Simulated Critical Differences for Speech Reception Thresholds

Identifying Listeners Whose Speech Intelligibility Depends on a Quiet Extra Moment After a Sentence

PURPOSE

An extra moment after a sentence is spoken may be important for listeners with hearing loss to mentally repair misperceptions during listening. The current audiologic test battery cannot distinguish between a listener who repaired a misperception versus a listener who heard the speech accurately with no need for repair. This study aims to develop a behavioral method to identify individuals who are at risk for relying on a quiet moment after a sentence.

METHOD

Forty-three individuals with hearing loss (32 cochlear implant users, 11 hearing aid users) heard sentences that were followed by either 2 s of silence or 2 s of babble noise. Both high- and low-context sentences were used in the task.

RESULTS

Some individuals showed notable benefit in accuracy scores (particularly for high-context sentences) when given an extra moment of silent time following the sentence. This benefit was highly variable across individuals and sometimes absent altogether. However, the group-level patterns of results were mainly explained by the use of context and successful perception of the words preceding sentence-final words.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that some but not all individuals improve their speech recognition score by relying on a quiet moment after a sentence, and that this fragility of speech recognition cannot be assessed using one isolated utterance at a time. Reliance on a quiet moment to repair perceptions would potentially impede the perception of an upcoming utterance, making continuous communication in real-world scenarios difficult especially for individuals with hearing loss. The methods used in this study-along with some simple modifications if necessary-could potentially identify patients with hearing loss who retroactively repair mistakes by using clinically feasible methods that can ultimately lead to better patient-centered hearing health care.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21644801.

Efficient Adaptive Speech Reception Threshold Measurements Using Stochastic Approximation Algorithms

This study examines whether speech-in-noise tests that use adaptive procedures to assess a speech reception threshold in noise (SRT50n) can be optimized using stochastic approximation (SA) methods, especially in cochlear-implant (CI) users. A simulation model was developed that simulates intelligibility scores for words from sentences in noise for both CI users and normal-hearing (NH) listeners. The model was used in Monte Carlo simulations. Four different SA algorithms were optimized for use in both groups and compared with clinically used adaptive procedures. The simulation model proved to be valid, as its results agreed very well with existing experimental data. The four optimized SA algorithms all provided an efficient estimation of the SRT50n. They were equally accurate and produced smaller standard deviations (SDs) than the clinical procedures. In CI users, SRT50n estimates had a small bias and larger SDs than in NH listeners. At least 20 sentences per condition and an initial signal-to-noise ratio below the real SRT50n were required to ensure sufficient reliability. In CI users, bias and SD became unacceptably large for a maximum speech intelligibility score in quiet below 70%. In conclusion, SA algorithms with word scoring in adaptive speech-in-noise tests are applicable to various listeners, from CI users to NH listeners. In CI users, they lead to efficient estimation of the SRT50n as long as speech intelligibility in quiet is greater than 70%. SA procedures can be considered as a valid, more efficient, and alternative to clinical adaptive procedures currently used in CI users.

A Comparative Study of a Novel Adhesive Bone Conduction Device and Conventional Treatment Options for Conductive Hearing Loss

Objective:

To compare the audiological performance with the novel adhesive bone conduction hearing device (ADHEAR) to that with a passive bone conduction (BC) implant and to that with a bone conduction device (BCD) on a softband.

Study Design:

Prospective study in an acute setting, single-subject repeated measure in three situations: unaided, with conventional BCDs (passive implant or on softband), and with the ADHEAR.

Setting:

Tertiary referral center.

Patients:

Ten subjects with conductive hearing loss were evaluated with the ADHEAR. Five of these were users of a passive BC implant (Baha Attract with Baha4); five received a BCD (Baha4) on a softband for test purposes.

Intervention:

Use of non-invasive adhesive bone conduction system for the treatment of conductive hearing loss.

Main Outcome Measures:

Air and bone conduction thresholds, sound field thresholds, word recognition scores in quiet, and speech recognition thresholds in quiet and noise were assessed.

Results:

Users of the passive BC implant received comparable hearing benefit with the ADHEAR. The mean aided thresholds in sound field measurements and speech understanding in quiet and noise were similar, when subjects were evaluated either with the ADHEAR or the passive BC implant. The audiological outcomes for the non-implanted group were also comparable between the ADHEAR and the BCD on softband.

Conclusions:

Based on our initial data, the ADHEAR seems to be a suitable alternative for patients who need a hearing solution for conductive hearing loss but for medical reasons cannot or do not want to undergo surgery for a passive BC implant.