scholarly journals Effectiveness and efficiency of a dedicated bimodal fitting formula

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Domenico Cuda ◽  
Alessandra Murri ◽  
Anna Mainardi ◽  
Josef Chalupper
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Residual Hearing ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Subject Specific ◽  
Contralateral Ear ◽  
Effectiveness And Efficiency ◽  
Localization Ability

The population of unilateral cochlear implant (CI) users with aidable residual hearing in the contralateral ear is continuously growing. Aiding the contralateral ear with a hearing aid has been shown to provide substantial benefit regarding speech intelligibility in quiet and in noise, sound quality, localization ability and listening effort. In this study, a dedicated hearing aid with the accompanying fitting prescription, tailored to the needs of bimodal listeners was evaluated in nine bimodal CI users. Speech intelligibility scores in noise revealed on-par performance of the dedicated bimodal fitting compared to the clinical standard prescription. 78% of the bimodal CI users preferred the dedicated bimodal fitting over the clinical standard. The minimal subject-specific finetuning effort required during the dedicated bimodal fitting process emphasizes the clinical efficiency.

A Comparison of Personal Sound Amplification Products and Hearing Aids in Ecologically Relevant Test Environments

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 581-593 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Brody ◽  
Yu-Hsiang Wu ◽  
Elizabeth Stangl
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Speech Intelligibility Index ◽  
Sound Amplification

Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the benefit of self-adjusted personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) to audiologist-fitted hearing aids based on speech recognition, listening effort, and sound quality in ecologically relevant test conditions to estimate real-world effectiveness. Method Twenty-five older adults with bilateral mild-to-moderate hearing loss completed the single-blinded, crossover study. Participants underwent aided testing using 3 PSAPs and a traditional hearing aid, as well as unaided testing. PSAPs were adjusted based on participant preference, whereas the hearing aid was configured using best-practice verification protocols. Audibility provided by the devices was quantified using the Speech Intelligibility Index (American National Standards Institute, 2012). Outcome measures assessing speech recognition, listening effort, and sound quality were administered in ecologically relevant laboratory conditions designed to represent real-world speech listening situations. Results All devices significantly improved Speech Intelligibility Index compared to unaided listening, with the hearing aid providing more audibility than all PSAPs. Results further revealed that, in general, the hearing aid improved speech recognition performance and reduced listening effort significantly more than all PSAPs. Few differences in sound quality were observed between devices. All PSAPs improved speech recognition and listening effort compared to unaided testing. Conclusions Hearing aids fitted using best-practice verification protocols were capable of providing more aided audibility, better speech recognition performance, and lower listening effort compared to the PSAPs tested in the current study. Differences in sound quality between the devices were minimal. However, because all PSAPs tested in the study significantly improved participants' speech recognition performance and reduced listening effort compared to unaided listening, PSAPs could serve as a budget-friendly option for those who cannot afford traditional amplification.

scholarly journals Can Dual Compression Offer Better Mandarin Speech Intelligibility and Sound Quality Than Fast-Acting Compression?

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 233121652199761
Author(s):  
Yuan Chen ◽  
Lena L. N. Wong ◽  
Volker Kuehnel ◽  
Jinyu Qian ◽  
Solveig Christina Voss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Theoretical Understanding ◽  
Quality Ratings ◽  
Speech Reception Thresholds ◽  
Fast Acting

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dual compression for Mandarin-speaking hearing aid users. Dual compression combines fast and slow compressors operating simultaneously across all frequency channels. The study participants were 31 hearing aid users with symmetrical moderate-to-severe hearing loss, with a mean age of 67 years. A new pair of 20-channel behind-the-ear hearing aids (i.e., Phonak Bolero B90-P) was used during the testing. The results revealed a significant improvement in speech reception thresholds in noise when switching from fast-acting compression to dual compression. The sound quality ratings revealed that most listeners preferred dual compression to fast-acting compression for listening effort, listening comfort, speech clarity, and overall sound quality at +4 dB signal-to-noise ratio. These results are consistent with predictions based on the theoretical understanding of dual and fast-acting compression. However, whether these results can be generalized to other languages or other dual compression systems should be verified by future studies.

Listening Effort With Cochlear Implant Simulations

2013 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 1075-1084 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carina Pals ◽  
Anastasios Sarampalis ◽  
Deniz Başkent
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Spectral Resolution ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Cognitive Resources ◽  
Visual Response ◽  
Processing Conditions ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Dual Task Paradigm ◽  
Spectral Channels

Purpose Fitting a cochlear implant (CI) for optimal speech perception does not necessarily optimize listening effort. This study aimed to show that listening effort may change between CI processing conditions for which speech intelligibility remains constant. Method Nineteen normal-hearing participants listened to CI simulations with varying numbers of spectral channels. A dual-task paradigm combining an intelligibility task with either a linguistic or nonlinguistic visual response-time (RT) task measured intelligibility and listening effort. The simultaneously performed tasks compete for limited cognitive resources; changes in effort associated with the intelligibility task are reflected in changes in RT on the visual task. A separate self-report scale provided a subjective measure of listening effort. Results All measures showed significant improvements with increasing spectral resolution up to 6 channels. However, only the RT measure of listening effort continued improving up to 8 channels. The effects were stronger for RTs recorded during listening than for RTs recorded between listening. Conclusion The results suggest that listening effort decreases with increased spectral resolution. Moreover, these improvements are best reflected in objective measures of listening effort, such as RTs on a secondary task, rather than intelligibility scores or subjective effort measures.

Comparing the Effect of Different Hearing Aid Fitting Methods in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jantien L. Vroegop ◽  
J. Gertjan Dingemanse ◽  
Marc P. van der Schroeff ◽  
André Goedegebure
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Hearing Aid Fitting ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Localization Test ◽  
Fitting Procedures ◽  
Auditory Performance ◽  
Contralateral Ear ◽  
Noise Test

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.

scholarly journals Listener Performance with a Novel Hearing Aid Frequency Lowering Technique

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (09) ◽  
pp. 810-822 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. Kirby ◽  
Judy G. Kopun ◽  
Meredith Spratford ◽  
Clairissa M. Mollak ◽  
Marc A. Brennan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Signal Processing ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Processing Strategy ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
At Home

AbstractSloping hearing loss imposes limits on audibility for high-frequency sounds in many hearing aid users. Signal processing algorithms that shift high-frequency sounds to lower frequencies have been introduced in hearing aids to address this challenge by improving audibility of high-frequency sounds.This study examined speech perception performance, listening effort, and subjective sound quality ratings with conventional hearing aid processing and a new frequency-lowering signal processing strategy called frequency composition (FC) in adults and children.Participants wore the study hearing aids in two signal processing conditions (conventional processing versus FC) at an initial laboratory visit and subsequently at home during two approximately six-week long trials, with the order of conditions counterbalanced across individuals in a double-blind paradigm.Children (N = 12, 7 females, mean age in years = 12.0, SD = 3.0) and adults (N = 12, 6 females, mean age in years = 56.2, SD = 17.6) with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who were full-time hearing aid users.Individual performance with each type of processing was assessed using speech perception tasks, a measure of listening effort, and subjective sound quality surveys at an initial visit. At the conclusion of each subsequent at-home trial, participants were retested in the laboratory. Linear mixed effects analyses were completed for each outcome measure with signal processing condition, age group, visit (prehome versus posthome trial), and measures of aided audibility as predictors.Overall, there were few significant differences in speech perception, listening effort, or subjective sound quality between FC and conventional processing, effects of listener age, or longitudinal changes in performance. Listeners preferred FC to conventional processing on one of six subjective sound quality metrics. Better speech perception performance was consistently related to higher aided audibility.These results indicate that when high-frequency speech sounds are made audible with conventional processing, speech recognition ability and listening effort are similar between conventional processing and FC. Despite the lack of benefit to speech perception, some listeners still preferred FC, suggesting that qualitative measures should be considered when evaluating candidacy for this signal processing strategy.

scholarly journals Aiding and Occluding the Contralateral Ear in Implanted Children with Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (09) ◽  
pp. 567-577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina L. Runge ◽  
Jamie Jensen ◽  
David R. Friedland ◽  
Ruth Y. Litovsky ◽  
Sergey Tarima
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Auditory Neuropathy ◽  
Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Predictive Variables ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Contralateral Ear

Background: The challenges associated with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD) are due primarily to temporal impairment and therefore tend to affect perception of low- to midfrequency sounds. A common treatment option for severe impairment in ANSD is cochlear implantation, and because the degree of impairment is unrelated to degree of hearing loss by audiometric thresholds, this population may have significant acoustic sensitivity in the contralateral ear. Clinically, the question arises as to how we should treat the contralateral ear in this population when there is acoustic hearing—should we plug it, amplify it, implant it, or leave it alone? Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of acute amplification and plugging of the contralateral ear compared to no intervention in implanted children with ANSD and aidable contralateral hearing. It was hypothesized that due to impaired temporal processing in ANSD, contralateral acoustic input would interfere with speech perception achieved with the cochlear implant (CI) alone; therefore, speech perception performance will decline with amplification and improve with occlusion. Research Design: Prospective within-subject comparison. Adaptive speech recognition thresholds (SRTs) for monosyllable and spondee word stimuli were measured in quiet and in noise for the intervention configurations. Study Sample: Nine children treated at the Medical College of Wisconsin Koss Cochlear Implant Program participated in the study. Inclusion criteria for this study were children diagnosed with ANSD who were unilaterally implanted, had aidable hearing in the contralateral ear (defined as a three-frequency pure-tone average of ≤80 dB HL), had at least 1 yr of cochlear implant experience, and were able to perform the speech perception task. Intervention: We compared SRT with the CI alone to SRTs with interventions of cochlear implant with a contralateral hearing aid (CI+HA) and cochlear implant with a contralateral earplug (CI+plug). Data Collection and Analysis: SRTs were measured and compared within subjects across listening conditions. Within-subject comparisons were analyzed using paired t-tests, and analyses of predictive variables for effects of contralateral intervention were analyzed using linear regression. Results: Contrary to the hypothesis, the bimodal CI+HA configuration showed a significant improvement in mean performance over the CI-alone configuration in quiet (p = .04). In noise, SRTs were obtained for six subjects, and no significant bimodal benefit was observed (p = .09). There were no consistent effects of occlusion observed across subjects and stimulus conditions. Degree of bimodal benefit showed a significant relationship with performance with the CI alone, with greater bimodal benefit associated with poorer CI-alone performance (p = .01). This finding, however, was limited by floor effects. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that children with ANSD who are experienced cochlear implant users may benefit from contralateral amplification, particularly for moderate cochlear implant performers. It is unclear from these data whether long-term contralateral hearing aid use in real-world situations would ultimately benefit this population; however, a hearing aid trial is recommended with assessment of bimodal benefit over time. These data may help inform clinical guidelines for determining optimal hearing configurations for unilaterally implanted children with ANSD, particularly when considering candidacy for sequential cochlear implantation.

Should a Hearing Aid in the Contralateral Ear Be Recommended for Children with a Unilateral Cochlear Implant?

2008 ◽  
Vol 117 (6) ◽  
pp. 397-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan-Willem Beijen ◽  
Emmanuel A. M. Mylanus ◽  
A. Rens Leeuw ◽  
Ad F. M. Snik
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Contralateral Ear

scholarly journals Speech and Sound Quality Recognition in Adults Bimodal Cochlear Implant Listeners

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-205
Author(s):  
Leehwa Park ◽  
Soo Hee Oh
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Pressure ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
Pressure Level ◽  
Story Comprehension ◽  
Monosyllabic Word ◽  
Quality Dimensions ◽  
Basic Evaluation

Purpose: Recent bimodal studies identified a lack of bimodal evaluation and fitting protocols to improve bimodal benefits. The purpose of this study is to measure bimodal benefits in speech and sound quality recognition and identify bimodal fitting issues with adult cochlear implant listeners to establish bimodal fitting guidelines and evaluation protocol.Methods: A total of 20 adult cochlear implant users were participated in this study. The experimental procedures included basic evaluation, hearing aid evaluation, and bimodal benefits evaluation. In order to evaluate bimodal benefits, speech and sound quality recognition tests were performed. Matrix sentences in quiet and noise (5 and 10 dB sound pressure level), consonant-vowel-consonant words, and story comprehension tasks were provided. Participants judged sound qualities for six sound quality dimensions and a tester performed real ear measurements to verify hearing aid gains.Results: Results showed that bimodal listeners had some bimodal benefits in the sentence and monosyllabic word recognition in quiet. The benefits of sound quality judgments were also observed for six sound quality dimensions. Bimodal cochlear implant listeners of this study demonstrated less real-ear insertion gains than target gains across test frequencies.Conclusion: Speech and sound quality recognition tests are useful tools to measure bimodal benefits. Additional care for bimodal listeners is needed to optimize bimodal fitting and improve the quality of bimodal hearing aid fitting services.

scholarly journals An introductory overview of bimodal fitting

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahdieh Hasanalifard ◽  
Younes Lotfi ◽  
Abdollah Moossavi
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Residual Hearing ◽  
Sound Perception ◽  
Speech Perception In Noise ◽  
Musical Perception ◽  
Introductory Overview ◽  
Wide Range

Background and Aim: In a bimodal fitting, one ear is stimulated acoustically with a hearing aid and the other is stimulated electrically with a cochlear implant. This paper provides a brief summary of the concept of bimodal fitting, binaural hearing and its importance, the hearing benefits of binaural hearing in bimodal fitting, candidacy and hearing aid adjustment in bimodal fitting cases. Recent Findings: Researches have shown that bimodal fitting offers a wide range of hearing benefits over unilateral cochlear implants, such as better speech perception in noise, better musical perception, and a better understanding of pitch and tone perception and naturalness of sound perception. Conclusion: Considering the binaural hearing advantages in bimodal fitting users, it can be concluded that users of unilateral cochlear implants who have measurable residual hearing in their non-implanted ear can use a hearing aid in that ear and enjoy binaural hearing advantages. The hearing aid should be fitted in a way to complement the information obtained through cochlear implantation. Keywords: Bimodal fitting; cochlear implant; binaural hearing

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document