts have been made by previous researchers to relate the use of hearing aids to speech perception in noise (SPIN), with an expectation of improved speech perception followed by an increased acceptance of hearing aids. Unfortunately, SPIN was not related to hearing-aid use or satisfaction. A new measure of listener reaction to background noise has been proposed. The acceptable noise level (ANL), expressed in decibels, is defined as a difference between the most comfortable listening level for speech and the highest background noise level that is acceptable when listening to and following a story. The ANL measure assumes that speech understanding in noise may not be as important as is the willingness to listen in the presence of noise. It has been established that people who accept background noise have smaller ANLs and tend to be "good" users of hearing aids. Conversely, people who cannot accept background noise have larger ANLs and may only use hearing aids occasionally or reject them altogether. Because this is a new measure, it was important to determine the reliability of the ANL over time with and without hearing aids, to determine the effect of acclimatization to hearing aids, and to compare the ANL to well-established measures such as speech perception scores collected with the SPIN test. Results from 50 listeners indicate that for both good and occasional hearing aid users, the ANL is comparable in reliability to the SPIN test and that both measures do not change with acclimatization. The ANLs and SPIN scores are unrelated. Although the SPIN scores improve with amplification, the ANLs are unaffected by amplification, suggesting that the ANL is inherent to an individual and can be established prior to hearing aid fitting as a possible predictor of hearing-aid use. KEY WORDS : background noise, hearing aids, acceptable noise level, speech perception in noise

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document