Hearing Aid Measurements Using the Revised Standard

1980 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 322-335
Author(s):  
Thomas H. Townsend

Unlike previous standards, the revised hearing aid standard, (ANSI $3.22-1976), specifies tolerance requirements for the electroaeoustic characteristics of hearing aids. It is essential, therefore, that measurements of performance be made as accurately as possible. To assess the precision with which these measures can be made in a clinical environment, five hearing aids of the same model were each tested five times using Bruel and Kjaer instrumentation. When possible, data were recorded directly from the meter of the measuring amplifier as well as from the chart paper. The variability of the results was always less when data were obtained from the meter than from the chart. The ratio of the variability (meter:chart) differed depending on the test being made. The accuracy of the test system was derived (as required by the standard) both theoretically and empirically. When its estimated tolerances were added to the tolerances permitted for the aids, all hearing aids were found to perform well within the limits of the standard except for one measurement on one aid.

1983 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 157-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula L. Potts ◽  
Jacalyn Greenwood

The effectiveness of a daily hearing aid monitoring program was evaluated. Routine monitoring was followed by a detailed visual-auditory inspection and by electroacoustic analysis. Results suggested that improvements could be made in the existing program to improve the effectiveness of monitoring procedures. Thus, several changes were made in the inspection program, including the addition of periodic electroacoustic analysis of all hearing aids. One year later, a duplicate study revealed a significant decrease in the incidence of hearing aid malfunction.


1996 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynne A. Davis ◽  
Stephanie A. Davidson

This study investigated the relationship between acoustic damping of hearing aid responses and listeners’ speech discrimination and judgments of preference and sound quality. Eighteen subjects with essentially equivalent hearing impairments participated. Subjects’ speech discrimination was evaluated for a male talker in quiet and in noise and for a female talker in the same conditions with hearing aids with 0 dB, −5 dB, and −10 dB of damping. Subjects also compared the damping levels using eight bipolar adjective pairs and provided judgments of overall preference. Measurements of the hearing aid responses were made in a 2-cm 3 coupler and in the subjects’ ears using probe microphone techniques. Smoothness of the responses was quantified using the Index of Response Irregularity (IRI) and the Frequency Response Smoothness Quantification Index (FReSQI). Subjects preferred the two damped hearing aid responses to the undamped. They also had better speech discrimination with damped hearing aid responses. The bipolar adjectives were of limited use in comparing hearing aids. A few questions about hearing aid sound quality and preference appear adequate for evaluating listeners’ choice of hearing aids. Smoothness of the hearing aid responses in the test box was higher for the damped hearing aids than for the undamped. However, for real ear responses measured using a probe microphone, smoothness did not change as a function of damping level.


1981 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 139-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cletus G. Fisher ◽  
Kenneth Brooks

Classroom teachers were asked to list the traits they felt were characteristic of the elementary school child who wears a hearing aid. These listings were evaluated according to the desirability of the traits and were studied regarding frequency of occurrence, desirability, and educational, emotional, and social implications. The results of the groupings are discussed in terms of pre-service and in-service training.


1999 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Davis ◽  
Rhonda Jackson ◽  
Tina Smith ◽  
William Cooper

Prior studies have proven the existence of the "hearing aid effect" when photographs of Caucasian males and females wearing a body aid, a post-auricular aid (behind-the-ear), or no hearing aid were judged by lay persons and professionals. This study was performed to determine if African American and Caucasian males, judged by female members of their own race, were likely to be judged in a similar manner on the basis of appearance, personality, assertiveness, and achievement. Sixty female undergraduate education majors (30 African American; 30 Caucasian) used a semantic differential scale to rate slides of preteen African American and Caucasian males, with and without hearing aids. The results of this study showed that female African American and Caucasian judges rated males of their respective races differently. The hearing aid effect was predominant among the Caucasian judges across the dimensions of appearance, personality, assertiveness, and achievement. In contrast, the African American judges only exhibited a hearing aid effect on the appearance dimension.


1992 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 208-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marsha Lipscomb ◽  
Peggy Von Almen ◽  
James C. Blair

Twenty students between the ages of 6 and 19 years who were receiving services for students with hearing impairments in a metropolitan, inner-city school system were trained to monitor their own hearing aids. This study investigated the effect of this training on the percentage of students who wore functional hearing aids. Ten of the students received fewer than 3 hours of instruction per day in the regular education setting and generally had hearing losses in the severe to profound range. The remaining 10 students received greater than 3 hours of instruction per day in the regular education setting and had hearing losses in the moderate to severe range. The findings indicated improved hearing aid function when students were actively involved in hearing aid maintenance programs. Recommendations are made concerning hearing aid maintenance in the schools.


2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Convery ◽  
Gitte Keidser ◽  
Louise Hickson ◽  
Carly Meyer

Purpose Hearing loss self-management refers to the knowledge and skills people use to manage the effects of hearing loss on all aspects of their daily lives. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between self-reported hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Method Thirty-seven adults with hearing loss, all of whom were current users of bilateral hearing aids, participated in this observational study. The participants completed self-report inventories probing their hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Correlation analysis was used to investigate the relationship between individual domains of hearing loss self-management and hearing aid benefit and satisfaction. Results Participants who reported better self-management of the effects of their hearing loss on their emotional well-being and social participation were more likely to report less aided listening difficulty in noisy and reverberant environments and greater satisfaction with the effect of their hearing aids on their self-image. Participants who reported better self-management in the areas of adhering to treatment, participating in shared decision making, accessing services and resources, attending appointments, and monitoring for changes in their hearing and functional status were more likely to report greater satisfaction with the sound quality and performance of their hearing aids. Conclusion Study findings highlight the potential for using information about a patient's hearing loss self-management in different domains as part of clinical decision making and management planning.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 419-428
Author(s):  
Jasleen Singh ◽  
Karen A. Doherty

Purpose The aim of the study was to assess how the use of a mild-gain hearing aid can affect hearing handicap, motivation, and attitudes toward hearing aids for middle-age, normal-hearing adults who do and do not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. Method A total of 20 participants (45–60 years of age) with clinically normal-hearing thresholds (< 25 dB HL) were enrolled in this study. Ten self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise, and 10 did not self-report difficulty hearing in background noise. All participants were fit with mild-gain hearing aids, bilaterally, and were asked to wear them for 2 weeks. Hearing handicap, attitudes toward hearing aids and hearing loss, and motivation to address hearing problems were evaluated before and after participants wore the hearing aids. Participants were also asked if they would consider purchasing a hearing aid before and after 2 weeks of hearing aid use. Results After wearing the hearing aids for 2 weeks, hearing handicap scores decreased for the participants who self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise. No changes in hearing handicap scores were observed for the participants who did not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. The participants who self-reported difficulty hearing in background noise also reported greater personal distress from their hearing problems, were more motivated to address their hearing problems, and had higher levels of hearing handicap compared to the participants who did not self-report trouble hearing in background noise. Only 20% (2/10) of the participants who self-reported trouble hearing in background noise reported that they would consider purchasing a hearing aid after 2 weeks of hearing aid use. Conclusions The use of mild-gain hearing aids has the potential to reduce hearing handicap for normal-hearing, middle-age adults who self-report difficulty hearing in background noise. However, this may not be the most appropriate treatment option for their current hearing problems given that only 20% of these participants would consider purchasing a hearing aid after wearing hearing aids for 2 weeks.


2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 877-894
Author(s):  
Nur Azyani Amri ◽  
Tian Kar Quar ◽  
Foong Yen Chong

Purpose This study examined the current pediatric amplification practice with an emphasis on hearing aid verification using probe microphone measurement (PMM), among audiologists in Klang Valley, Malaysia. Frequency of practice, access to PMM system, practiced protocols, barriers, and perception toward the benefits of PMM were identified through a survey. Method A questionnaire was distributed to and filled in by the audiologists who provided pediatric amplification service in Klang Valley, Malaysia. One hundred eight ( N = 108) audiologists, composed of 90.3% women and 9.7% men (age range: 23–48 years), participated in the survey. Results PMM was not a clinical routine practiced by a majority of the audiologists, despite its recognition as the best clinical practice that should be incorporated into protocols for fitting hearing aids in children. Variations in practice existed warranting further steps to improve the current practice for children with hearing impairment. The lack of access to PMM equipment was 1 major barrier for the audiologists to practice real-ear verification. Practitioners' characteristics such as time constraints, low confidence, and knowledge levels were also identified as barriers that impede the uptake of the evidence-based practice. Conclusions The implementation of PMM in clinical practice remains a challenge to the audiology profession. A knowledge-transfer approach that takes into consideration the barriers and involves effective collaboration or engagement between the knowledge providers and potential stakeholders is required to promote the clinical application of evidence-based best practice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 993-1005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gitte Keidser ◽  
Nicole Matthews ◽  
Elizabeth Convery

Purpose The aim of this study was to examine how hearing aid candidates perceive user-driven and app-controlled hearing aids and the effect these concepts have on traditional hearing health care delivery. Method Eleven adults (3 women, 8 men), recruited among 60 participants who had completed a research study evaluating an app-controlled, self-fitting hearing aid for 12 weeks, participated in a semistructured interview. Participants were over 55 years of age and had varied experience with hearing aids and smartphones. A template analysis was applied to data. Results Five themes emerged from the interviews: (a) prerequisites to the successful implementation of user-driven and app-controlled technologies, (b) benefits and advantages of user-driven and app-controlled technologies, (c) barriers to the acceptance and use of user-driven and app-controlled technologies, (d) beliefs that age is a significant factor in how well people will adopt new technology, and (e) consequences that flow from the adoption of user-driven and app-controlled technologies. Specifically, suggested benefits of the technology included fostering empowerment and providing cheaper and more discrete options, while challenges included lack of technological self-efficacy among older adults. Training and support were emphasized as necessary for successful adaptation and were suggested to be a focus of audiologic services in the future. Conclusion User perceptions of user-driven and app-controlled hearing technologies challenge the audiologic profession to provide adequate support and training for use of the technology and manufacturers to make the technology more accessible to older people.


2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leisha Eiten ◽  
Dawna Lewis

Background: For children with hearing loss, the benefits of FM systems in overcoming deleterious effects of noise, distance, and reverberation have led to recommendations for use beyond classroom settings. It is important that audiologists who recommend and fit these devices understand the rationale and procedures underlying fitting and verification. Objectives: This article reviews previousguidelines for FM verification, addresses technological advances, and introduces verification procedures appropriate for current FM and hearing-aid technology. Methods: Previous guidelines for verification of FM systems are reviewed. Those recommendations that are appropriate for current technology are addressed, as are procedures that are no longer adequate for hearing aids and FM systems utilizing more complex processing than in the past. Technological advances are discussed, and an updated approach to FM verification is proposed. Conclusions: Approaches to verification andfitting of FM systems must keep pace with advances in hearing-aid and FM technology. The transparency approach addressed in this paper is recommended for verification of FM systems coupled to hearing aids.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document