Listening-Related Fatigue in New and Experienced Adult Cochlear Implant Users

OBJECTIVES

Active listening in everyday settings is challenging and requires substantial mental effort, particularly in noisy settings. In some cases, effortful listening can lead to significant listening-related fatigue and negatively affect quality of life. However, our understanding of factors that affect the severity of fatigue is limited. Hearing aids and cochlear implants (CIs) can improve speech understanding and thus, potentially, reduce listening effort and fatigue. Some research supports this idea for adult hearing aid users with mild-to-moderate hearing loss, but similar work in CI users is very limited. This study examined (1) longitudinal changes in listening-related fatigue in new and established CI users, and (2) relationships between demographic and audiologic factors and preimplantation and postimplantation listening-related fatigue.

DESIGN

Participants included an experimental group of 48 adult CI candidates receiving either a unilateral implant (n = 46) or simultaneous, bilateral implants (n = 2) and a control group of 96 experienced (>12 months experience) adult CI users (50 unilateral, 46 bilateral). Listening-related fatigue was evaluated using the 40-item version of the Vanderbilt Fatigue Scale for Adults. Experimental group ratings were obtained before implantation and again at 0.5-, 1-, 2-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month(s) postactivation. Control group participants completed the scale twice-upon study entry and approximately 3 months later. Additional measures, including a social isolation and disconnectedness questionnaire, hearing handicap inventory, and the Effort Assessment Scale, were also administered at multiple time points. The role of these measures and select demographic and audiologic factors on preimplant and postimplant fatigue ratings were examined.

RESULTS

Adult CI candidates reported significantly more fatigue, greater self-perceived hearing handicap, greater listening effort, and more social isolation than experienced adult CI users. However, significant reductions in fatigue and effort were observed within 2 weeks postimplantation. By 3 months, there were no significant differences in fatigue, effort, hearing handicap, or social isolation between new CI recipients and experienced CI users. Secondary analyses revealed that age at onset of hearing loss (before or after 2 years of age) and subjective hearing handicap contributed significantly to the variance of preimplantation fatigue ratings (those with higher handicap reported higher fatigue). In contrast, variance in postimplantation fatigue ratings was not affected by age of hearing loss onset but was affected by gender (females reported more fatigue than males) and subjective ratings of effort, handicap, and isolation (those reporting more effort, handicap, and isolation reported more fatigue).

CONCLUSIONS

Listening-related fatigue is a significant problem for many CI candidates, as well as for many experienced unilateral and bilateral CI users. Receipt of a CI significantly reduced listening-related fatigue (as well as listening effort, hearing handicap, and social isolation) as soon as 2 weeks post-CI activation. However, the magnitude of fatigue-related issues for both CI candidates and experienced CI users varies widely. Audiologic factors, such as hearing loss severity and aided speech recognition, were not predictive of individual differences in listening-related fatigue. In contrast, strong associations were observed between perceived hearing handicap and listening-related fatigue in all groups suggesting fatigue-related issues may be a component of perceived hearing handicap.

Effects of Critical Distance and Reverberation on Listening Effort in Adults

PURPOSE

Mixed historical data on how listening effort is affected by reverberation and listener-to-speaker distance challenge existing models of listening effort. This study investigated the effects of reverberation and listener-to-speaker distance on behavioral and subjective measures of listening effort: (a) when listening at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and (b) at SNRs that were manipulated so that word recognition would be comparable across different reverberation times and listening distances. It was expected that increased reverberation would increase listening effort but only when listening outside critical distance.

METHOD

Nineteen adults (21-40 years) with no hearing loss completed a dual-task paradigm. The primary task was word recognition and the secondary task was timed word categorization; response times indexed behavioral listening effort. Additionally, participants provided subjective ratings in each condition. Testing was completed at two reverberation levels (moderate and high, RT₃₀ = 469 and 1,223 ms, respectively) and at two listener-to-speaker distances (inside and outside critical distance for the test room, 1.25 and 4 m, respectively).

RESULTS

Increased reverberation and listening distances worsened word recognition performance and both behavioral and subjective listening effort. The effect of reverberation was exacerbated when listeners were outside critical distance. Subjective experience of listening effort persisted even when word recognition was comparable across conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Longer reverberation times or listening outside the room's critical distance negatively affected behavioral and subjective listening effort. This study extends understanding of listening effort in reverberant rooms by highlighting the effect of listener's position relative to the room's critical distance.

Applying the Hearing Aid Fitting Standard to Selection for Adults

The recent hearing aid fitting standard for adults outlines the minimum practice for audiologists fitting adult patients with hearing loss. This article focuses on three items of the standard (5, 6, and 7), which focus on the selection of unilateral/bilateral hearing aids, hearing aid style, and coupling, in addition to feature selection. The standard emphasizes that decisions around these three aspects should be recommended for a patient in an individualized manner, based on their needs assessment. For these decisions, the needs assessment might include measures of speech-in-noise ability, social network size, patient preference, and a trial period. Additional elements could include assessments of manual dexterity, binaural interference, and attitude toward hearing aids. However, there are a multitude of ways to practice clinically and still meet the items outlined in the standard. As long as the selection decisions consider individualized patient factors and are capable of meeting validated prescriptive targets, a clinician would be meeting the adult hearing aid fitting minimum standard guidance. In addition, despite the large number of past studies supporting these standards, additional, high-quality research including randomized, controlled, clinical trials are still needed to further support appropriate minimum standard recommendations.

Evaluating Risk of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in Otologic Surgery

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate risk for noise-induced hearing damage from otologic surgery-related noise exposure, given recent research indicating that noise levels previously believed to be safe and without long-term consequence may result in cochlear synaptopathy with subsequent degeneration of spiral ganglion neurons, degradation of neural transmission in response to suprathreshold acoustic stimuli, and difficulty understanding in background noise.

METHODS

A prospective observational study of surgeon noise exposure during otologic and neurotologic procedures was performed in a tertiary care center. Surgeon noise exposure was recorded in A- and C-weighted decibel scales (dBA, dBC), including average equivalent (LA_eq) and peak (LA_peak, LC_peak) levels and noise dose.

RESULTS

Sound measurements taken at the ear with continuous recording equipment during cadaveric otologic surgery demonstrated LA_eq 80-83 dBA, LA_peaks of 105 dBA, LC_peaks of 127 dBC, with noise doses of 0.9% to 6.7%. Sound level measurements during live surgery translabyrinthine approaches yielded lower LAeq of 72 to 74 dBA and lower noise doses compared with temporal bone lab measurements. Raw sound recordings during live surgery demonstrated narrow band, high frequency, high amplitude spikes between 4 and 12 kHz.

CONCLUSION

Noise exposure to surgeons, staff, and patients in the operating room is acceptable per NIOSH recommendations. Temporal bone lab noise exposures are greater, possibly due to poorly maintained drill systems and lack of noise shielding from microscope bulk, yet are also within NIOSH recommended levels.

Symmetrical and asymmetrical directional benefits are present for talkers at the front and side

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the study was to examine the effects of symmetrical and asymmetrical directional microphone settings on speech recognition, localisation and microphone preference in listening conditions with on- and off-axis talkers.

DESIGN

A within-subjects repeated-measure evaluation of three hearing aid microphone settings (bilateral omnidirectional, bilateral directional, asymmetrical directional) was completed in a moderately reverberant laboratory. An exploratory analysis of the potential relationship between microphone preference and unaided measures was also completed.

STUDY SAMPLE

Twenty adult listeners with mild to moderately severe bilateral hearing loss participated.

RESULTS

The directional and asymmetric microphone settings resulted in equivalent benefits for sentence recognition in noise, word recall, and localisation speed regardless of the speech loudspeaker location (on- or off-axis). However, localisation accuracy was significantly worse with the asymmetric fitting than the directional setting when speech was presented from the rear hemisphere. Listeners who always preferred directional microphones had significantly poorer unaided speech recognition than those who preferred the omnidirectional setting for one or more listening condition.

CONCLUSIONS

Benefits from directional and asymmetric processing were small in the current study, but generally similar to each other. Unaided speech recognition in noise performance may have utility as a clinical predictor of preference for directional processing.

Individual Differences Offer Insight Into Clinical Recommendations for Directional and Remote Microphone Technology Use in Children

Purpose This study sought to evaluate the effects of common hearing aid microphone technologies on speech recognition and listening effort, and to evaluate potential predictive factors related to microphone benefits for school-age children with hearing loss in a realistic listening situation. Method Children (n = 17, ages 10-17 years) with bilateral, sensorineural hearing loss were fitted with hearing aids set to include three programs: omnidirectional, adaptive directional, and omnidirectional + remote microphone. Children completed a dual-task paradigm in a moderately reverberant room. The primary task included monosyllabic word recognition, with target speech presented at 60 dB A from 0° (front) or 180° (back) azimuth. The secondary task was a "go/no-go," visual shape-recognition task. Multitalker babble noise created a +5 dB SNR. Children were evaluated in two speaker conditions (front, back) using all three hearing aid programs. The remote microphone transmitter remained at the front speaker throughout testing. Speech recognition performance was calculated from the primary task while listening effort was measured as response time during the secondary task. Results Speech presented from the back significantly increased listening effort and caused a reduction in speech perception when directional and remote microphones were used. Considerable variability was found in pattern of benefit across microphones and source location. Clinical measures did not predict benefit patterns with directional or remote microphones; however, child age and performance with omnidirectional microphones did. Conclusions When compared to a traditional omnidirectional setting, the directional and remote microphone configurations evaluated in this study have the potential to provide benefit for some children and increase difficulty for others when used in dynamic environments. A child's performance with omnidirectional hearing aids could be used to better inform clinical recommendations for these technologies.

Central auditory system responses from children while listening to speech in noise

Cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) have been successfully used to explore the effects of noise on speech processing at the cortical level in adults and children. The purpose of this study was to determine whether +15 dB signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), often recommended for optimal speech perception in children, elicit higher amplitude CAEPs than more realistic SNRs encountered by children during their daily lives (+10 dB SNR). Moreover, we aimed to investigate whether cortical speech categorization is observable in children in quiet and in noise and whether CAEPs to speech in noise are related to behavioral speech perception in noise performance in children. CAEPs were measured during a passive speech-syllable task in 51 normal hearing children aged 8 to 11 years. The speech syllables /da/ and /ga/ were presented in quiet and in the presence of a 4-talker-babble noise at +15 dB and +10 dB SNR. N1 latencies and P2 amplitudes and latencies varied as a function of SNR, with poorer SNRs (+10 dB) eliciting significantly smaller P2 amplitudes and delayed N1 and P2 latencies relative to the higher SNR (+15 dB). Finally, speech categorization was present at the cortical level in this group of children in quiet and at both SNRs; however, N1 and P2 amplitudes and latencies were not related to behavioral speech-in-noise perception of children.

Directional Benefit in the Presence of Speech and Speechlike Maskers

Recent research suggests that omnidirectional hearing aids are relatively ineffective at improving speech understanding in everyday conversational speech settings when the background noise contains both energetic and informational masking components. Energetic masking refers to situations where the peripheral (or neural) activity of the target is less than that of the masker, thus making the target inaudible. In contrast, informational masking effects, in this paper, refer to additional masking effects that are not energetic in nature. The current study evaluated the benefits of directional technology in the presence of background noises that contained both energetic and informational masking components. Aided speech recognition (in both omnidirectional and directional modes) was assessed in the presence of three types of maskers (forward and reversed speech and speech-modulated noise) that varied in the amount of informational masking they were expected to produce. Study results showed significant directional benefit in all conditions. This finding suggests that in everyday conversational speech environments, directional technology is equally efficacious regardless of the magnitude of informational masking present in the background noise. In addition, study findings suggest that the semantic information present in the masking speech may play only a limited role in contributing to informational masking in everyday environments. Investigaciones recientes sugieren que los auxiliares auditivos omnidireccionales son relativamente ineficientes en cuanto a mejorar la comprensión del lenguaje en condiciones cotidianas de conversación, cuando el ruido de fondo contiene componentes de enmascaramiento tanto energéticos como de información. El enmascaramiento energético se refiere a situaciones donde la actividad periférica (o neural) de la señal meta es menor que aquella del enmascarador, haciendo la señal inaudible. En contraste, los efectos de enmascaramiento de información, se refieren a efectos de enmascaramiento adicional, que no son de naturaleza energética. El estudio actual evaluó los beneficios de la tecnología direccional en presencia de ruidos de fondo que contenían tanto componentes de enmascaramiento energético como de información. Se evaluó el reconocimiento amplificado del lenguaje (tanto en el modo omnidireccional como direccional) en presencia de tres tipos de ruidos enmascarantes (lenguaje anterógrado y reverso, y ruido de lenguaje modulado), con variaciones en la cantidad de enmascaramiento de información que debían producir. Los resultados del estudio mostraron un beneficio direccional significativo en todas las condiciones. Este hallazgo sugiere que en ambientes cotidianos de conversación, la tecnología direccional es igualmente eficiente, independientemente de la magnitud del enmascaramiento de información presente en el ruido de fondo. Además, los hallazgos del estudio sugieren que la información semántica presente en el lenguaje enmascarante puede jugar solamente un papel limitado, en ambientes cotidianos, en su contribución como enmascaramiento de información.

Sound Quality Measures for Speech in Noise through a Commercial Hearing Aid Implementing "Digital Noise Reduction"

This brief report discusses the affect of digital noise reduction (DNR) processing on aided speech recognition and sound quality measures in 14 adults fitted with a commercial hearing aid. Measures of speech recognition and sound quality were obtained in two different speech-in-noise conditions (71 dBA speech, +6 dB SNR and 75 dBA speech, +1 dB SNR). The results revealed that the presence or absence of DNR processing did not impact speech recognition in noise (either positively or negatively). Paired comparisons of sound quality for the same speech in noise signals, however, revealed a strong preference for DNR processing. These data suggest that at least one implementation of DNR processing is capable of providing improved sound quality, for speech in noise, in the absence of improved speech recognition.

The Effect of Digital Phase Cancellation Feedback Reduction Systems on Amplified Sound Quality

The effect of feedback reduction (FBR) systems on sound quality recorded from two commercially available hearing aids was evaluated using paired comparison judgments by 16 participants with mild to severe sloping hearing loss. These comparisons were made with the FBR systems on and off without audible feedback and while attempting to control for differences in gain and clinical fitting factors. Wilcoxon signed rank test analyses showed that the participants were unable to differentiate between signals that had been recorded with the FBR systems on and off within the same hearing aid. However, significant between-instrument differences in sound quality were identified. The results support the activation of the FFT-phase cancellation FBR systems evaluated herein without concern for a noticeable degradation of sound quality. Se evaluó el efecto de los sistemas de reducción de la retroalimentaciñn (FBR) sobre la calidad del sonido registrado por medio de dos auxiliaries auditivos disponibles comercialmente, utilizando juicios de comparación en pares, de 16 participantes con una hipocusia leve a moderada de pendiente pronunciada. Estas comparaciones se realizaron con los sistemas FBR apagados y encendidos, sin retroalimentación audible y tratando de controlar las diferencias en cuanto a ganancia y a factores clínicos de adaptación. Los análisis de pruebas de rango certificados por Wilcoxon mostraron que los participantes no podian diferenciar entre señales que habian sido registradas con los sistemas de FBR encendidos o apagados dentro del mismo auxiliar auditivo. Los resultados apoyan la activación de los sistemas de FBR de cancelación de fase FFT, aqui evaluados, sin preocupaciones por una degradación identificable en la calidad del sonido.

Hearing Technology Use and Management in School-Age Children: Reports from Data Logs, Parents, and Teachers

Background: Consistency of hearing aid and remote microphone system use declines as school-age children with hearing loss age. One indicator of hearing aid use time is data logging, another is parent report. Recent data suggest that parents overestimate their children’s hearing aid use time relative to data logging. The potential reasons for this disparity remain unclear. Because school-age children spend the majority of their day away from their parents and with their teachers, reports from teachers might serve as a valuable and additional tool for estimating hearing aid use time and management.

Purpose: This study expands previous research on factors influencing hearing aid use time in school-age children using data logging records. Discrepancies between data logging records and parent reports were explored using custom surveys designed for parents and teachers. Responses from parents and teachers were used to examine hearing aid use, remote microphone system use, and hearing aid management in school-age children.

Study Sample: Thirteen children with mild-to-moderate hearing loss between the ages of 7 and 10 yr and their parents participated in this study. Teachers of ten of these children also participated.

Data Collection and Analysis: Parents and teachers of children completed written surveys about each child’s hearing aid use, remote microphone system use, and hearing aid management skills. Data logs were read from hearing aids using manufacturer’s software. Multiple linear regression analysis and an intraclass correlation coefficient were used to examine factors influencing hearing aid use time and parent agreement with data logs. Parent report of hearing aid use time was compared across various activities and school and nonschool days. Survey responses from parents and teachers were compared to explore areas requiring potential improvement in audiological counseling.

Results: Average daily hearing aid use time was ˜6 hr per day as recorded with data logging technology. Children exhibiting greater degrees of hearing loss and those with poorer vocabulary were more likely to use hearing aids consistently than children with less hearing loss and better vocabulary. Parents overestimated hearing aid use by ˜1 hr per day relative to data logging records. Parent-reported use of hearing aids varied across activities but not across school and nonschool days. Overall, parents and teachers showed excellent agreement on hearing aid and remote microphone system use during school instruction but poor agreement when asked about the child’s ability to manage their hearing devices independently.

Conclusions: Parental reports of hearing aid use in young school-age children are largely consistent with data logging records and with teacher reports of hearing aid use in the classroom. Audiologists might find teacher reports helpful in learning more about children’s hearing aid management and remote microphone system use during their time at school. This supplementary information can serve as an additional counseling tool to facilitate discussion about remote microphone system use and hearing aid management in school-age children with hearing loss.

Efficacy of Hearing-Aid Based Telephone Strategies for Listeners with Moderate-to-Severe Hearing Loss

Background: Understanding speech over the telephone when listening in noisy environments may present a significant challenge for listeners with moderate-to-severe hearing loss.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare speech recognition and subjective ratings across several hearing aid-based telephone listening strategies for individuals with moderate-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss.

Research Design: Speech recognition and subjective ratings were evaluated for a simulated telephone signal. The strategies evaluated included acoustic telephone, unilateral telecoil, unilateral wireless streaming, and bilateral wireless streaming. Participants were seated in a noisy room for all evaluations.

Study Sample: Eighteen adults, aged 49–88 yr, with moderate-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss participated.

Data Collection and Analysis: Speech recognition scores on the Connected Speech Test were converted to rationalized arcsine units and analyzed using analysis of variance testing and Tukey post hoc analyses. Subjective ratings of ease and comfort were also analyzed in this manner.

Results: Speech recognition performance was poorest with acoustic coupling to the telephone and best with bilateral wireless routing. Telecoil coupling resulted in better speech recognition performance than acoustic coupling, but was significantly poorer than bilateral wireless routing. Furthermore, unilateral wireless routing and telecoil coupling generally led to similar speech recognition performance, except in lower-level background noise conditions, for which unilateral routing resulted in better performance than the telecoil.

Conclusions: For people with moderate-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss, acoustic telephone listening with a hearing aid may not lead to acceptable performance in noise. Although unilateral routing options (telecoil and wireless streaming) improved performance, speech recognition performance and subjective ratings of ease and comfort were best when bilateral wireless routing was used. These results suggest that wireless routing is a potentially beneficial telephone listening strategy for listeners with moderate-to-severe hearing loss who are fitted with limited venting if the telephone signal is routed to both ears. Unilateral wireless routing may provide similar benefits to traditional unilateral telecoil. However, the newer wireless systems may have the advantage for some listeners in that they do not include some of the positioning constraints associated with telecoil use.

Degree of Hearing Loss Affects Bilateral Hearing Aid Benefits in Ecologically Relevant Laboratory Conditions

Purpose Previous evidence supports benefits of bilateral hearing aids, relative to unilateral hearing aid use, in laboratory environments using audio-only (AO) stimuli and relatively simple tasks. The purpose of this study was to evaluate bilateral hearing aid benefits in ecologically relevant laboratory settings, with and without visual cues. In addition, we evaluated the relationship between bilateral benefit and clinically viable predictive variables. Method Participants included 32 adult listeners with hearing loss ranging from mild-moderate to severe-profound. Test conditions varied by hearing aid fitting type (unilateral, bilateral) and modality (AO, audiovisual). We tested participants in complex environments that evaluated the following domains: sentence recognition, word recognition, behavioral listening effort, gross localization, and subjective ratings of spatialization. Signal-to-noise ratio was adjusted to provide similar unilateral speech recognition performance in both modalities and across procedures. Results Significant and similar bilateral benefits were measured for both modalities on all tasks except listening effort, where bilateral benefits were not identified in either modality. Predictive variables were related to bilateral benefits in some conditions. With audiovisual stimuli, increasing hearing loss, unaided speech recognition in noise, and unaided subjective spatial ability were significantly correlated with increased benefits for many outcomes. With AO stimuli, these same predictive variables were not significantly correlated with outcomes. No predictive variables were correlated with bilateral benefits for sentence recognition in either modality. Conclusions Hearing aid users can expect significant bilateral hearing aid advantages for ecologically relevant, complex laboratory tests. Although future confirmatory work is necessary, these data indicate the presence of vision strengthens the relationship between bilateral benefits and degree of hearing loss.

Moderate Reverberation Does Not Increase Subjective Fatigue, Subjective Listening Effort, or Behavioral Listening Effort in School-Aged Children

Background noise and reverberation levels in typical classrooms have negative effects on speech recognition, but their effects on listening effort and fatigue are less well understood. Based on the Framework for Understanding Effortful Listening, noise and reverberation would be expected to increase both listening effort and fatigue. However, previous investigations of the effects of reverberation for adults have resulted in mixed findings. Some discrepancies in the literature might be accounted for by methodological differences; behavioral and subjective indices of listening effort do not often align in adults. The effects of sustained listening on self-reported fatigue in school-aged children are also not well understood. The purposes of this project were to (1) evaluate the effects of noise and reverberation on listening effort in school-aged children using behavioral and subjective measures, (2) compare subjective and behavioral indices of listening effort, and (3) evaluate the effects of reverberation on self-reported fatigue. Twenty typically developing children (10-17 years old) participated. Participants completed dual-task testing in two rooms that varied in terms of reverberation, an audiometric sound booth and a moderately reverberant room. In each room, testing was completed in quiet and in two levels of background noise. Participants provided subjective ratings of listening effort after completing the dual-task in each listening condition. Subjective ratings of fatigue were completed before and after testing in each level of reverberation. Results revealed background noise, not reverberation, increased behavioral and subjective listening effort. Subjective ratings of perceived performance, ease of listening, and desire to control the listening situation revealed a similar pattern of results as word recognition performance, making them poor candidates for providing an indication of behavioral listening effort. However, ratings of time perception were moderately correlated with behavioral listening effort. Finally, sustained listening for approximately 25 min increased self-reported fatigue, although changes in fatigue were comparable in low and moderately reverberant environments. In total, these data offer no evidence that a moderate level of reverberation increases listening effort or fatigue, but the data do support the reduction of background noise in classrooms.

Musician and Nonmusician Hearing Aid Setting Preferences for Music and Speech Stimuli

Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate potential group differences between musicians and nonmusicians in their self-adjusted (SA) gain and compression settings for both music and speech stimuli. Speech recognition, sound quality, and strength of preference for the SA settings and the original prescriptive (National Acoustic Laboratories-Nonlinear 2 [NAL-NL2]) settings were also compared. Method Participants included 12 musician ( M = 60 years) and 12 nonmusician ( M = 55 years) adult hearing aid users with mild-moderate hearing loss, on average. Self-adjustments were made to hearing aid gain and compression settings for 2 music stimuli and a speech stimulus. Speech recognition in quiet and noise, sound quality for 6 dimensions (clarity, pleasantness, naturalness, fullness, brightness, and overall impression), and strength of preference ratings using paired comparisons were then assessed at both the NAL-NL2 settings and the participants' SA settings. Results On average, self-adjustments made by both groups were quite small (< 5 dB for gain and < 0.5 for compression ratio). Furthermore, SA changes to gain and compression ratio were not significantly different for musicians versus nonmusicians or for music versus speech. Finally, speech perception performance and sound quality ratings did not differ for the SA settings versus the NAL-NL2 settings, with the exception of the naturalness sound quality dimension. Conclusions These data suggest that a gain-frequency response specific to musicians and/or music inputs may not be necessary. Thus, current, validated prescriptive methods continue to be well supported as an appropriate starting place for listeners with mild-moderate hearing loss using open hearing aid fittings.

Do Modern Hearing Aids Meet ANSI Standards?

BACKGROUND

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) provides standards used to govern standardization of all hearing aids. If hearing aids do not meet specifications, there are potential negative implications for hearing aid users, professionals, and the industry. Recent literature has not investigated the proportion of new hearing aids in compliance with the ANSI specifications for quality control standards when they arrive in the clinic before dispensing.

PURPOSE

The aims of this study were to determine the percentage of new hearing aids compliant with the relevant ANSI standard and to report trends in electroacoustic analysis data.

RESEARCH DESIGN

New hearing aids were evaluated for quality control via the ANSI S3.22-2009 standard. In addition, quality control of directional processing was also assessed.

STUDY SAMPLE

Seventy-three behind-the-ear hearing aids from four major manufacturers, that were purchased for clinical patients were evaluated before dispensing.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Audioscan Verifit (version 3.1) hearing instrument fitting system was used to complete electroacoustic analysis and directional processing evaluation of the hearing aids. Frye's Fonix 8000 test box system (Fonix 8000) was also used to cross-check equivalent input noise (EIN) measurements. These measurements were then analyzed for trends across brands and specifications.

RESULTS

All of the hearing aids evaluated were found to be out of specification for at least one measure. EIN and attack and release times were the measures most frequently out of specification. EIN was found to be affected by test box isolation for two of the four brands tested. Systematic discrepancies accounted for ∼93% of the noncompliance issues, while unsystematic quality control issues accounted for the remaining 7%.

CONCLUSIONS

The high number of systematic discrepancies between the data collected and the specifications published by the manufacturers suggests there are clear issues related to the specific protocols used for quality control testing. These issues present a significant barrier for hearing aid dispensers when attempting to accurately determine if a hearing aid is functioning appropriately. The significant number of unsystematic discrepancies supports the continued importance of quality control measures of new and repaired hearing aids to ensure that the device is functioning properly before it is dispensed and to avoid future negative implications of fitting a faulty device.

An Evaluation of Hearing Aid Beamforming Microphone Arrays in a Noisy Laboratory Setting

BACKGROUND

People with hearing loss experience difficulty understanding speech in noisy environments. Beamforming microphone arrays in hearing aids can improve the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and thus also speech recognition and subjective ratings. Unilateral beamformer arrays, also known as directional microphones, accomplish this improvement using two microphones in one hearing aid. Bilateral beamformer arrays, which combine information across four microphones in a bilateral fitting, further improve the SNR. Early bilateral beamformers were static with fixed attenuation patterns. Recently adaptive, bilateral beamformers have been introduced in commercial hearing aids.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article was to evaluate the potential benefits of adaptive unilateral and bilateral beamformers for improving sentence recognition and subjective ratings in a laboratory setting. A secondary purpose was to identify potential participant factors that explain some of the variability in beamformer benefit.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Participants were fitted with study hearing aids equipped with commercially available adaptive unilateral and bilateral beamformers. Participants completed sentence recognition testing in background noise using three hearing aid settings (omnidirectional, unilateral beamformer, bilateral beamformer) and two noise source configurations (surround, side). After each condition, participants made subjective ratings of their perceived work, desire to control the situation, willingness to give up, and tiredness.

STUDY SAMPLE

Eighteen adults (50-80 yr, M = 66.2, σ = 8.6) with symmetrical mild sloping to severe hearing loss participated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Sentence recognition scores and subjective ratings were analyzed separately using generalized linear models with two within-subject factors (hearing aid microphone and noise configuration). Two benefit scores were calculated: (1) unilateral beamformer benefit (relative to performance with omnidirectional) and (2) additional bilateral beamformer benefit (relative to performance with unilateral beamformer). Hierarchical multiple linear regression was used to determine if beamformer benefit was associated with participant factors (age, degree of hearing loss, unaided speech in noise ability, spatial release from masking, and performance in omnidirectional).

RESULTS

Sentence recognition and subjective ratings of work, control, and tiredness were better with both types of beamformers relative to the omnidirectional conditions. In addition, the bilateral beamformer offered small additional improvements relative to the unilateral beamformer in terms of sentence recognition and subjective ratings of tiredness. Speech recognition performance and subjective ratings were generally independent of noise configuration. Performance in the omnidirectional setting and pure-tone average were independently related to unilateral beamformer benefits. Those with the lowest performance or the largest degree of hearing loss benefited the most. No factors were significantly related to additional bilateral beamformer benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

Adaptive bilateral beamformers offer additional advantages over adaptive unilateral beamformers in hearing aids. The small additional advantages with the adaptive beamformer are comparable to those reported in the literature with static beamformers. Although the additional benefits are small, they positively affected subjective ratings of tiredness. These data suggest that adaptive bilateral beamformers have the potential to improve listening in difficult situations for hearing aid users. In addition, patients who struggle the most without beamforming microphones may also benefit the most from the technology.

Hearing, Emotion, Amplification, Research, and Training Workshop: Current Understanding of Hearing Loss and Emotion Perception and Priorities for Future Research

The question of how hearing loss and hearing rehabilitation affect patients' momentary emotional experiences is one that has received little attention but has considerable potential to affect patients' psychosocial function. This article is a product from the Hearing, Emotion, Amplification, Research, and Training workshop, which was convened to develop a consensus document describing research on emotion perception relevant for hearing research. This article outlines conceptual frameworks for the investigation of emotion in hearing research; available subjective, objective, neurophysiologic, and peripheral physiologic data acquisition research methods; the effects of age and hearing loss on emotion perception; potential rehabilitation strategies; priorities for future research; and implications for clinical audiologic rehabilitation. More broadly, this article aims to increase awareness about emotion perception research in audiology and to stimulate additional research on the topic.

Child-Adult Differences in Using Dual-Task Paradigms to Measure Listening Effort

PURPOSE

The purpose of the project was to investigate the effects modifying the secondary task in a dual-task paradigm to measure objective listening effort. To be specific, the complexity and depth of processing were increased relative to a simple secondary task.

METHOD

Three dual-task paradigms were developed for school-age children. The primary task was word recognition. The secondary task was a physical response to a visual probe (simple task), a physical response to a complex probe (increased complexity), or word categorization (increased depth of processing). Sixteen adults (22-32 years, M = 25.4) and 22 children (9-17 years, M = 13.2) were tested using the 3 paradigms in quiet and noise.

RESULTS

For both groups, manipulations of the secondary task did not affect word recognition performance. For adults, increasing depth of processing increased the calculated effect of noise; however, for children, results with the deep secondary task were the least stable.

CONCLUSIONS

Manipulations of the secondary task differentially affected adults and children. Consistent with previous findings, increased depth of processing enhanced paradigm sensitivity for adults. However, younger participants were more likely to demonstrate the expected effects of noise on listening effort using a secondary task that did not require deep processing.

Directional Microphone Hearing Aids in School Environments: Working Toward Optimization

PURPOSE

The hearing aid microphone setting (omnidirectional or directional) can be selected manually or automatically. This study examined the percentage of time the microphone setting selected using each method was judged to provide the best signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for the talkers of interest in school environments.

METHOD

A total of 26 children (aged 6-17 years) with hearing loss were fitted with study hearing aids and evaluated during 2 typical school days. Time-stamped hearing aid settings were compared with observer judgments of the microphone setting that provided the best SNR on the basis of the specific listening environment.

RESULTS

Despite training for appropriate use, school-age children were unlikely to consistently manually switch to the microphone setting that optimized SNR. Furthermore, there was only fair agreement between the observer judgments and the hearing aid setting chosen by the automatic switching algorithm. Factors contributing to disagreement included the hearing aid algorithm choosing the directional setting when the talker was not in front of the listener or when noise arrived only from the front quadrant and choosing the omnidirectional setting when the noise level was low.

CONCLUSION

Consideration of listener preferences, talker position, sound level, and other factors in the classroom may be necessary to optimize microphone settings.

The Effects of Directional Processing on Objective and Subjective Listening Effort

PURPOSE

The purposes of this investigation were (a) to evaluate the effects of hearing aid directional processing on subjective and objective listening effort and (b) to investigate the potential relationships between subjective and objective measures of effort.

METHOD

Sixteen adults with mild to severe hearing loss were tested with study hearing aids programmed with 3 settings: omnidirectional, fixed directional, and bilateral beamformer. A dual-task paradigm and subjective ratings were used to assess objective and subjective listening effort, respectively, in 2 signal-to-noise ratios. Testing occurred in rooms with either low or moderate reverberation.

RESULTS

Directional processing improved subjective and objective listening effort, although benefit for objective effort was found only in moderate reverberation. Subjective reports of work and tiredness were more highly correlated with word recognition performance than objective listening effort. However, subjective ratings about control were significantly correlated with objective listening effort.

CONCLUSIONS

Directional microphone technology in hearing aids has the potential to improve listening effort in moderately reverberant environments. In addition, subjective questions that probe a listener's desire to exercise control may be a viable method for eliciting ratings that are significantly related to objective listening effort.

Evaluation of the effects of nonlinear frequency compression on speech recognition and sound quality for adults with mild to moderate hearing loss

OBJECTIVE

While potentially improving audibility for listeners with considerable high frequency hearing loss, the effects of implementing nonlinear frequency compression (NFC) for listeners with moderate high frequency hearing loss are unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of activating NFC for listeners who are not traditionally considered candidates for this technology.

DESIGN

Participants wore study hearing aids with NFC activated for a 3-4 week trial period. After the trial period, they were tested with NFC and with conventional processing on measures of consonant discrimination threshold in quiet, consonant recognition in quiet, sentence recognition in noise, and acceptableness of sound quality of speech and music.

STUDY SAMPLE

Seventeen adult listeners with symmetrical, mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss participated. Better ear, high frequency pure-tone averages (4, 6, and 8 kHz) were 60 dB HL or better.

RESULTS

Activating NFC resulted in lower (better) thresholds for discrimination of /s/, whose spectral center was 9 kHz. There were no other significant effects of NFC compared to conventional processing.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that the benefits, and detriments, of activating NFC may be limited for this population.

Test-retest reliability of probe-microphone verification in children fitted with open and closed hearing aid tips

PURPOSE

To investigate the test-retest reliability of real-ear aided response (REAR) measures in open and closed hearing aid fittings in children using appropriate probe-microphone calibration techniques (stored equalization for open fittings and concurrent equalization for closed fittings).

RESEARCH DESIGN

Probe-microphone measurements were completed for two mini-behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids which were coupled to the ear using open and closed eartips via thin (0.9 mm) tubing. Before probe-microphone testing, the gain of each of the test hearing aids was programmed using an artificial ear simulator (IEC 711) and a Knowles Electronic Manikin for Acoustic Research to match the National Acoustic Laboratories-Non-Linear, version 1 targets for one of two separate hearing loss configurations using an Audioscan Verifit. No further adjustments were made, and the same amplifier gain was used within each hearing aid across both eartip configurations and all participants. Probe-microphone testing included real-ear occluded response (REOR) and REAR measures using the Verifit's standard speech signal (the carrot passage) presented at 65 dB sound pressure level (SPL). Two repeated probe-microphone measures were made for each participant with the probe-tube and hearing aid removed and repositioned between each trial in order to assess intrasubject measurement variability. These procedures were repeated using both open and closed domes.

STUDY SAMPLE

Thirty-two children, ages ranging from 4 to 14 yr.

RESULTS

The test-retest standard deviations for open and closed measures did not exceed 4 dB at any frequency. There was also no significant difference between the open (stored equalization) and closed (concurrent equalization) methods. Reliability was particularly similar in the high frequencies and was also quite similar to that reported in previous research. There was no correlation between reliability and age, suggesting high reliability across all ages evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this study suggest that reliable probe-microphone measurements are obtainable on children 4 yr and older for both traditional unvented and open-canal hearing aid fittings. These data suggest that clinicians should not avoid fitting open technology to children as young as 4 y because of concerns regarding the reliability of verification techniques.

Visual cues and listening effort: individual variability

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of visual cues on listening effort as well as whether predictive variables such as working memory capacity (WMC) and lipreading ability affect the magnitude of listening effort.

METHOD

Twenty participants with normal hearing were tested using a paired-associates recall task in 2 conditions (quiet and noise) and 2 presentation modalities (audio only [AO] and auditory-visual [AV]). Signal-to-noise ratios were adjusted to provide matched speech recognition across audio-only and AV noise conditions. Also measured were subjective perceptions of listening effort and 2 predictive variables: (a) lipreading ability and (b) WMC.

RESULTS

Objective and subjective results indicated that listening effort increased in the presence of noise, but on average the addition of visual cues did not significantly affect the magnitude of listening effort. Although there was substantial individual variability, on average participants who were better lipreaders or had larger WMCs demonstrated reduced listening effort in noise in AV conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the results support the hypothesis that integrating auditory and visual cues requires cognitive resources in some participants. The data indicate that low lipreading ability or low WMC is associated with relatively effortful integration of auditory and visual information in noise.

Dispensing rates of four common hearing aid product features: associations with variations in practice among audiologists

The purpose of the study was to develop and examine a list of potential variables that may account for variability in the dispensing rates of four common hearing aid features. A total of 29 potential variables were identified and placed into the following categories: (1) characteristics of the audiologist, (2) characteristics of the hearing aids dispensed by the audiologist, (3) characteristics of the audiologist's patient population, and (4) evidence-based practice grades of recommendation for each feature. The potentially associative variables then were examined using regression analyses from the responses of 257 audiologists to a dispensing practice survey. There was a direct relation between price and level of hearing aid technology with the frequency of dispensing product features. There was also a direct relation between the belief by the audiologist that a feature might benefit patients and the frequency of dispensing that feature. In general, the results suggested that personal differences among audiologists and the hearing aids audiologists choose to dispense are related more strongly to dispensing rates of product features than to differences in characteristics of the patient population served by audiologists. An additional finding indicated that evidence-based practice recommendations were inversely related to dispensing rates of product features. This finding, however, may not be the result of dispensing trends as much as hearing aid manufacturing trends.

Statistically derived factors of varied importance to audiologists when making a hearing aid brand preference decision

PURPOSE

To determine the amount of importance audiologists place on various items related to their selection of a preferred hearing aid brand manufacturer.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Three hundred forty-three hearing aid-dispensing audiologists rated a total of 32 randomized items by survey methodology.

RESULTS

Principle component analysis identified seven orthogonal statistical factors of importance. In rank order, these factors were Aptitude of the Brand, Image, Cost, Sales and Speed of Delivery, Exposure, Colleague Recommendations, and Contracts and Incentives. While it was hypothesized that differences among audiologists in the importance ratings of these factors would dictate their preference for a given brand, that was not our finding. Specifically, mean ratings for the six most important factors did not differ among audiologists preferring different brands. A statistically significant difference among audiologists preferring different brands was present, however, for one factor: Contracts and Incentives. Its assigned importance, though, was always lower than that for the other six factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most audiologists have a preferred hearing aid brand, differences in the perceived importance of common factors attributed to brands do not largely determine preference for a particular brand.

High-frequency amplification and sound quality in listeners with normal through moderate hearing loss

PURPOSE

One factor that has been shown to greatly affect sound quality is audible bandwidth. Provision of gain for frequencies above 4-6 kHz has not generally been supported for groups of hearing aid wearers. The purpose of this study was to determine if preference for bandwidth extension in hearing aid processed sounds was related to the magnitude of hearing loss in individual listeners.

METHOD

Ten participants with normal hearing and 20 participants with mild-to-moderate hearing loss completed the study. Signals were processed using hearing aid-style compression algorithms and filtered using two cutoff frequencies, 5.5 and 9 kHz, which were selected to represent bandwidths that are achievable in modern hearing aids. Round-robin paired comparisons based on the criteria of preferred sound quality were made for 2 different monaurally presented brief sound segments, including music and a movie.

RESULTS

Results revealed that preference for either the wider or narrower bandwidth (9- or 5.5-kHz cutoff frequency, respectively) was correlated with the slope of hearing loss from 4 to 12 kHz, with steep threshold slopes associated with preference for narrower bandwidths.

CONCLUSION

Consistent preference for wider bandwidth is present in some listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss.

Horizontal-Plane Localization of Noise and Speech Signals by Postlingually Deafened Adults Fitted With Bilateral Cochlear Implants*

OBJECTIVES

The main purpose of the study was to assess the ability of adults with bilateral cochlear implants to localize noise and speech signals in the horizontal plane. A second objective was to measure the change in localization performance in these adults between approximately 5 and 15 mo after activation. A third objective was to evaluate the relative roles of interaural level difference (ILD) and interaural temporal difference (ITD) cues in localization by these subjects.

DESIGN

Twenty-two adults, all postlingually deafened and all bilaterally fitted with MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implants, were tested in a modified source identification task. Subjects were tested individually in an anechoic chamber, which contained an array of 43 numbered loudspeakers extending from -90 degrees to +90 degrees azimuth. On each trial, a 200-msec signal (either a noise burst or a speech sample) was presented from one of 17 active loudspeakers (span: +/-80 degrees ), and the subject had to identify which source from the 43 loudspeakers in the array produced the signal. Subjects were tested in three conditions: left device only active, right device only active, and both devices active. Twelve of the 22 subjects were retested approximately 10 mo after their first test. In Experiment 2, the spectral content and rise-decay time of the noise stimulus were manipulated.

RESULTS

The relationship between source azimuth and response azimuth was characterized in terms of the adjusted constant error (ĉ). (1) With both devices active, ĉ for the noise stimulus varied from 8.1 degrees to 43.4 degrees (mean: 24.1 degrees ). By comparison, ĉ for a group of listeners with normal hearing ranged from 3.5 degrees to 7.8 degrees (mean: 5.6 degrees ). When subjects listened in unilateral mode (with one device turned off), ĉ was at or near chance (50.5 degrees ) in all cases. However, when considering unilateral performance on each subject's better side, average ĉ for the speech stimulus was 47.9 degrees , which was significantly (but only slightly) better than chance. (2) When listening bilaterally, error score was significantly lower for the speech stimulus (mean ĉ = 21.5 degrees ) than for the noise stimulus (mean ĉ = 24.1 degrees ). (3) As a group, the 12 subjects who were retested 10 mo after their first visit showed no significant improvement in localization performance during the intervening time. However, two subjects who performed very poorly during their first visit showed dramatic improvement (error scores were halved) over the intervening time. In Experiment 2, removing the high-frequency content of noise signals resulted in significantly poorer performance, but removing the low-frequency content or increasing the rise-decay time did not have an effect.

CONCLUSIONS

In agreement with previously reported data, subjects with bilateral cochlear implants localized sounds in the horizontal plane remarkably well when using both of their devices, but they generally could not localize sounds when either device was deactivated. They could localize the speech signal with slightly, but significantly better accuracy than the noise, possibly due to spectral differences in the signals, to the availability of envelope ITD cues with the speech but not the noise signal, or to more central factors related to the social salience of speech signals. For most subjects the remarkable ability to localize sounds has stabilized by 5 mo after activation. However, for some subjects who perform poorly initially, there can be substantial improvement past 5 mo. Results from Experiment 2 suggest that ILD cues underlie localization ability for noise signals, and that ITD cues do not contribute.

Effects of Noise Source Configuration on Directional Benefit Using Symmetric and Asymmetric Directional Hearing Aid Fittings

OBJECTIVE

The benefits of directional processing in hearing aids are well documented in laboratory settings. Likewise, substantial research has shown that speech understanding is optimized in many settings when listening binaurally. Although these findings suggest that speech understanding would be optimized by using bilateral directional technology (e.g., a symmetric directional fitting), recent research suggests similar performance with an asymmetrical fitting (directional in one ear and omnidirectional in the other). The purpose of this study was to explore the benefits of using bilateral directional processing, as opposed to an asymmetric fitting, in environments where the primary speech and noise sources come from different directions.

DESIGN

Sixteen older adults with mild-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) were recruited for the study. Aided sentence recognition using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) was assessed in a moderately reverberant room, in three different speech and noise conditions in which the locations of the speech and noise sources were varied. In each speech and noise condition, speech understanding was assessed in four different microphone modes (bilateral omnidirectional mode; bilateral directional mode; directional mode left and omnidirectional mode right; omnidirectional mode left and directional mode right). The benefits and limitations of bilateral directional processing were assessed by comparing HINT thresholds across the various symmetric and asymmetric microphone processing conditions.

RESULTS

Study results revealed directional benefit varied based on microphone mode symmetry (i.e., symmetric versus asymmetric directional processing) and the specific speech and noise configuration. In noise configurations in which the speech was located in the front of the listener and the noise was located to the side or surrounded the listener, maximum directional benefit (approximately 3.3 dB) was observed with the symmetric directional fitting. HINT thresholds obtained when using bilateral directional processing were approximately 1.4 dB better than when an asymmetric fitting (directional processing in only one ear) was used. When speech was located on the side of the listener, the use of directional processing on the ear near the speech significantly reduced speech understanding.

CONCLUSIONS

Although directional benefit is present in asymmetric fittings, the use of bilateral directional processing optimizes speech understanding in noise conditions in which the speech comes from in front of the listener and the noise sources are located to the side of or surround the listener. In situations in which the speech is located to the side of the listener, the use of directional processing on the ear adjacent to the speaker is likely to reduce speech audibility and thus degrade speech understanding.

The effects of speech and speechlike maskers on unaided and aided speech recognition in persons with hearing loss

Speech understanding in noise is affected by both the energetic and informational masking components of the background noise. In addition, when the background noise is everyday speech, the relative contributions of the energetic and informational masking components to the overall difficulties in understanding speech are unclear. This study estimated informational masking effects, in conversational speech settings, on the speech understanding of persons with and without hearing loss. The benefits and limitations of amplification in settings containing both informational and energetic masking components were also explored. Speech recognition was assessed in the presence of two types of maskers (speech and noise) that varied in the amount of informational masking they were expected to produce. Persons with hearing loss were tested both unaided and aided. Study results suggest that background noise, consisting of individual talkers, results in both informational and energetic masking. In addition, the benefits of amplification are limited when the background noise contains both informational and energetic masking components.

Speech Recognition for Unilateral and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Modes in the Presence of Uncorrelated Noise Sources

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the current investigation was to compare speech recognition in noise for bilateral and unilateral modes within postlingually deafened, adult bilateral cochlear implant recipients. In addition, it was of interest to evaluate the time course of the bilateral speech-recognition advantage and the effect of changing signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) on the magnitude of the bilateral advantage.

DESIGN

In the first experiment, 16 postlingually deafened adults who were bilaterally implanted with the MED-EL C40+ cochlear device were evaluated in unilateral left, unilateral right, and bilateral conditions 4 to 7 mo after activation. Speech recognition in the presence of five spatially separated, uncorrelated noise sources was evaluated using both a single fixed SNR of +10 dB and an adaptive-SNR method. In a follow-up study, a subset of 10 participants was re-evaluated using an identical fixed-SNR method 12 to 17 mo after activation to examine the time course of speech-recognition performance in both unilateral and bilateral modes at a single SNR. A third study was performed with a subset of six participants to examine performance over a range of SNRs. In this study, speech recognition was measured 12 to 17 mo after activation in quiet and at +5, +10, +15, and +20 dB SNRs using the same five uncorrelated noise sources.

RESULTS

The speech-recognition data revealed a significant bilateral advantage of 3.3 dB using the adaptive-SNR method. A significant bilateral advantage of 9% was also measured using a fixed +10 dB SNR. Results from the second study revealed that experience resulted in a significant (11 to 20%) increase in speech-recognition-in-noise performance for both unilateral and bilateral modes; however, the magnitude of the bilateral advantage was not affected by experience. Results from the third study revealed the largest bilateral advantage at the poorest SNR evaluated. In addition, performance in quiet was significantly better than that measured in the presence of noise, even at the +20 dB SNR.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of these experiments support a small but significant bilateral speech-recognition-in-noise advantage for cochlear implant recipients in an environment with multiple noise sources. This advantage is presumed to be attributable to the combined effects of binaural squelch and diotic summation. Although experience generally improved speech-recognition-in-noise performance in both unilateral and bilateral modes, a consistent bilateral advantage (approximately 10%) was measured at 4 to 7 mo and at 12 to 17 mo postactivation.

Directional hearing aid benefit in listeners with severe hearing loss

The purpose of this investigation was to examine the potential for directional hearing aid benefit in listeners with severe hearing loss at multiple SNRs for both auditory only and audio-visual presentation modes. Speech recognition performance was measured using the connected speech test at six SNRs individually determined for each subject in order to avoid floor and ceiling effects. The results revealed significant directional benefit was present at all tested SNRs in the presence of visual information. For auditory only presentations, significant directional benefit was only present at the least positive SNR. The largest directional benefit was measured at the poorest tested SNR for both auditory only and audiovisual presentation modes. The results of this study generally support small but significant directional for listeners with severe hearing loss benefit in a difficult listening environment both with and without the presence of visual information.

The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding. II. Sloping hearing loss

The speech understanding of persons with sloping high-frequency (HF) hearing impairment (HI) was compared to normal hearing (NH) controls and previous research on persons with "flat" losses [Hornsby and Ricketts (2003). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 113, 1706-1717] to examine how hearing loss configuration affects the contribution of speech information in various frequency regions. Speech understanding was assessed at multiple low- and high-pass filter cutoff frequencies. Crossover frequencies, defined as the cutoff frequencies at which low- and high-pass filtering yielded equivalent performance, were significantly lower for the sloping HI, compared to NH, group suggesting that HF HI limits the utility of HF speech information. Speech intelligibility index calculations suggest this limited utility was not due simply to reduced audibility but also to the negative effects of high presentation levels and a poorer-than-normal use of speech information in the frequency region with the greatest hearing loss (the HF regions). This deficit was comparable, however, to that seen in low-frequency regions of persons with similar HF thresholds and "flat" hearing losses suggesting that sensorineural HI results in a "uniform," rather than frequency-specific, deficit in speech understanding, at least for persons with HF thresholds up to 60-80 dB HL.

Application of Frequency Importance Functions to Directivity for Prediction of Benefit in Uniform Fields

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the current investigation was to systematically examine two of the assumptions central to the application of Articulation Index weighted Directivity Index (AI-DI) to the prediction of directional benefit across three groups of listeners differentiated by degree and configuration of hearing loss. Specifically, the assumption that (1) changes in speech recognition performance are predictable from frequency specific changes in calculated audibility after applying directivity index (DI) values and (2) applying appropriate frequency importance functions would increase the accuracy of AI-DI predictions of directional benefit were evaluated.

DESIGN

The output of a single hearing aid for a speech in noise input was recorded to produce high and low directivity (directional and omnidirectional microphone modes) segments. These segments were then high-pass and low-pass filtered into low- and high-frequency regions and acoustically mixed to generate the eight frequency-specific directivity combinations. All recordings were made through an acoustic manikin placed in a single room, surrounded by five uncorrelated noise sources. The aided sentence recognition, in noise, for three groups of 12 adult participants with symmetrical sensorineural hearing impairment, was then measured across the eight listening conditions. The three groups were differentiated by degree and type of hearing loss including "sloping," "flat," and "severe" configurations. The frequency-specific DI values for each of the eight listening conditions were applied to the calculation of frequency specific noise levels. These corrected noise levels were then used to calculate an Articulation Index using the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII, ). These SII values were then compared with measured speech recognition under the same eight listening conditions. Directional benefit values were then calculated by subtracting the performance of individual participants on the Connected Speech Test (CST) in omnidirectional mode from performance in all other filter conditions. The changes in average DI and AI-DI (using three different frequency importance functions) that existed between omnidirectional and the other seven filter conditions were then calculated for comparison to directional benefit values.

RESULTS

The speech recognition data revealed a complex interaction between filter condition and group. Despite this interaction, highly significant positive correlations were found between participants' speech recognition scores and the corresponding SII calculation for all three hearing loss groups. Individual subjects' measured directional benefit was highly correlated with changes in DI. Similar correlations were found for average DI and all three AI-DI weighting methods.

CONCLUSIONS

As expected, performance and calculated SII values were in good agreement across conditions supporting the hypothesis that DI provides a reasonable frequency-specific estimate of signal-to-noise ratio changes in the test environment. The results further support the use of AI-DI or average DI for prediction of directional benefit. The choice of importance weighting across frequency (flat or frequency importance function based), however, did not improve the accuracy of these predictions; therefore, a simple average DI is advocated. Further, the prediction of absolute directional benefit across hearing loss groups from traditional AI-DI calculations may lead to error if the negative effects of hearing loss on speech understanding, and how these effects vary with degree of hearing loss, are not considered as a contributing factor.

Directional hearing aids: then and now

Directional microphone hearing aids can lead to improved speech recognition when speech and noise are coming from different directions. This technology provides limited benefits, however, and in specific instances use of a directional hearing aid mode can be detrimental. This article discusses the benefits and limitations of directional amplification, summarizes some current work in directional amplification, and recommends clinical application relative to the use of directional amplification.

Distance and Reverberation Effects on Directional Benefit

OBJECTIVE

Understanding the potential benefits and limitations of directional hearing aids across a wide range of listening environments is important when counseling persons with hearing loss regarding realistic expectations for these devices. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of speaker-to-listener distance on directional benefit in two reverberant environments, in which the dominate noise sources were placed close to the hearing aid wearer. In addition, speech transmission index (STI) measures made in the test environments were compared to measured sentence recognition to determine if performance was predictable across changes in distance, reverberation and microphone mode.

DESIGN

The aided sentence recognition, in noise, for fourteen adult participants with symmetrical sensorineural hearing impairment was measured in six environmental conditions in both directional and omnidirectional modes. A single room, containing four uncorrelated noise sources served as the test environment. The room was modified to exhibit either low (RT60 = 0.3 sec) or moderate (RT60 = 0.9 sec) levels of reverberation. Sentence recognition was measured in both reverberant environments at three different speech loudspeaker-to-listener distances (1.2 m, 2.4 m, and 4.8 m). STI measures also were made in each of the 12 listening conditions (2 microphone modes x 3 distances x 2 reverberation environments).

RESULTS

A decrease in directional benefit was measured with increasing distance in the moderate reverberation condition. Although reduced, directional benefit was still present in the moderately reverberant environment at the farthest speech speaker-to-listener distance tested in this experiment. A similar decrease with increasing speaker-to-listener distance was not measured in the low reverberation condition. The pattern of average sentence recognition results across varying distances and two different reverberation times agreed with the pattern of STI values measured under the same conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Although these data support increased directional benefit in noise for reduced speaker-to-listener distance, some benefit was still obtained by listeners when listening beyond "effective" critical distance under conditions of low (300 msec) to moderate (900 msec) reverberation. It is assumed that the directional benefit was due to the reduction of the direct sound energy from the noise sources near the listener. The use of aided STI values for the prediction of average word recognition across listening conditions that differ in reverberation, microphone directivity, and speaker-to-listener distance also was supported.

The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding

The speech understanding of persons with "flat" hearing loss (HI) was compared to a normal-hearing (NH) control group to examine how hearing loss affects the contribution of speech information in various frequency regions. Speech understanding in noise was assessed at multiple low- and high-pass filter cutoff frequencies. Noise levels were chosen to ensure that the noise, rather than quiet thresholds, determined audibility. The performance of HI subjects was compared to a NH group listening at the same signal-to-noise ratio and a comparable presentation level. Although absolute speech scores for the HI group were reduced, performance improvements as the speech and noise bandwidth increased were comparable between groups. These data suggest that the presence of hearing loss results in a uniform, rather than frequency-specific, deficit in the contribution of speech information. Measures of auditory thresholds in noise and speech intelligibility index (SII) calculations were also performed. These data suggest that differences in performance between the HI and NH groups are due primarily to audibility differences between groups. Measures of auditory thresholds in noise showed the "effective masking spectrum" of the noise was greater for the HI than the NH subjects.