scholarly journals A Study on the Preferred Real-Ear Insertion Gain of Multi-Channel Hearing Aid for the Korean with Sensorineural Hearing Loss

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-94
Author(s):  
Eojini Bang ◽  
Kyoungwon Lee

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the preferred real-ear insertion gain for Korean (PREIG-K) wearing multi-channel hearing aid with the National Acoustics Laboratories-Non-Linear version 2 (NAL-NL2; National Acoustic Laboratories) gains in order to develop Korean hearing aid fitting formula.Methods: A total of thirty one (62 ears) Korean hearing aid users were included in this study. All subjects wore in-the-canal or custom hearing aids in both ears. Individual hearing aid fitting procedures involved to adjust the gains for 50, 65, and 80 dB sound pressure level of speech across low, high, and wideband frequency bands based on participant’s subjective responses. In addition, only the high frequency bands of 1 kHz or more of the PREIG-K were re-adjusted to be the same as NAL-NL2 gain and then the word recognition scores (WRSs) were compared before and after the adjusting gain. Results: The results showed that the PREIG-K increased up to 1.5 kHz with the maximum amount, then the PREIG-K decreased across the frequencies. For all half octave frequencies, the PREIG-Ks were substantially less than the NAL-NL2. When the PREIG-K of high frequencies were re-adjusted same as the NAL-NL2 gains, the WRSs of the PREIG-K were not significantly different before and after gain adjustment. The slopes up to 1.5 kHz frequencies of the PREIG-K were steeper than the slopes of NAL-NL2 gain, however similar to the slope of manufactures’ fitting formulae.Conclusion: The development of an effective hearing aid fitting formula for improving the communication abilities of hearing-impaired Korean will require further experiments considering the language, physical characteristics, and word recognition used by Koreans.

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 233121652093246
Author(s):  
Johanna Hengen ◽  
Inger L. Hammarström ◽  
Stefan Stenfelt

Dissatisfaction with the sound of one’s own voice is common among hearing-aid users. Little is known regarding how hearing impairment and hearing aids separately affect own-voice perception. This study examined own-voice perception and associated issues before and after a hearing-aid fitting for new hearing-aid users and refitting for experienced users to investigate whether it was possible to differentiate between the effect of (unaided) hearing impairment and hearing aids. Further aims were to investigate whether First-Time and Experienced users as well as users with dome and mold inserts differed in the severity of own-voice problems. The study had a cohort design with three groups: First-Time hearing-aid users going from unaided to aided hearing ( n = 70), Experienced hearing-aid users replacing their old hearing aids ( n = 70), and an unaided control group ( n = 70). The control group was surveyed once and the hearing-aid users twice; once before hearing-aid fitting/refitting and once after. The results demonstrated that own-voice problems are common among both First-Time and Experienced hearing-aid users with either dome- or mold-type fittings, while people with near-normal hearing and not using hearing aids report few problems. Hearing aids increased ratings of own-voice problems among First-Time users, particularly those with mold inserts. The results suggest that altered auditory feedback through unaided hearing impairment or through hearing aids is likely both to change own-voice perception and complicate regulation of vocal intensity, but hearing aids are the primary reason for poor perceived sound quality of one’s own voice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (11) ◽  
pp. 4150-4164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inge de Ronde-Brons ◽  
Wim Soede ◽  
Wouter Dreschler

Purpose The aim of the study was to evaluate the application of a modified version of the Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disabilities and Handicap to inventory self-reported hearing difficulties pre and post hearing aid fitting in 6 dimensions: detection, speech in silence, speech in noise, localization, discrimination, and noise tolerance. Method Questionnaires pre and post hearing aid fitting were collected during regular practice of hearing aid provision. Data of 740 subjects are presented; 337 already used hearing aids, and 403 were new users. Results Group-averaged scores improved due to hearing aid fitting for all 6 dimensions. Based on a criterion previously defined for the Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disabilities and Handicap questionnaire, 66% of subjects had a significant individual improvement in sum score. Experienced users showed lower improvement in scores, whereas their aided prescores were, on average, not better than the (unaided) score of 1st users. Conclusions The questionnaire can be applied as a structured approach to inventory hearing problems in 6 dimensions prior to hearing aid fitting and to systematically evaluate the effects of hearing aid fitting after a trial period. The data presented here can serve as normative data for comparison of individual subjects in clinical practice.


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.


1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 362-369 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna M. Risberg ◽  
Robyn M. Cox

A custom in-the-ear (ITE) hearing aid fitting was compared to two over-the-ear (OTE) hearing aid fittings for each of 9 subjects with mild to moderately severe hearing losses. Speech intelligibility via the three instruments was compared using the Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) test. The relationship between functional gain and coupler gain was compared for the ITE and the higher rated OTE instruments. The difference in input received at the microphone locations of the two types of hearing aids was measured for 10 different subjects and compared to the functional gain data. It was concluded that (a) for persons with mild to moderately severe hearing losses, appropriately adjusted custom ITE fittings typically yield speech intelligibility that is equal to the better OTE fitting identified in a comparative evaluation; and (b) gain prescriptions for ITE hearing aids should be adjusted to account for the high-frequency emphasis associated with in-the-concha microphone placement.


2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jantien L. Vroegop ◽  
J. Gertjan Dingemanse ◽  
Marc P. van der Schroeff ◽  
André Goedegebure

PurposeThe aim of the study was to investigate the effect of 3 hearing aid fitting procedures on provided gain of the hearing aid in bimodal cochlear implant users and their effect on bimodal benefit.MethodThis prospective study measured hearing aid gain and auditory performance in a cross-over design in which 3 hearing aid fitting methods were compared. Hearing aid fitting methods differed in initial gain prescription rule (NAL-NL2 and Audiogram+) and loudness balancing method (broadband vs. narrowband loudness balancing). Auditory functioning was evaluated by a speech-in-quiet test, a speech-in-noise test, and a sound localization test. Fourteen postlingually deafened adult bimodal cochlear implant users participated in the study.ResultsNo differences in provided gain and in bimodal performance were found for the different hearing aid fittings. For all hearing aid fittings, a bimodal benefit was found for speech in noise and sound localization.ConclusionOur results confirm that cochlear implant users with residual hearing in the contralateral ear substantially benefit from bimodal stimulation. However, on average, no differences were found between different types of fitting methods, varying in prescription rule and loudness balancing method.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raul Sanchez-Lopez ◽  
Michal Fereczkowski ◽  
Sébastien Santurette ◽  
Torsten Dau ◽  
Tobias Neher

AbstractObjectiveThe clinical characterization of hearing deficits for hearing-aid fitting purposes is typically based on the pure-tone audiogram only. In a previous study, a group of hearing-impaired listeners were tested using a comprehensive test battery designed to tap into different aspects of hearing. A data-driven analysis of the data yielded four clinically relevant patient subpopulations or “auditory profiles”. In the current study, profile-based hearing-aid settings were proposed and evaluated to explore their potential for providing more targeted hearing-aid treatment.DesignFour candidate hearing-aid settings were implemented and evaluated by a subset of the participants tested previously. The evaluation consisted of multi-comparison preference ratings carried out in realistic sound scenarios.ResultsListeners belonging to the different auditory profiles showed different patterns of preference for the tested hearing-aid settings that were largely consistent with the expectations.ConclusionThe results of this proof-of-concept study support further investigations into stratified, profile-based hearing-aid fitting with wearable hearing aids.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (02) ◽  
pp. 141-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reza Zarenoe ◽  
Mathias Hällgren ◽  
Gerhard Andersson ◽  
Torbjörn Ledin

Background: Tinnitus is a common condition and there is a need to evaluate effects of tinnitus management in relation to moderating factors such as degree of hearing loss. As it is possible that tinnitus influences concentration, and thus is likely to disturb cognitive processing, the role of cognitive functioning also needs to be investigated. Purpose: To compare a group of patients with sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus to a control group with only sensorineural hearing loss (and no tinnitus). To investigate working memory, sleep, and hearing problems measured before and after hearing rehabilitation. Research Design: A prospective study. Study Sample: The sample consisted of 100 patients, 50 with hearing loss and tinnitus, and 50 controls with hearing loss but no tinnitus. All patients were between 40 and 82 yr old and had a pure-tone average (PTA; average of 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz) <70 dB HL. Intervention: Patients were tested before and after rehabilitation with hearing aids with regard to their working memory capacity, sleep quality, hearing problems, speech recognition, and tinnitus annoyance. Data Collection and Analysis: Eight patients dropped out of the study. Thus, a total of 92 patients were included for analysis, with 46 in each group. As a consequence of unplanned age and PTA differences between the groups, an age-matched subsample (n = 30 + 30) was selected for further analysis. Tests including the Reading Span, Hearing-in-Noise Test (HINT), Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) were administered before and after hearing aid rehabilitation. Results: There were no between-group differences at baseline in the full sample (n = 92), with the exception of the THI (p < 0.001) and the PSQI (p < 0.002), on which the hearing loss and tinnitus group had significantly higher scores. Pre/post changes were significant for both groups on the Reading Span, and HHIE. However, these improvements were significantly larger for the patients in the hearing loss and tinnitus group on the Reading Span test (p < 0.001) and the PSQI (p < 0.001). Patients with tinnitus and hearing loss also exhibited significantly improved THI scores at follow-up, compared to baseline (p < 0.001).We conducted the same analyses for the age-matched subsample (n = 30 + 30). For the baseline data, only the THI (p < 0.001) and the PSQI (p < 0.015) difference remained significant. With regard to the pre/post changes, we found the same differences in improvement in Reading Span (p < 0.001) and the PSQI (p < 0.015) as in the full sample. Conclusions: Patients with tinnitus benefited from hearing aid rehabilitation. The observed differences in cognitive function were unexpected, and there were larger score improvements on the Reading Span test in the hearing loss and tinnitus group than in the hearing loss group. Patients with tinnitus and hearing loss may receive extra benefit in terms of cognitive function following hearing aid rehabilitation.


Author(s):  
Jace Wolfe ◽  
Mila Duke ◽  
Sharon Miller ◽  
Erin Schafer ◽  
Christine Jones ◽  
...  

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


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document