The Hearing Aid Effect in 2013

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (09) ◽  
pp. 893-903 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik P. Rauterkus ◽  
Catherine V. Palmer
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Young Men ◽  
Standard Size ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
The Past ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Negative Attributes

Background: The hearing aid effect is the term used to describe the assignment of negative attributes to individuals using hearing aids. The effect was first empirically identified in 1977 when it was reported that adults rating young children with and without hearing aids assigned negative attributes to the children depicted with hearing aids. Investigations in the 1980s and 1990s reported mixed results related to the extent of the hearing aid effect but continued to identify, on average, some negative attributes assigned to individuals wearing hearing aids. Purpose: The specific aim of this research was to investigate whether the hearing aid effect has diminished in the past several decades by replicating the methods of previous studies for testing the hearing aid effect while using updated devices. Research Design: Five device configurations were rated across eight attributes. Results for each attribute were considered separately. Study Sample: A total of 24 adults judged pictures of young men wearing various ear level technologies across 8 attributes on a 7-point Likert scale. Five young men between ages 15 and 17 yr were photographed wearing each of five device configurations including (1) a standard-sized behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aid coupled to an earmold with #13 tubing, (2) a mini-BTE hearing aid with a slim tube open-fit configuration, (3) a completely-in-the-canal hearing aid that could not be seen because of its location in the ear canal, (4) an earbud, and (5) a Bluetooth receiver. Data Collection and Analysis: The 24 raters saw pictures of each of the 5 young men with each wearing one of the 5 devices so that devices and young men were never judged twice by the same observer. All judgments of each device, regardless of the young man modeling the device, were combined in the data analysis. The effect of device types on judgments was tested using a one-way between-participant analysis of variance. Results: There was a significant difference on the judgment of age and trustworthiness level among the five devices. However, our post hoc analysis revealed that only two significant effects were present. People wearing a completely-in-the-canal aid (nothing visible in the ear) were rated significantly older than people wearing an earbud, and people wearing the standard-size BTE with earmold were rated significantly more trustworthy than people who wore the Bluetooth device. Conclusions: It was hypothesized that the hearing aid effect would be diminished in 2013 compared with data reported in the past. This proved to be the case, as no hearing aid condition was rated as more negative than any of the non–hearing aid device conditions. In fact, models wearing the standard-size BTE with earmold were rated as more trustworthy than models wearing the Bluetooth device. The standard-sized BTE with earmold condition is the configuration that can be directly compared with previous research because similar devices were used in those studies. These results indicate that the hearing aid effect has diminished, if not completely disappeared, in the 21st century.

Validation of Several Methods of Estimating Maximal Oxygen Uptake in Young Men

1998 ◽  
Vol 87 (2) ◽  
pp. 575-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars McNaughton ◽  
Phil Hall ◽  
Dean Cooley
Keyword(s):  
Young Men ◽  
Gas Analysis ◽  
Accurate Predictor ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Run Test ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Treadmill Protocol ◽  
Shuttle Run

The purpose of this study was to identify the most accurate predictor of VO2max from a variety of running tests. 32 young adult male undergraduates of (mean ± SE) age 20.14 ± 0.34 yr., height 179.4 ± 1.8 cm, weight 73.7±2.8 kg, and VO2max 57.89 ± 1.1 ml · kg−1 · min.−1 were randomly tested on four different predictive VO2max running tests to assess their actual VO2max, based on a continuous, progressive treadmill protocol and obtained via gas analysis. The four tests consisted of a treadmill jogging test, 1.5 mile run, Cooper's 12-min. run, and the 20-m progressive shuttle-run test. An analysis of variance applied to means indicated significance. Post hoc analysis between the means with correction by Scheffé showed significant difference between the predictive submaximal treadmill jogging test and the 12-min. run but no other difieren .es. The strength of the relationship between predictive tests and VO2max varied, wit1 the 12-min run having the highest correlation of .87, followed by the 1.5 mile rur .87, 20-m progressive shuttle run .82, and the treadmill jogging test .50. The 12-min. run had the highest correlation of all tests with VO2max in young men, with active to trained levels of fitness. The 1.5 mile and 20-m shuttle run also provided accurate predictions of VO2max and so should be used for an accurate prediction of young men's VO2max.

FM Verification for the 21 st Century

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leisha Eiten ◽  
Dawna Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Current Technology ◽  
The Past ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss

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.

scholarly journals Integrated Bimodal Fitting for Unilateral CI Users with Residual Contralateral Hearing

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-206
Author(s):  
Gennaro Auletta ◽  
Annamaria Franzè ◽  
Carla Laria ◽  
Carmine Piccolo ◽  
Carmine Papa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Performance Difference ◽  
Test Conditions ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Noisy Conditions ◽  
New Formula ◽  
Better Than

Background: The aim of this study was to compare, in users of bimodal cochlear implants, the performance obtained using their own hearing aids (adjusted with the standard NAL-NL1 fitting formula) with the performance using the Phonak Naìda Link Ultra Power hearing aid adjusted with both NAL-NL1 and a new bimodal system (Adaptive Phonak Digital Bimodal (APDB)) developed by Advanced Bionics and Phonak Corporations. Methods: Eleven bimodal users (Naìda CI Q70 + contralateral hearing aid) were enrolled in our study. The users’ own hearing aids were replaced with the Phonak Naìda Link Ultra Power and fitted following the new formula. Speech intelligibility was assessed in quiet and noisy conditions, and comparisons were made with the results obtained with the users’ previous hearing aids and with the Naída Link hearing aids fitted with the NAL-NL1 generic prescription formula. Results: Using Phonak Naìda Link Ultra Power hearing aids with the Adaptive Phonak Digital Bimodal fitting formula, performance was significantly better than that with the users’ own rehabilitation systems, especially in challenging hearing situations for all analyzed subjects. Conclusions: Speech intelligibility tests in quiet settings did not reveal a significant difference in performance between the new fitting formula and NAL-NL1 fittings (using the Naída Link hearing aids), whereas the performance difference between the two fittings was very significant in noisy test conditions.

scholarly journals Using Wearable Cameras to Assess Foods and Beverages Omitted in 24 Hour Dietary Recalls and a Text Entry Food Record App

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1806
Author(s):  
Virginia Chan ◽  
Alyse Davies ◽  
Lyndal Wellard-Cole ◽  
Silvia Lu ◽  
Hoi Ng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dietary Assessment ◽  
Fats And Oils ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Smartphone App ◽  
Food Record ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Paired T Test

Technology-enhanced methods of dietary assessment may still face common limitations of self-report. This study aimed to assess foods and beverages omitted when both a 24 h recall and a smartphone app were used to assess dietary intake compared with camera images. For three consecutive days, young adults (18–30 years) wore an Autographer camera that took point-of-view images every 30 seconds. Over the same period, participants reported their diet in the app and completed daily 24 h recalls. Camera images were reviewed for food and beverages, then matched to the items reported in the 24 h recall and app. ANOVA (with post hoc analysis using Tukey Honest Significant Difference) and paired t-test were conducted. Discretionary snacks were frequently omitted by both methods (p < 0.001). Water was omitted more frequently in the app than in the camera images (p < 0.001) and 24 h recall (p < 0.001). Dairy and alternatives (p = 0.001), sugar-based products (p = 0.007), savoury sauces and condiments (p < 0.001), fats and oils (p < 0.001) and alcohol (p = 0.002) were more frequently omitted in the app than in the 24 h recall. The use of traditional self-report methods of assessing diet remains problematic even with the addition of technology and finding new objective methods that are not intrusive and are of low burden to participants remains a challenge.

scholarly journals The effect of liraglutide and sitagliptin on oxidative stress in persons with type 2 diabetes

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Suvanjaa Sivalingam ◽  
Emil List Larsen ◽  
Daniel H. van Raalte ◽  
Marcel H. A. Muskiet ◽  
Mark M. Smits ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Oxidative Stress ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Urinary Excretion ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Glucagon Like Peptide ◽  
Glucagon Like Peptide 1 ◽  
Post Hoc

AbstractGlucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists have shown cardioprotective effects which have been suggested to be mediated through inhibition of oxidative stress. We investigated the effect of treatment with a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (liraglutide) on oxidative stress measured as urinary nucleic acid oxidation in persons with type 2 diabetes. Post-hoc analysis of two independent, randomised, placebo-controlled and double-blinded clinical trials. In a cross-over study where persons with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria (LIRALBU, n = 32) received liraglutide (1.8 mg/day) or placebo for 12 weeks in random order, separated by 4 weeks of wash-out. In a parallel-grouped study where obese persons with type 2 diabetes (SAFEGUARD, n = 56) received liraglutide (1.8 mg/day), sitagliptin (100 mg/day) or placebo for 12 weeks. Endpoints were changes in the urinary markers of DNA oxidation (8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2′-deoxyguanosine (8-oxodG)) and RNA oxidation [8-oxo-7,8-dihydroguanosine (8-oxoGuo)]. In LIRALBU, we observed no significant differences between treatment periods in urinary excretion of 8-oxodG [0.028 (standard error (SE): 0.17] nmol/mmol creatinine, p = 0.87) or of 8-oxoGuo [0.12 (0.12) nmol/mmol creatinine, p = 0.31]. In SAFEGUARD, excretion of 8-oxodG was not changed in the liraglutide group [2.8 (− 8.51; 15.49) %, p = 0.62] but a significant decline was demonstrated in the placebo group [12.6 (− 21.3; 3.1) %, p = 0.02], resulting in a relative increase in the liraglutide group compared to placebo (0.16 nmol/mmol creatinine, SE 0.07, p = 0.02). Treatment with sitagliptin compared to placebo demonstrated no significant difference (0.07 (0.07) nmol/mmol creatinine, p = 0.34). Nor were any significant differences for urinary excretion of 8-oxoGuo liraglutide vs placebo [0.09 (SE: 0.07) nmol/mmol creatinine, p = 0.19] or sitagliptin vs placebo [0.07 (SE: 0.07) nmol/mmol creatinine, p = 0.35] observed. This post-hoc analysis could not demonstrate a beneficial effect of 12 weeks of treatment with liraglutide or sitagliptin on oxidatively generated modifications of nucleic acid in persons with type 2 diabetes.

scholarly journals Comparison of In-Situ and Retrospective Self-Reports on Assessing Hearing Aid Outcomes

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Hsiang Wu ◽  
Elizabeth Stangl ◽  
Octav Chipara ◽  
Anna Gudjonsdottir ◽  
Jacob Oleson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Self Reports ◽  
Outcome Difference ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Ecological Momentary

Abstract Background Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a methodology involving repeated surveys to collect in-situ self-reports that describe respondents' current or recent experiences. Audiology literature comparing in-situ and retrospective self-reports is scarce. Purpose To compare the sensitivity of in-situ and retrospective self-reports in detecting the outcome difference between hearing aid technologies, and to determine the association between in-situ and retrospective self-reports. Research Design An observational study. Study Sample Thirty-nine older adults with hearing loss. Data Collection and Analysis The study was part of a larger clinical trial that compared the outcomes of a prototype hearing aid (denoted as HA1) and a commercially available device (HA2). In each trial condition, participants wore hearing aids for 4 weeks. Outcomes were measured using EMA and retrospective questionnaires. To ensure that the outcome data could be directly compared, the Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile was administered as an in-situ self-report (denoted as EMA-GHABP) and as a retrospective questionnaire (retro-GHABP). Linear mixed models were used to determine if the EMA- and retro-GHABP could detect the outcome difference between HA1 and HA2. Correlation analyses were used to examine the association between EMA- and retro-GHABP. Results For the EMA-GHABP, HA2 had significantly higher (better) scores than HA1 in the GHABP subscales of benefit, residual disability, and satisfaction (p = 0.029–0.0015). In contrast, the difference in the retro-GHABP score between HA1 and HA2 was significant only in the satisfaction subscale (p = 0.0004). The correlations between the EMA- and retro-GHABP were significant in all subscales (p = 0.0004 to <0.0001). The strength of the association ranged from weak to moderate (r = 0.28–0.58). Finally, the exit interview indicated that 29 participants (74.4%) preferred HA2 over HA1. Conclusion The study suggests that in-situ self-reports collected using EMA could have a higher sensitivity than retrospective questionnaires. Therefore, EMA is worth considering in clinical trials that aim to compare the outcomes of different hearing aid technologies. The weak to moderate association between in-situ and retrospective self-reports suggests that these two types of measures assess different aspects of hearing aid outcomes.

The Effects of Receiver Placement on Probe Microphone, Performance, and Subjective Measures with Open Canal Hearing Instruments

2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (04) ◽  
pp. 249-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynzee N. Alworth ◽  
Patrick N. Plyler ◽  
Monika Bertges Reber ◽  
Patti M. Johnstone
Keyword(s):  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Clinical Importance ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Subjective Measures ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Hearing Instruments ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Occlusion Effect

Background: Open canal hearing instruments differ in method of sound delivery to the ear canal, distance between the microphone and the receiver, and physical size of the devices. Moreover, RITA (receiver in the aid) and RITE (receiver in the ear) hearing instruments may also differ in terms of retention and comfort as well as ease of use and care for certain individuals. What remains unclear, however, is if any or all of the abovementioned factors contribute to hearing aid outcome. Purpose: To determine the effect of receiver location on performance and/or preference of listeners using open canal hearing instruments. Research Design: An experimental study in which subjects were exposed to a repeated measures design. Study Sample: Twenty-five adult listeners with mild sloping to moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss (mean age 67 yr). Data Collection and Analysis: Participants completed two six-week trial periods for each device type. Probe microphone, objective, and subjective measures (quiet, noise) were conducted unaided and aided at the end of each trial period. Results: Occlusion effect results were not significantly different between the RITA and RITE instruments; however, frequency range was extended in the RITE instruments, resulting in significantly greater maximum gain for the RITE instruments than the RITA instruments at 4000 and 6000 Hz. Objective performance in quiet or in noise was unaffected by receiver location. Subjective measures revealed significantly greater satisfaction ratings for the RITE than for the RITA instruments. Similarly, preference in quiet and overall preference were significantly greater for the RITE than for the RITA instruments. Conclusions: Although no occlusion differences were noted between instruments, the RITE did demonstrate a significant difference in reserve gain before feedback at 4000 and 6000 Hz. Objectively; no positive benefit was noted between unaided and aided conditions on speech recognition tests. These results suggest that such testing may not be sensitive enough to determine aided benefit with open canal instruments. However, the subjective measures (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit [APHAB] and subjective ratings) did indicate aided benefit for both instruments when compared to unaided. This further suggests the clinical importance of subjective measures as a way to measure aided benefit of open-fit devices.

Verification of In Situ Thresholds and Integrated Real-Ear Measurements

2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (10) ◽  
pp. 663-670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey J. DiGiovanni ◽  
Ryan M. Pratt
Keyword(s):  
Measurement System ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Analysis Tool ◽  
Ohio University ◽  
Positive Direction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Threshold Measurement

Background: Accurate prescriptive gain results in a more accurate fit, lower return rate in hearing aids, and increased patient satisfaction. In situ threshold measurements can be used to determine required gain. The Widex Corporation uses an in situ threshold measurement strategy, called the Sensogram. Real-ear measurements determine if prescriptive gain targets have been achieved. Starkey Laboratories introduced an integrated real-ear measurement system in their hearing aids. Purpose: To determine whether the responses obtained using the Widex Sensogram were equivalent to those obtained using current clinical threshold measurement methods. To determine the accuracy of the Starkey IREMS™ (Integrated Real Ear Measurement System) in measuring RECD (real-ear to coupler difference) values compared to a dedicated real-ear measurement system. Research Design: A verification design was employed by comparing participant data measured from standard, benchmark equipment and procedures against new techniques offered by hearing-aid manufacturers. Study Sample: A total of 20 participants participated in this study. Ten participants with sensorineural hearing loss were recruited from the Ohio University Hearing, Speech, and Language Clinic participated in the first experiment. Ten participants with normal hearing were recruited from the student population at Ohio University participated in both experiments. The normal-hearing group had thresholds of 15 dB HL or better at the octave frequencies of 250–8000 Hz. The hearing-impaired group had thresholds of varying degrees and configurations with thresholds equal to or poorer than 25 dB HL three-frequency pure-tone average. Data Collection and Analysis: The order of measurement method for both experiments was counterbalanced. In Experiment 1, thresholds obtained via the Widex Sensogram were compared to thresholds obtained for each participant using a clinical audiometer and ER-3A insert ear phones. In Experiment 2, RECD values obtained via the Starkey IREMS were compared to RECD values obtained via the Audioscan Verifit™. A repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for statistical analysis, and a Fisher's LSD (least significant difference) was used as a post hoc analysis tool. Results: A significant difference between Sensogram thresholds and conventional audiometric thresholds was found with the Sensogram method resulting in better threshold values at 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 kHz for both groups. In Experiment 2, a significant difference between RECD values obtained by the Starkey IREMS and the Audioscan Verifit system was found with significant differences in RECD values found at 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.5, 2.0, and 6.0 kHz. Conclusions: The Sensogram data differ significantly from traditional audiometry at several frequencies important for speech intelligibility. Real-ear measures are still required for verification of prescribed gain, however, calling into question any claims of shortened fitting time. The Starkey IREMS does perform real-ear measurements that vary significantly from benchmark equipment. These technologies represent a positive direction in prescribing accurate gain during hearing-aid fittings, but a stand-alone system is still the preferred method for real-ear measurements in hearing-aid fittings.

Cartilage Conduction Hearing Aid Fitting in Clinical Practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tadashi Nishimura ◽  
Hiroshi Hosoi ◽  
Tomoko Sugiuchi ◽  
Nozomu Matsumoto ◽  
Takanori Nishiyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Severe Stenosis ◽  
Aural Atresia ◽  
New Device ◽  
Data Collection And Analysis ◽  
Purchase Rate ◽  
Fitting In ◽  
Air Conduction ◽  
Assessment Results

Abstract Background Cartilage conduction hearing aids (CCHAs) were newly devised and spread fast in Japan since their launch in 2017. However, little knowledge is available for this new device. Purpose The aim of this study was to establish the knowledge of CCHAs and suggest their indication. Research Design Correlational study. Study Sample A total 256 patients were registered. Data Collection and Analysis The fitting of CCHAs was surveyed in nine institutions. The outcomes were assessed by audiometric tests. The patients were classified into seven groups, depending on the ear conditions. The clinical characteristics, assessment results, and purchase rates were compared among the groups. The assessment results of CCHAs were also compared with those of previously used hearing aids. Results Most patients who used CCHAs were classified into the bilateral closed (aural atresia or severe stenosis) ear (n = 65) or unilateral closed ear (n = 124) groups. The patients in these groups achieved good benefits that resulted in a high purchase rate. The bilateral continuous otorrhea group also supported a high purchase rate, although the benefits of CCHAs were not always excellent. In contrast, the purchase rate was poor in the patients who could use air conduction hearing aids (ACHAs) without absolute problems. As for using a CCHA as a contralateral routing of signals hearing aid, the benefits depended on the patients. Conclusions CCHAs are considered as a great option not only to the patients with closed ears but also to those who had difficulties in ACHAs usage.

scholarly journals Diastolic function in patients with preeclampsia during pre- and post-partum period using tissue doppler imaging

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
I B Rangga Wibhuti ◽  
Amiliana M. Soesanto ◽  
Fahmi Shahab
Keyword(s):  
Diastolic Function ◽  
Tissue Doppler Imaging ◽  
Pregnancy Termination ◽  
Post Partum ◽  
Tissue Doppler ◽  
Doppler Imaging ◽  
Post Hoc Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Partum Period ◽  
Post Hoc

Background: Prior studies have compared the E/e’ elevation in preeclampsia patients to normal patients, however there are no data whether this elevation persists after birth. The aim of this study is to analyze diastolic function in preeclampsia patients during pre- and post-partum period using E/e’ parameter measurement.Methods: This is a prospective cohort study of pregnant women with preeclampsia who were hospitalized and planned for pregnancy termination. Basic clinical characteristics were obtained from all samples. Echocardiography was done prepartum, 48-72 hours after termination, and 40-60 days postpartum. Post hoc analysis using least significant difference method was used to compare the results between measurements.Results: 30 subjects were enrolled in the study. Analysis on E/e’ characteristics showed statistical difference between prepartum E/e’ and 40 days postpartum E/e’ (11.87±3.184 vs 9.43±2.529, p=0.001, CI=1.123-3.751), as well as between 48 hours post-partum and 40 days post-partum period (12.12±2.754 vs 9.43±2.529, p<0.001, CI=1.615-3.771). There were no statistical differences between pre-partum E/e’ and 48 hours post-partum E/e’ (11.87±3.184 vs 12.12±2.754, p=0.633, CI=-1.345-0.832).Conclusion: This study showed diastolic dysfunction in preeclampsia patients persists up until a few days after birth, but resolves in time (40 days after birth) as measured by tissue doppler imaging.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document