scholarly journals Impact of Unilateral Hearing Loss on Behavioral and Evoked Potential Measures of Auditory Function in Adults

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (07) ◽  
pp. 564-578
Author(s):  
Oscar M. Cañete ◽  
Suzanne C. Purdy ◽  
Colin R. S. Brown ◽  
Michel Neeff ◽  
Peter R. Thorne
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Auditory Evoked Potentials ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Self Perception ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Speech Detection

AbstractA unilateral hearing loss (UHL) can have a significant functional and social impact on children and adults, affecting their quality of life. In adults, UHL is typically associated with difficulties understanding speech in noise and sound localization, and UHL increases the self-perception of auditory disability for a range of listening situations. Furthermore, despite evidence for the negative effects of reduced unilateral auditory input on the neural encoding of binaural cues, the perceptual consequences of these changes are still not well understood.Determine effects of UHL on auditory abilities and speech-evoked cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs).CAEPs, sound localization, speech perception in noise and self-perception of auditory abilities (speech, spatial, and qualities hearing scale) were assessed.Thirteen adults with UHL with a range of etiologies, duration of hearing loss, and severity and a control group of eleven binaural listeners with normal hearing.Participants with UHL varied greatly in their ability to localize sound and reported speech recognition and listening effort were the greatest problem. There was a greater effect of right ear than left ear hearing loss on N1 amplitude hemispheric asymmetry and N1 latencies evoked by speech syllables in noise. As duration of hearing loss increased, contralateral dominance (N1 amplitude asymmetry) decreased. N1 amplitudes correlated with speech scores, larger N1 amplitudes were associated with better speech recognition in noise scores. N1 latencies are delayed (in the better ear) and amplitude hemisphere asymmetry differed across UHL participants as function of side of deafness, mainly for right-sided deafness.UHL affects a range of auditory abilities, including speech detection in noise, sound localization, and self-perceived hearing disability. CAEPs elicited by speech sounds are sensitive enough to evidence changes within the auditory cortex due to an UHL.

scholarly journals Unilateral hearing loss and the use of hearing aid: speech recognition, benefit, self-perception of functional performance and satisfaction

Revista CEFAC ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lidiéli Dalla Costa ◽  
Sinéia Neujahr dos Santos ◽  
Maristela Julio Costa
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Functional Performance ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Brazilian Portuguese ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Life Questionnaire ◽  
Self Perception ◽  
Sound Amplification

ABSTRACT Purpose: to investigate speech recognition in silence and in noise in subjects with unilateral hearing loss with and without hearing aids, and to analyze the benefit, self-perception of functional performance, satisfaction and the use of hearing aids in these subjects. Methods: eleven adults with unilateral, mixed and sensorineural, mild to severe hearing loss participated in this study. Speech recognition was evaluated by the Brazilian Portuguese sentences lists test; functional performance of the hearing was assessed by using the Speech Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale questionnaire; satisfaction was assessed by the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life questionnaire, both in Brazilian Portuguese; and to assess the use of hearing aids, the patient's report was analyzed. Results: the adaptation of hearing aids provided benefits in speech recognition in all positions evaluated, both in silence and in noise. The subjects did not report major limitations in communication activities with the use of hearing aids. They were satisfied with the use of sound amplification. Most of the subjects did not use hearing aids, effectively. The discontinuity of hearing aids use can be justified by the difficulty on perceiving participation’s restriction caused by hearing loss, as well as the benefit of the hearing aid, besides the concern with batteries’ costs and aesthetic aspects. Conclusion: although showing benefits in speech recognition, in silence and in noise, and satisfaction with sound amplification, most subjects with unilateral hearing loss do not effectively use hearing aids.

Auditory Outcomes with Hearing Rehabilitation in Children with Unilateral Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 157 (4) ◽  
pp. 565-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Swathi Appachi ◽  
Jessica. L. Specht ◽  
Nikhila Raol ◽  
Judith E. C. Lieu ◽  
Michael S. Cohen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Rehabilitation ◽  
Hearing Devices ◽  
Bone Conduction Hearing ◽  
Speech Recognition In Noise

Objective Options for management of unilateral hearing loss (UHL) in children include conventional hearing aids, bone-conduction hearing devices, contralateral routing of signal (CROS) aids, and frequency-modulating (FM) systems. The objective of this study was to systematically review the current literature to characterize auditory outcomes of hearing rehabilitation options in UHL. Data Sources PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to January 2016. Manual searches of bibliographies were also performed. Review Methods Studies analyzing auditory outcomes of hearing amplification in children with UHL were included. Outcome measures included functional and objective auditory results. Two independent reviewers evaluated each abstract and article. Results Of the 249 articles identified, 12 met inclusion criteria. Seven articles solely focused on outcomes with bone-conduction hearing devices. Outcomes favored improved pure-tone averages, speech recognition thresholds, and sound localization in implanted patients. Five studies focused on FM systems, conventional hearing aids, or CROS hearing aids. Limited data are available but suggest a trend toward improvement in speech perception with hearing aids. FM systems were shown to have the most benefit for speech recognition in noise. Studies evaluating CROS hearing aids demonstrated variable outcomes. Conclusions Data evaluating functional and objective auditory measures following hearing amplification in children with UHL are limited. Most studies do suggest improvement in speech perception, speech recognition in noise, and sound localization with a hearing rehabilitation device.

Localization by unilateral BAHA users

2005 ◽  
Vol 132 (6) ◽  
pp. 928-932 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack J. Wazen ◽  
Soha N. Ghossaini ◽  
Jaclyn B. Spitzer ◽  
Mary Kuller
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Prospective Study ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Improve Performance ◽  
Average Accuracy ◽  
Laterality Judgment ◽  
Head Level

OBJECTIVES: Patients with unilateral hearing loss report difficulty hearing conversation on their impaired side, localizing sound, and understanding of speech in background noise. The bone-anchored cochlear stimulator (BAHA) (Entific, Gothenburg, Sweden) has been shown to improve performance in persons with unilateral severe-profound sensorineural loss (USNHL). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of BAHA in sound localization for USNHL listeners. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study of 12 USNHL subjects, 9 of whom received implants on the poorer hearing side. A control group of 10 normal hearing subjects were assessed for comparison. Localization with and without BAHA was assessed using an array of 8 speakers at head level separated by 45 degrees. Error analysis matrix was generated to evaluate the confusions, accuracy in response, and laterality judgment. RESULTS: The average accuracy of speaker localization was 16% in the unaided condition, with no improvement with BAHA use. Laterality judgment was poorer than 43% in both aided and nonaided conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with UNSNHL had poor sound localization and laterality judgment abilities that did not improve with BAHA use.

scholarly journals Effects of Noise on Speech Recognition and Listening Effort in Children With Normal Hearing and Children With Mild Bilateral or Unilateral Hearing Loss

2016 ◽  
Vol 59 (5) ◽  
pp. 1218-1232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawna Lewis ◽  
Kendra Schmid ◽  
Samantha O'Leary ◽  
Jody Spalding ◽  
Elizabeth Heinrichs-Graham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Total Duration ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Verbal Response ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Sentence Recognition ◽  
Hearing Status

Purpose This study examined the effects of stimulus type and hearing status on speech recognition and listening effort in children with normal hearing (NH) and children with mild bilateral hearing loss (MBHL) or unilateral hearing loss (UHL). Method Children (5–12 years of age) with NH (Experiment 1) and children (8–12 years of age) with MBHL, UHL, or NH (Experiment 2) performed consonant identification and word and sentence recognition in background noise. Percentage correct performance and verbal response time (VRT) were assessed (onset time, total duration). Results In general, speech recognition improved as signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) increased both for children with NH and children with MBHL or UHL. The groups did not differ on measures of VRT. Onset times were longer for incorrect than for correct responses. For correct responses only, there was a general increase in VRT with decreasing SNR. Conclusions Findings indicate poorer sentence recognition in children with NH and MBHL or UHL as SNR decreases. VRT results suggest that greater effort was expended when processing stimuli that were incorrectly identified. Increasing VRT with decreasing SNR for correct responses also supports greater effort in poorer acoustic conditions. The absence of significant hearing status differences suggests that VRT was not differentially affected by MBHL, UHL, or NH for children in this study.

Unilateral Hearing Loss in Youth: Development of Candidate Items for a Condition-Specific Validated Instrument

2018 ◽  
Vol 159 (6) ◽  
pp. 1043-1050 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia L. Purcell ◽  
Todd C. Edwards ◽  
Meghan Wisneski ◽  
Dylan K. Chan ◽  
Henry Ou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Specific Patient ◽  
Functional Impact ◽  
Noise Environment ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Functional Scores

Objective This study interviewed youth with unilateral hearing, utilizing their responses to generate candidate items for a condition-specific patient-reported instrument. Study Design Mixed methods, cross-sectional. Setting Tertiary care children’s hospital. Participants and Methods Youth with unilateral hearing loss and normal hearing in the contralateral ear were identified and recruited for participation through query of an audiometric database and through hearing loss clinics. Interviews with the youth were qualitatively analyzed to identify common themes and generate items related to functional impact. A multi-institutional expert panel reviewed items with prespecified item selection criteria. Participants rated items for impact on daily life. For preliminary criterion validity assessment, statistical analyses explored correlations between functional scores and type and severity of hearing loss. Results Thirty-nine youth aged 9 to 18 years with unilateral hearing loss participated; 31% used a hearing device. Fifteen youth participated in interviews; thematic analysis, item crafting, and expert panel item review resulted in 41 items. Twenty-six youth responded to the items, reporting low functional scores in the domains of sound localization, ear positioning, and noise environment. They reported better levels of function in carrying out group conversations, focusing on schoolwork, and feeling safe during activities. Multivariate linear regression found that youth scored 0.4 points (or approximately 8%) lower on the functional impact scale with every 20–dB HL increase in pure tone average in the abnormal ear. Conclusion Youth with unilateral hearing loss report functional impact, particularly related to sound localization, ear positioning, and noise environment; therefore, they may benefit from a condition-specific functional assessment instrument.

scholarly journals Cochlear Implants in Patients with Fluctuant or Progressive Hearing Loss on the Better Ear

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Luiz Mangabeira-Albernaz ◽  
Andrea Felice dos Santos Malerbi
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Unilateral Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Noisy Environments ◽  
Progressive Hearing Loss ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Unilateral Deafness ◽  
Definite Improvement

Abstract Introduction Cochlear implants have been proposed for cases of unilateral hearing loss, especially in patients with tinnitus impairment. Several studies have shown that they result in definite improvement of sound localization and speech understanding, both in quiet and noisy environments. On the other hand, there are few references regarding cochlear implants in patients whose better ears present hearing loss. Objective To report the audiological outcomes of three patients with unilateral deafness, in whom the better ears presented hearing losses, submitted to cochlear implants. Methods Three patients with unilateral profound hearing loss underwent a cochlear implant performed by the same surgeon. Results The patients' data are presented in detail. Conclusion The indications for cochlear implants are becoming more diverse with the expansion of clinical experience and the observation that they definitely help patients with special hearing problems.

scholarly journals Effect of Speaker Age on Speech Recognition and Perceived Listening Effort in Older Adults With Hearing Loss

2012 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 838-847 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan J. McAuliffe ◽  
Phillipa J. Wilding ◽  
Natalie A. Rickard ◽  
Greg A. O'Beirne
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Signal Quality ◽  
Older Individuals ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Younger Adults ◽  
Perceived Effort ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Significant Difference

Purpose Older adults exhibit difficulty understanding speech that has been experimentally degraded. Age-related changes to the speech mechanism lead to natural degradations in signal quality. We tested the hypothesis that older adults with hearing loss would exhibit declines in speech recognition when listening to the speech of older adults, compared with the speech of younger adults, and would report greater amounts of listening effort in this task. Method Nineteen individuals with age-related hearing loss completed speech recognition and listening effort scaling tasks. Both were conducted in quiet, when listening to high- and low-predictability phrases produced by younger and older speakers, respectively. Results No significant difference in speech recognition existed when stimuli were derived from younger or older speakers. However, perceived effort was significantly higher when listening to speech from older adults, as compared with younger adults. Conclusions For older individuals with hearing loss, natural degradations in signal quality may require greater listening effort. However, they do not interfere with speech recognition—at least in quiet. Follow-up investigation of the effect of speaker age on speech recognition and listening effort under more challenging noise conditions appears warranted.

scholarly journals Listening Effort and Speech Recognition with Frequency Compression Amplification for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (09) ◽  
pp. 823-837 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc A. Brennan ◽  
Dawna Lewis ◽  
Ryan McCreery ◽  
Judy Kopun ◽  
Joshua M. Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Recognition ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Nonsense Word ◽  
Spectral Distortion ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Frequency Compression ◽  
Low Pass ◽  
Adults And Children

AbstractNonlinear frequency compression (NFC) can improve the audibility of high-frequency sounds by lowering them to a frequency where audibility is better; however, this lowering results in spectral distortion. Consequently, performance is a combination of the effects of increased access to high-frequency sounds and the detrimental effects of spectral distortion. Previous work has demonstrated positive benefits of NFC on speech recognition when NFC is set to improve audibility while minimizing distortion. However, the extent to which NFC impacts listening effort is not well understood, especially for children with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL).To examine the impact of NFC on recognition and listening effort for speech in adults and children with SNHL.Within-subject, quasi-experimental study. Participants listened to amplified nonsense words that were (1) frequency-lowered using NFC, (2) low-pass filtered at 5 kHz to simulate the restricted bandwidth (RBW) of conventional hearing aid processing, or (3) low-pass filtered at 10 kHz to simulate extended bandwidth (EBW) amplification.Fourteen children (8–16 yr) and 14 adults (19–65 yr) with mild-to-severe SNHL.Participants listened to speech processed by a hearing aid simulator that amplified input signals to fit a prescriptive target fitting procedure.Participants were blinded to the type of processing. Participants' responses to each nonsense word were analyzed for accuracy and verbal-response time (VRT; listening effort). A multivariate analysis of variance and linear mixed model were used to determine the effect of hearing-aid signal processing on nonsense word recognition and VRT.Both children and adults identified the nonsense words and initial consonants better with EBW and NFC than with RBW. The type of processing did not affect the identification of the vowels or final consonants. There was no effect of age on recognition of the nonsense words, initial consonants, medial vowels, or final consonants. VRT did not change significantly with the type of processing or age.Both adults and children demonstrated improved speech recognition with access to the high-frequency sounds in speech. Listening effort as measured by VRT was not affected by access to high-frequency sounds.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document