Binaural Hearing of Speech for Aided and Unaided Conditions

1969 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 650-664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald D. Dirks ◽  
Richard A. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Field Conditions ◽  
Interaural Time Differences ◽  
Binaural Listening ◽  
Signal Sources

Differences in speech intelligibility and identification between binaural, monaural near ear, and monaural far ear conditions were studied in sound field conditions. Scores from listeners with normal hearing and with sensorineural losses were evalated in sound field conditions (unaided) and under conditions of hearing aid amplification (aided). For both conditions listeners with sensorineural hearing loss obtained a binaural advantage similar to that found for normal listeners. The binaural advantage could be demonstrated only when the primary and/or competing signal sources were located at an azimuth which resulted in interaural time differences for at least one of the signals. When the signals arrived simultaneously at the ears from the same loudspeaker, no binaural advantage was obtained. Differences in intelligibility and identification scores between monaural near ear and far ear conditions (6.0 dB) were almost twice as large as those found between binaural listening and monaural near ear listening (3.3 dB).

scholarly journals The use of speech sentence audiometry in a free sound field

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-39
Author(s):  
Mariya Yu. Boboshko ◽  
Irina P. Berdnikova ◽  
Natalya V. Maltzeva
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Normative Data ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Objectives -to determine the normative data of sentence speech intelligibility in a free sound field and to estimate the applicability of the Russian Matrix Sentence test (RuMatrix) for assessment of the hearing aid fitting benefit. Material and methods. 10 people with normal hearing and 28 users of hearing aids with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing loss were involved in the study. RuMatrix test both in quiet and in noise was performed in a free sound field. All patients filled in the COSI questionnaire. Results. The hearing impaired patients were divided into two subgroups: the 1st with high and the 2nd with low hearing aid benefit, according to the COSI questionnaire. In the 1st subgroup, the threshold for the sentence intelligibility in quiet was 34.9 ± 6.4 dB SPL, and in noise -3.3 ± 1.4 dB SNR, in the 2nd subgroup 41.7 ± 11.5 dB SPL and 0.15 ± 3.45 dB SNR, respectively. The significant difference between the data of both subgroups and the norm was registered (p

Outcomes of Hearing Aid Use by Individuals with Unilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss (USNHL)

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 941-949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles E. Bishop ◽  
Elgenaid Hamadain ◽  
Jason A. Galster ◽  
Mary Frances Johnson ◽  
Christopher Spankovich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Spatial Separation ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Hearing Aid Use

Background: Unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (USNHL) can have a negative impact on functions associated with the advantages of balanced, binaural hearing. Although single-sided deafness, which is a complete loss of audibility in one ear, has gained increased interest in the published research, there is a gap in the literature concerning hearing aid outcomes for individuals with residual, or otherwise “aidable,” hearing in the affected ear. Purpose: To assess hearing aid outcomes for a group of individuals with USNHL with residual, aidable function. Research Design: A quasi-experimental study of hearing aid outcomes with paired comparisons made between unaided and aided test conditions. Study Sample: A convenience sample of twenty-two individuals with USNHL, with sufficient residual hearing in the affected ear as to receive audibility from use of a hearing aid, were recruited into the study from September 2011 to August 2012. Intervention: Each participant was fit with a digital behind-the-ear hearing aid coupled to a custom ear mold. Data Collection and Analysis: Assessments were performed at baseline (unaided) and after a three-month field trial (aided) with primary outcomes involving objective measures in sound field yielding signal-to-noise ratio loss (SNR Loss) via the Quick Speech-in-Noise Test and word recognition scores (WRS) via the Northwestern University Auditory Test, No. 6. Outcomes also involved the administration of two well-established subjective benefit questionnaires: The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the 49-item Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ49). Results: As a group, participants showed significantly improved median SNR Loss thresholds when aided in a test condition that included spatial separation of speech and noise, with speech stimuli directed toward the worse ear and noise stimuli directed toward the better ear (diff. = −4.5; p < 0.001). Hearing aid use had a small, though statistically significant, negative impact on median SNR Loss thresholds, when speech and noise stimuli originated from the same 0° azimuth (diff. = 1.0; p = 0.018). This was also evidenced by the median WRS in sound field (diff. = −6.0; p = 0.006), which was lowered from 98% in the unaided state to 92% in the aided state. Results from the SSQ49 showed statistically significant improvement on all subsection means when participants were aided (p < 0.05), whereas results from the APHAB were generally found to be unremarkable between unaided and aided conditions as benefit was essentially equal to the 50th percentile of the normative data. At the close of the study, it was observed that only slightly more than half of all participants chose to continue use of a hearing aid after their participation. Conclusions: We observed that hearing aid use by individuals with USNHL can improve the SNR Loss associated with the interference of background noise, especially in situations when there is spatial separation of the stimuli and speech is directed toward the affected ear. In addition, hearing aid use by these individuals can provide subjective benefit, as evidenced by the APHAB and SSQ49 subjective benefit questionnaires.

scholarly journals Rehabilitation of Severe to Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss in Adults: Audiological Outcomes

2019 ◽  
pp. 014556131989246
Author(s):  
Andrea Ciorba ◽  
Maria Paola Guidi ◽  
Piotr H. Skarżyński ◽  
Chiara Bianchini ◽  
Monica Rosignoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Functional Results ◽  
Binaural Hearing ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Clinical Records

The aim of this article is to describe the audiological patterns of 71 adult patients presenting severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss, who were rehabilitated by cochlear implants (CIs) and hearing aids. This is a retrospective study in a university setting, where the clinical records of 71 adult patients were reviewed and processed. Speech intelligibility was evaluated at one aided ear (CI) or at both aided ears (double CI or a combination of CI and hearing aid [HA]). Patients with a bilateral CI or with a bimodal hearing setup (CI and HA) performed better than those with a single CI; data from the phonetic matrices test showed that there was a statistically significant difference among patients aided by a single CI versus binaural setup (double CI or CI + HA). In particular, patients aided by a bilateral CI, or by a CI and HA, showed an improvement in the functional results of the speech tests, compared to patients using a single CI. Binaural hearing (either with a bilateral CI or bimodal) allows an improvement in the functional results at the speech tests, compared to the use of a CI only.

Efficiency of the cochlear implantation in children with severe sensorineural hearing loss and deafness according to the data of speech audiometry in the free sound field and in the noise background

2018 ◽  
pp. 4-16
Author(s):  
Dmitry Zabolotny ◽  
Viktor Lutsenko ◽  
Irina Belyakova ◽  
Tetiana Kholodenko
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Speech Audiometry ◽  
Noise Background ◽  
Useful Signal ◽  
The Impact

Relevance: Any kind of the hearing loss, especially in the childhood, affects the mental and intellectual development negatively as well as behavior and social position of a deaf patient in the hearing world. Cochlear implantation is the most effective and reliable method of medical and educational auditory-speech rehabilitation for both adults and children with severe hearing loss and deafness. One of the key performance indicators of the cochlear implantation is a result of speech audiometry, especially on the noise background. The aim is to study the state of auditory function according to the subjective audiometry in the noise background and the influence of various factors on the effectiveness of rehabilitation of the children after cochlear implantation. Materials and methods: The study involved 150 children with severe sensorineural hearing loss and deafness after cochlear implantation. In age, they ranged from 3 to 18 years old. Evaluation of the efficiency of cochlear implantation was carried out in several stages. All studies were done in the free-field with the cochlear implant on. At first, we performed the pure tone audiometry. Then we defined the 50% intelligibility threshold of numeral test. After that, we defined a word recognition percentage. And finally we defined the impact of masker on speech intelligibility at SPL of useful signal 50, 60 and 80 dB. Results: Based on the analysis of the received data, all children with severe sensorineural hearing loss and deafness after cochlear implantation were divided into 3 groups depending on the speech intelligibility. The first group (high efficiency of cochlear implantation) included 68 children (45,3%). This group was divided into two subgroups depending on the difference between the values of the speech intelligibility in the free sound field and in the noise background. The second group (average efficiency) consisted of 45 children (30%). The third group (low efficiency) were 37 children (24,7%). The influence of various factors on the efficiency of cochlear implantation was analyzed. Conclusion: Speech intelligibility in the noise background must be examinated in all children after cochlear implantation. The main factors affecting the effectiveness of cochlear implantation according to test of speech intelligibility in the noise background are the ethiology of hearing loss and duration of post-operation period. Results of speech intelligibility in the noise background test will help specialists who practice the rehabilitation of children after cochlear implantation (teachers for deaf, speech therapists) to pay attention to the decrease of speech intelligibility in children in the real conditions of communication and to focus their efforts on its improving with the appropriate methods.

Binaural and Monaural Speech Intelligibility in Reverberation

1967 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. Moncur ◽  
Donald Dirks
Keyword(s):  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Significant Contribution ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
The Other ◽  
Speech Discrimination ◽  
Interaural Time Differences ◽  
Quiet Condition ◽  
Binaural Listening

Forty-eight subjects with normal hearing were tested to determine binaural and monaural near- and far-ear speech discrimination in various reverberant conditions. One half of the group listened to the recorded PB words in quiet, while the other half received the words with a competing message. Binaural superiority was maintained throughout the study, except in the anechoic-quiet condition. Interaural time differences make a significant contribution to speech intelligibility; and the monaural far ear supplies valuable aid to binaural listening.

Speech intelligibility in patients of different ages with chronic sensorineural hearing loss

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 8-14
Author(s):  
M. Yu. Boboshko ◽  
◽  
E. V. Zhilinskaya ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Comprehensive Evaluation ◽  
Young Patients ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Speech Audiometry ◽  
Similar Degree ◽  
Different Ages ◽  
Monosyllabic Words

Deterioration in speech intelligibility, the most common complaint of people with hearing loss, leads to social isolation and dramatically reduces the quality of life. The correction of peripheral hearing loss by hearing aid fitting does not always solve this problem in patients with chronic sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). That is why in the process of audiological examination of patients with complaints of hearing loss, it is necessary to include methods of speech audiometry, which make it possible to comprehensively assess the functioning of the auditory system. The aim of the study: assessment of speech intelligibility in patients of different ages with SNHL. 94 people from 20 to 74 years of age were examined: 54 patients with SNHL (14 young and 40 elderly) and 40 people with normal hearing thresholds (20 young and 20 elderly). Besides the standard audiological examination, speech audiometry testing was conducted: evaluation of monosyllabic words intelligibility in quiet, binaural rapidly alternating speech test, dichotic digits test, Russian matrix sentence test (RuMatrix). Results: Speech intelligibility in elderly patients with SNHL was shown to be significantly worse than in young patients with a similar degree of hearing loss. The RuMatrix test in noise was proved to be the most sensitive test for comprehensive evaluation of the hearing system functioning.

Otologics Fully Implantable Hearing Device Phase II Results

2008 ◽  
Vol 139 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. P57-P57
Author(s):  
Drew M Horlbeck ◽  
Herman A Jenkins ◽  
Ben J Balough ◽  
Michael E Hoffer
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hearing Device

Objective The efficacy of the Otologics Fully Implantable Hearing Device (MET) was assessed in adult patients with bilateral moderate to severe sensorineural hearing loss. Methods Surgical insertion of this totally implanted system was identical to the Phase I study. A repeated-measures within-subjects design assessed aided sound field thresholds and speech performances with the subject's own, appropriately fit, walk-in hearing aid(s) and the Otologics Fully Implantable Hearing Device. Results Six- and 12-month Phase II data will be presented. Ten patients were implanted and activated as part Phase II clinical trial. Three patients were lost to long term follow-up due to two coil failures and one ossicular abnormality preventing proper device placement. No significant differences between preoperative (AC = 59 dB, BC = 55 dB) and postoperative (AC = 61 dB, BC = 54 dB) unaided pure tone averages were noted (p < 0.05). Pure tone average implant aided thresholds (41 dB) were equivalent to that of walk-in-aided (37 dB) condition with no significant difference (p < 0.05) between patients’ walk-in-aided individual frequency thresholds and implant-aided thresholds. Word recognition scores and hearing in noise scores were similar between the walk-in-aided and for the implant-aided condition. Patient benefit scales will be presented at all end points. Conclusions Results of the Otologics MET Fully Implantable Hearing Device Phase II trial provide evidence that this fully implantable device is a viable alternative to currently available hearing aids in patients with sensorineural hearing loss.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document