scholarly journals Can Music Training Improve Listening Skills For Children With Hearing Loss?

2022 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chi Yhun Lo ◽  
Valerie Looi ◽  
William Forde Thompson ◽  
Catherine M. McMahon

Hearing aids and cochlear [ko-clear] implants are very useful devices for children with hearing loss. But they do not completely restore hearing. Many children with hearing loss find it difficult to listen in noisy places like the playground. This is important because many social interactions create noise or occur in noisy places. While most people think we listen through our ears, it is the brain that does most of the hard work! We thought that music training might be a good way to improve listening skills. Why? Because music is a fun activity that involves not only sounds, but also sights, movement, memory, and more! This means a lot of activity and learning, which is good for the brain. What did we find? After 12 weeks of music training, children with hearing loss were better at listening, particularly in noisy environments.

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leisha Eiten ◽  
Dawna Lewis

Background: For children with hearing loss, the benefits of FM systems in overcoming deleterious effects of noise, distance, and reverberation have led to recommendations for use beyond classroom settings. It is important that audiologists who recommend and fit these devices understand the rationale and procedures underlying fitting and verification. Objectives: This article reviews previousguidelines for FM verification, addresses technological advances, and introduces verification procedures appropriate for current FM and hearing-aid technology. Methods: Previous guidelines for verification of FM systems are reviewed. Those recommendations that are appropriate for current technology are addressed, as are procedures that are no longer adequate for hearing aids and FM systems utilizing more complex processing than in the past. Technological advances are discussed, and an updated approach to FM verification is proposed. Conclusions: Approaches to verification andfitting of FM systems must keep pace with advances in hearing-aid and FM technology. The transparency approach addressed in this paper is recommended for verification of FM systems coupled to hearing aids.


2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-31
Author(s):  
Lyn Robertson

Abstract Learning to listen and speak are well-established preludes for reading, writing, and succeeding in mainstream educational settings. Intangibles beyond the ubiquitous test scores that typically serve as markers for progress in children with hearing loss are embedded in descriptions of the educational and social development of four young women. All were diagnosed with severe-to-profound or profound hearing loss as toddlers, and all were fitted with hearing aids and given listening and spoken language therapy. Compiling stories across the life span provides insights into what we can be doing in the lives of young children with hearing loss.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 883-892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha J. Gustafson ◽  
Todd A. Ricketts ◽  
Anne Marie Tharpe

Background: Consistency of hearing aid and remote microphone system use declines as school-age children with hearing loss age. One indicator of hearing aid use time is data logging, another is parent report. Recent data suggest that parents overestimate their children’s hearing aid use time relative to data logging. The potential reasons for this disparity remain unclear. Because school-age children spend the majority of their day away from their parents and with their teachers, reports from teachers might serve as a valuable and additional tool for estimating hearing aid use time and management. Purpose: This study expands previous research on factors influencing hearing aid use time in school-age children using data logging records. Discrepancies between data logging records and parent reports were explored using custom surveys designed for parents and teachers. Responses from parents and teachers were used to examine hearing aid use, remote microphone system use, and hearing aid management in school-age children. Study Sample: Thirteen children with mild-to-moderate hearing loss between the ages of 7 and 10 yr and their parents participated in this study. Teachers of ten of these children also participated. Data Collection and Analysis: Parents and teachers of children completed written surveys about each child’s hearing aid use, remote microphone system use, and hearing aid management skills. Data logs were read from hearing aids using manufacturer’s software. Multiple linear regression analysis and an intraclass correlation coefficient were used to examine factors influencing hearing aid use time and parent agreement with data logs. Parent report of hearing aid use time was compared across various activities and school and nonschool days. Survey responses from parents and teachers were compared to explore areas requiring potential improvement in audiological counseling. Results: Average daily hearing aid use time was ˜6 hr per day as recorded with data logging technology. Children exhibiting greater degrees of hearing loss and those with poorer vocabulary were more likely to use hearing aids consistently than children with less hearing loss and better vocabulary. Parents overestimated hearing aid use by ˜1 hr per day relative to data logging records. Parent-reported use of hearing aids varied across activities but not across school and nonschool days. Overall, parents and teachers showed excellent agreement on hearing aid and remote microphone system use during school instruction but poor agreement when asked about the child’s ability to manage their hearing devices independently. Conclusions: Parental reports of hearing aid use in young school-age children are largely consistent with data logging records and with teacher reports of hearing aid use in the classroom. Audiologists might find teacher reports helpful in learning more about children’s hearing aid management and remote microphone system use during their time at school. This supplementary information can serve as an additional counseling tool to facilitate discussion about remote microphone system use and hearing aid management in school-age children with hearing loss.


Author(s):  
Laurence Bruggeman ◽  
Julien Millasseau ◽  
Ivan Yuen ◽  
Katherine Demuth

Purpose Children with hearing loss (HL), including those with hearing aids (HAs) and cochlear implants (CIs), often have difficulties contrasting words like “ b each ” versus “ p each ” and “ do g ” versus “ do ck ” due to challenges producing systematic voicing contrasts. Even when acoustic contrasts are present, these may not be perceived as such by others. This can cause miscommunication, leading to poor self-esteem and social isolation. Acoustic evidence is therefore needed to determine if these children have established distinct voicing categories before entering school and if misperceptions are due to a lack of phonological representations or due to a still-maturing implementation system. The findings should help inform more effective early intervention. Method Participants included 14 children with HL (eight HA users, five CI users, and one bimodal) and 20 with normal hearing, all English-speaking preschoolers. In an elicited imitation task, they produced consonant–vowel–consonant minimal pair words that contrasted voicing in word-initial (onset) or word-final (coda) position at all three places of articulation (PoAs). Results Overall, children with HL showed acoustically distinct voicing categories for both onsets and codas at all three PoAs. Contrasts were less systematic for codas than for onsets, as also confirmed by adults' perceptual ratings. Conclusions Preschoolers with HL produce acoustic differences for voiced versus voiceless onsets and codas, indicating distinct phonological representations for both. Nonetheless, codas were less accurately perceived by adult raters, especially when produced by CI users. This suggests a protracted development of the phonetic implementation of codas, where CI users, in particular, may benefit from targeted intervention.


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


2017 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 233121651771037 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cara L. Wong ◽  
Teresa Y. C. Ching ◽  
Linda Cupples ◽  
Laura Button ◽  
Greg Leigh ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (09) ◽  
pp. 832-844 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea L. Pittman ◽  
Mollie M. Hiipakka

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.


2015 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 1077-1092 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Nittrouer ◽  
Joanna H. Lowenstein

Purpose Children must develop optimal perceptual weighting strategies for processing speech in their first language. Hearing loss can interfere with that development, especially if cochlear implants are required. The three goals of this study were to measure, for children with and without hearing loss: (a) cue weighting for a manner distinction, (b) sensitivity to those cues, and (c) real-world communication functions. Method One hundred and seven children (43 with normal hearing [NH], 17 with hearing aids [HAs], and 47 with cochlear implants [CIs]) performed several tasks: labeling of stimuli from /bɑ/-to-/wɑ/ continua varying in formant and amplitude rise time (FRT and ART), discrimination of ART, word recognition, and phonemic awareness. Results Children with hearing loss were less attentive overall to acoustic structure than children with NH. Children with CIs, but not those with HAs, weighted FRT less and ART more than children with NH. Sensitivity could not explain cue weighting. FRT cue weighting explained significant amounts of variability in word recognition and phonemic awareness; ART cue weighting did not. Conclusion Signal degradation inhibits access to spectral structure for children with CIs, but cannot explain their delayed development of optimal weighting strategies. Auditory training could strengthen the weighting of spectral cues for children with CIs, thus aiding spoken language acquisition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document