scholarly journals The use of speech sentence audiometry in a free sound field

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-39
Author(s):  
Mariya Yu. Boboshko ◽  
Irina P. Berdnikova ◽  
Natalya V. Maltzeva
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Normative Data ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Objectives -to determine the normative data of sentence speech intelligibility in a free sound field and to estimate the applicability of the Russian Matrix Sentence test (RuMatrix) for assessment of the hearing aid fitting benefit. Material and methods. 10 people with normal hearing and 28 users of hearing aids with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing loss were involved in the study. RuMatrix test both in quiet and in noise was performed in a free sound field. All patients filled in the COSI questionnaire. Results. The hearing impaired patients were divided into two subgroups: the 1st with high and the 2nd with low hearing aid benefit, according to the COSI questionnaire. In the 1st subgroup, the threshold for the sentence intelligibility in quiet was 34.9 ± 6.4 dB SPL, and in noise -3.3 ± 1.4 dB SNR, in the 2nd subgroup 41.7 ± 11.5 dB SPL and 0.15 ± 3.45 dB SNR, respectively. The significant difference between the data of both subgroups and the norm was registered (p

Otologics Fully Implantable Hearing Device Phase II Results

2008 ◽  
Vol 139 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. P57-P57
Author(s):  
Drew M Horlbeck ◽  
Herman A Jenkins ◽  
Ben J Balough ◽  
Michael E Hoffer
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hearing Device

Objective The efficacy of the Otologics Fully Implantable Hearing Device (MET) was assessed in adult patients with bilateral moderate to severe sensorineural hearing loss. Methods Surgical insertion of this totally implanted system was identical to the Phase I study. A repeated-measures within-subjects design assessed aided sound field thresholds and speech performances with the subject's own, appropriately fit, walk-in hearing aid(s) and the Otologics Fully Implantable Hearing Device. Results Six- and 12-month Phase II data will be presented. Ten patients were implanted and activated as part Phase II clinical trial. Three patients were lost to long term follow-up due to two coil failures and one ossicular abnormality preventing proper device placement. No significant differences between preoperative (AC = 59 dB, BC = 55 dB) and postoperative (AC = 61 dB, BC = 54 dB) unaided pure tone averages were noted (p < 0.05). Pure tone average implant aided thresholds (41 dB) were equivalent to that of walk-in-aided (37 dB) condition with no significant difference (p < 0.05) between patients’ walk-in-aided individual frequency thresholds and implant-aided thresholds. Word recognition scores and hearing in noise scores were similar between the walk-in-aided and for the implant-aided condition. Patient benefit scales will be presented at all end points. Conclusions Results of the Otologics MET Fully Implantable Hearing Device Phase II trial provide evidence that this fully implantable device is a viable alternative to currently available hearing aids in patients with sensorineural hearing loss.

scholarly journals A Personal Sound Amplification Product Compared to a Basic Hearing Aid for Speech Intelligibility in Adults with Mild-to-Moderate Sensorineural Hearing Loss

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-98
Author(s):  
Ji Eun Choi ◽  
Jinryoul Kim ◽  
Sung Hoon Yoon ◽  
Sung Hwa Hong ◽  
Il Joon Moon
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Speech Quality ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Amplification Product ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Sound Amplification

Background and Objectives: This study aimed to compare functional hearing with the use of a personal sound amplification product (PSAP) or a basic hearing aid (HA) among sensorineural hearing impaired listeners.Subjects and Methods: Nineteen participants with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) (26-55 dB HL; pure-tone average, 0.5-4 kHz) were prospectively included. No participants had prior experience with HAs or PSAPs. Audiograms, speech intelligibility in both quiet and noisy environments, speech quality, and preference were assessed in three different listening conditions: unaided, with the HA, and with the PSAP. Results: The use of PSAP was associated with significant improvement in pure-tone thresholds at 1, 2, and 4 kHz compared to the unaided condition (all <i>p</i> <0.01). In the quiet environment, speech intelligibility was significantly improved after wearing a PSAP compared to the unaided condition (<i>p</i> <0.001), and this improvement was better than the result obtained with the HA. The PSAP also demonstrated similar improvement in the most comfortable levels compared to those obtained with the HA (<i>p</i> <0.05). However, there was no significant improvement of speech intelligibility in a noisy environment when wearing the PSAP (<i>p</i> =0.160). There was no significant difference in the reported speech quality produced by either device or in participant preference for the PSAP or HA. Conclusions: The current result suggests that PSAPs provide considerable benefits to speech intelligibility in a quiet environment and can be a good alternative to compensate for mild-to-moderate SNHL.

scholarly journals Analysis of the results of hearing aids fitting using the questionnaire «Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile»

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-33
Author(s):  
L. E. Golooanooa ◽  
E. V. Zhiunskaya ◽  
M. . Yu
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Hearing Aid Fitting ◽  
Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

164 patients with moderate to severe ehronie bilateral sensorineural hearing loss were asked to fill in the Glasgow hearing aid benefit profile. Its usefulness was showed in eases of diffieult hearing aid fitting.

scholarly journals The Effects of Manufacturer’s Prefit and Real-Ear Fitting on the Predicted Speech Perception of Children with Severe to Profound Hearing Loss

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (05) ◽  
pp. 346-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tian Kar Quar ◽  
Cila Umat ◽  
Yong Yee Chew
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
High Input ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
High Frequency Region ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractThe use of probe microphone measures in hearing aid verification is often neglected or not fully used by practitioners. Some practitioners rely on simulated gain and output provided by manufacturer's fitting software to verify hearing aids.This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of manufacturer’s prefit procedure in matching the prescribed real-ear targets. It also aims to study its correlated impact on the predicted speech perception in children with severe and profound hearing loss.This cross-sectional experiment was carried out by measuring the output of hearing aids based on prefit versus real-ear at low-, moderate-, and high-input levels. The predicted speech perception for different hearing aid fittings was determined based on the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII).Sixteen children (28 ears) aged between 4 and 7 yr, with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss took part in the study.Two different types of hearing aids (Phonak and Unitron) were programmed based on their respective manufacturers’ Desired Sensation Levels (DSL) v5 Child procedure. The hearing aids were then verified using coupler-based measurements and individual real-ear-to-coupler differences. The prefit outputs were compared with the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs at low-, moderate-, and high-input levels. The hearing aids were then adjusted to closely match the prescribed output. The SIIs were calculated for the fittings before and after adjustment.Sixty four percent of fittings that were based on the prefit procedure achieved the optimal fit-to-targets, with less than 5-dB RMS deviations from the DSL v5 Child targets. After adjusting the hearing aids to attempt to meet the DSL v5 Child targets, 75% of the ears tested achieved the optimal fit-to-targets. On average, hearing aid outputs generated by the manufacturer’s prefit procedure had good and reasonable agreement with the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs at low- and mid-frequencies. Nonetheless, at 4000 Hz, the hearing aid output mostly fell below the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs. This was still the case even after the hearing aid was adjusted to attempt to match with the targets. At low input level, some prefit outputs were found to be higher than the prescribed outputs. The deviations of prefit outputs from the prescribed outputs were dependent on the type of hearing aid and input levels. There was no significant difference between the SII calculated for fittings based on the prefit and adjusted fit.Prefit procedure tends to produce outputs that were below the DSL v5 Child–prescribed outputs, with the largest mean difference at 4000 Hz. Even though the hearing aid gains were adjusted to attempt to match with the targets, the outputs were still below the targets. The limitations of hearing aids to match the DSL v5 Child targets at high-frequency region have resulted in no improvement in the children’s predicted speech perception.

Investigation of Extended Bandwidth Hearing Aid Amplification on Speech Intelligibility and Sound Quality in Adults with Mild-to-Moderate Hearing Loss

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (03) ◽  
pp. 243-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angeline Seeto ◽  
Grant D. Searchfield
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Significant Benefit ◽  
Band Frequency ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Moderate Hearing Loss

AbstractAdvances in digital signal processing have made it possible to provide a wide-band frequency response with smooth, precise spectral shaping. Several manufacturers have introduced hearing aids that are claimed to provide gain for frequencies up to 10–12 kHz. However, there is currently limited evidence and very few independent studies evaluating the performance of the extended bandwidth hearing aids that have recently become available.This study investigated an extended bandwidth hearing aid using measures of speech intelligibility and sound quality to find out whether there was a significant benefit of extended bandwidth amplification over standard amplification.Repeated measures study designed to examine the efficacy of extended bandwidth amplification compared to standard bandwidth amplification.Sixteen adult participants with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss.Participants were bilaterally fit with a pair of Widex Mind 440 behind-the-ear hearing aids programmed with a standard bandwidth fitting and an extended bandwidth fitting; the latter provided gain up to 10 kHz.For each fitting, and an unaided condition, participants completed two speech measures of aided benefit, the Quick Speech-in-Noise test (QuickSIN™) and the Phonak Phoneme Perception Test (PPT; high-frequency perception in quiet), and a measure of sound quality rating.There were no significant differences found between unaided and aided conditions for QuickSIN™ scores. For the PPT, there were statistically significantly lower (improved) detection thresholds at high frequencies (6 and 9 kHz) with the extended bandwidth fitting. Although not statistically significant, participants were able to distinguish between 6 and 9 kHz 50% better with extended bandwidth. No significant difference was found in ability to recognize phonemes in quiet between the unaided and aided conditions when phonemes only contained frequency content <6 kHz. However significant benefit was found with the extended bandwidth fitting for recognition of 9-kHz phonemes. No significant difference in sound quality preference was found between the standard bandwidth and extended bandwidth fittings.This study demonstrated that a pair of currently available extended bandwidth hearing aids was technically capable of delivering high-frequency amplification that was both audible and useable to listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. This amplification was of acceptable sound quality. Further research, particularly field trials, is required to ascertain the real-world benefit of high-frequency amplification.

Normative Data for the Attitudes towards Loss of Hearing Questionnaire

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (09) ◽  
pp. 637-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrielle H. Saunders ◽  
Kathleen M. Cienkowski ◽  
Anna Forsline ◽  
Stephen Fausti
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Normative Data ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Patient Attitudes ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Report Data ◽  
Negative Coping ◽  
Loss Of Hearing ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Investigations have shown that patient attitudes toward hearing loss and hearing aids impact self-reported handicap and disability, hearing aid benefit, and hearing aid use. The Attitudes towards Loss of Hearing Questionnaire (ALHQ) was developed by Saunders and Cienkowski (1996) to examine some of the psychosocial factors underlying the use and acquisition of hearing aids. Here we report data from a new version of questionnaire (ALHQ v2.1), which examines attitudes towards hearing loss and hearing aids on five scales: Denial of Hearing Loss, Negative Associations, Negative Coping Strategies, Manual Dexterity and Vision, and Hearing-Related Esteem. Reliability values, internal consistency values, and cut points for typical and atypical scores are provided, along with comparison of the scores of women, men, current hearing aid users, non–hearing aid users, and paying versus nonpaying individuals. The ALHQ takes about ten minutes to complete and identifies for the clinician some of the issues that might jeopardize successful hearing aid outcome.

Binaural Hearing of Speech for Aided and Unaided Conditions

1969 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 650-664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald D. Dirks ◽  
Richard A. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Field Conditions ◽  
Interaural Time Differences ◽  
Binaural Listening ◽  
Signal Sources

Differences in speech intelligibility and identification between binaural, monaural near ear, and monaural far ear conditions were studied in sound field conditions. Scores from listeners with normal hearing and with sensorineural losses were evalated in sound field conditions (unaided) and under conditions of hearing aid amplification (aided). For both conditions listeners with sensorineural hearing loss obtained a binaural advantage similar to that found for normal listeners. The binaural advantage could be demonstrated only when the primary and/or competing signal sources were located at an azimuth which resulted in interaural time differences for at least one of the signals. When the signals arrived simultaneously at the ears from the same loudspeaker, no binaural advantage was obtained. Differences in intelligibility and identification scores between monaural near ear and far ear conditions (6.0 dB) were almost twice as large as those found between binaural listening and monaural near ear listening (3.3 dB).

scholarly journals Rehabilitation of Severe to Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss in Adults: Audiological Outcomes

2019 ◽  
pp. 014556131989246
Author(s):  
Andrea Ciorba ◽  
Maria Paola Guidi ◽  
Piotr H. Skarżyński ◽  
Chiara Bianchini ◽  
Monica Rosignoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Functional Results ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Clinical Records

The aim of this article is to describe the audiological patterns of 71 adult patients presenting severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss, who were rehabilitated by cochlear implants (CIs) and hearing aids. This is a retrospective study in a university setting, where the clinical records of 71 adult patients were reviewed and processed. Speech intelligibility was evaluated at one aided ear (CI) or at both aided ears (double CI or a combination of CI and hearing aid [HA]). Patients with a bilateral CI or with a bimodal hearing setup (CI and HA) performed better than those with a single CI; data from the phonetic matrices test showed that there was a statistically significant difference among patients aided by a single CI versus binaural setup (double CI or CI + HA). In particular, patients aided by a bilateral CI, or by a CI and HA, showed an improvement in the functional results of the speech tests, compared to patients using a single CI. Binaural hearing (either with a bilateral CI or bimodal) allows an improvement in the functional results at the speech tests, compared to the use of a CI only.

Comparing NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 in Hearing Aids Fit to Children with Severe or Profound Hearing Loss: Goodness of Fit-to-Targets, Impacts on Predicted Loudness and Speech Intelligibility

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (03) ◽  
pp. 260-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa Y.C. Ching ◽  
Tian Kar Quar ◽  
Earl E. Johnson ◽  
Philip Newall ◽  
Mridula Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Goodness Of Fit ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
High Input ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Input Level

Background: An important goal of providing amplification to children with hearing loss is to ensure that hearing aids are adjusted to match targets of prescriptive procedures as closely as possible. The Desired Sensation Level (DSL) v5 and the National Acoustic Laboratories’ prescription for nonlinear hearing aids, version 1 (NAL-NL1) procedures are widely used in fitting hearing aids to children. Little is known about hearing aid fitting outcomes for children with severe or profound hearing loss. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the prescribed and measured gain of hearing aids fit according to the NAL-NL1 and the DSL v5 procedure for children with moderately severe to profound hearing loss; and to examine the impact of choice of prescription on predicted speech intelligibility and loudness. Research Design: Participants were fit with Phonak Naida V SP hearing aids according to the NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 procedures. The Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) and estimated loudness were calculated using published models. Study Sample: The sample consisted of 16 children (30 ears) aged between 7 and 17 yr old. Data Collection and Analysis: The measured hearing aid gains were compared with the prescribed gains at 50 (low), 65 (medium), and 80 dB SPL (high) input levels. The goodness of fit-to-targets was quantified by calculating the average root-mean-square (RMS) error of the measured gain compared with prescriptive gain targets for 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz. The significance of difference between prescriptions for hearing aid gains, SII, and loudness was examined by performing analyses of variance. Correlation analyses were used to examine the relationship between measures. Results: The DSL v5 prescribed significantly higher overall gain than the NAL-NL1 procedure for the same audiograms. For low and medium input levels, the hearing aids of all children fit with NAL-NL1 were within 5 dB RMS of prescribed targets, but 33% (10 ears) deviated from the DSL v5 targets by more than 5 dB RMS on average. For high input level, the hearing aid fittings of 60% and 43% of ears deviated by more than 5 dB RMS from targets of NAL-NL1 and DSL v5, respectively. Greater deviations from targets were associated with more severe hearing loss. On average, the SII was higher for DSL v5 than for NAL-NL1 at low input level. No significant difference in SII was found between prescriptions at medium or high input level, despite greater loudness for DSL v5 than for NAL-NL1. Conclusions: Although targets between 0.25 and 2 kHz were well matched for both prescriptions in commercial hearing aids, gain targets at 4 kHz were matched for NAL-NL1 only. Although the two prescriptions differ markedly in estimated loudness, they resulted in comparable predicted speech intelligibility for medium and high input levels.

The Relationship Between Hearing Loss Self-Management and Hearing Aid Benefit and Satisfaction

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Convery ◽  
Gitte Keidser ◽  
Louise Hickson ◽  
Carly Meyer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose Hearing loss self-management refers to the knowledge and skills people use to manage the effects of hearing loss on all aspects of their daily lives. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between self-reported hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Method Thirty-seven adults with hearing loss, all of whom were current users of bilateral hearing aids, participated in this observational study. The participants completed self-report inventories probing their hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Correlation analysis was used to investigate the relationship between individual domains of hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Results Participants who reported better self-management of the effects of their hearing loss on their emotional well-being and social participation were more likely to report less aided listening difficulty in noisy and reverberant environments and greater satisfaction with the effect of their hearing aids on their self-image. Participants who reported better self-management in the areas of adhering to treatment, participating in shared decision making, accessing services and resources, attending appointments, and monitoring for changes in their hearing and functional status were more likely to report greater satisfaction with the sound quality and performance of their hearing aids. Conclusion Study findings highlight the potential for using information about a patient's hearing loss self-management in different domains as part of clinical decision making and management planning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document