Efficacy of Linear Frequency Transposition on Consonant Identification in Quiet and in Noise

2009 ◽  
Vol 20 (08) ◽  
pp. 465-479 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francis Kuk ◽  
Denise Keenan ◽  
Petri Korhonen ◽  
Chi-chuen Lau
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Frequency Region ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Linear Frequency ◽  
Test Conditions ◽  
Speech Performance ◽  
Over Time

Background: Frequency transposition has gained renewed interest in recent years. This type of processing takes sounds in the unaidable high-frequency region and moves them to the lower frequency region. One concern is that the transposed sounds mask or distort the original low-frequency sounds and lead to a poorer performance. On the other hand, experience with transposition may allow the listeners to relearn the new auditory percepts and benefit from transposition. Purpose: The current study was designed to examine the effect of linear frequency transposition on consonant identification in quiet (50 dB SPL and 68 dB SPL) and in noise at three intervals—the initial fit, after one month of use (along with auditory training), and a further one month of use (without directed training) of transposition. Research Design: A single-blind, factorial repeated-measures design was used to study the effect of test conditions (three) and hearing aid setting/time interval (four) on consonant identification. Study Sample: Eight adults with a severe-to-profound high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss participated. Intervention: Participants were fit with the Widex m4-m behind-the-ear hearing aids binaurally in the frequency transposition mode, and their speech scores were measured initially. They wore the hearing aids home for one month and were instructed to complete a self-paced “bottom-up” training regimen. They returned after the training, and their speech performance was measured. They wore the hearing aids home for another month, but they were not instructed to complete any auditory training. Their speech performance was again measured at the end of the two-month trial. Data Collection and Analysis: Consonant performance was measured with a nonsense syllable test (ORCA-NST) that was developed at this facility (Office of Research in Clinical Amplification [Widex]). The test conditions included testing in quiet at 50 dB SPL and 68 dB SPL, and at 68 dB SPL in noise (SNR [signal-to-noise ratio] = +5). The hearing aid conditions included no transposition at initial fit (V1), transposition at initial fit (V2), transposition at one month post-fit (V3), and transposition at 2 months post-fit (V4). Identification scores were analyzed for each individual phoneme and phonemic class. Repeated-measures ANOVA were conducted using SPSS software to examine significant differences. Results: For all test conditions (50 dB SPL in quiet, 68 dB SPL in quiet, and 68 dB SPL in noise), a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05 level) was reached between the transposition condition measured at two months postfitting and the initial fitting (with and without transposition) for fricatives only. The difference between transposition and the no-transposition conditions at the 50 dB SPL condition was also significant for the initial and one-month intervals. Analysis of individual phonemes showed a decrease in the number of confusions and an increase in the number of correct identification over time. Conclusions: Linear frequency transposition improved fricative identification over time. Proper candidate selection with appropriate training is necessary to fully realize the potential benefit of this type of processing.

Cochlear Implant Combined with a Linear Frequency Transposing Hearing Aid

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (09) ◽  
pp. 722-732 ◽  
Author(s):  
Håkan Hua ◽  
Björn Johansson ◽  
Radi Jönsson ◽  
Lennart Magnusson
Keyword(s):  
High Frequency ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Frequency Region ◽  
Swedish Version ◽  
High Frequency Region ◽  
Linear Frequency ◽  
Contralateral Ear

Background: Adults with cochlear implants (CIs) are usually implanted unilaterally. To preserve binaural advantages, a noninvasive method involves maintaining the hearing aid (HA) on the contralateral ear; the choice of HA for this purpose is therefore crucial. In recent years, the use of frequency transposition has gained a renewed interest in clinical practice. This type of processing records information from the high-frequency region and conveys it to a low-frequency region where there is still some residual hearing. Purpose: To conduct an investigation and examine whether adults with unilateral CI derive benefits from a HA utilizing linear frequency transposition (LFT) on the contralateral ear. Research Design: A two-period, single-blind, repeated-measures crossover design was conducted to examine the combination of LFT in conjunction with a CI. Speech recognition tests were performed in quiet and in noise with LFT either activated or deactivated. The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Questionnaire (SSQ) was used to measure subjective benefit. Study Sample: The participants were nine frequent bimodal users, five males and four females, with a moderate to profound high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss in the nonimplanted ear. Intervention: The current study was conducted using the Widex Mind440 power (m4-19) behind-the-ear HA. The participants acted as their own control in a total of seven conditions: (1) bimodal with own HA, (2) CI only, (3) own HA alone, (4) bimodal new HA LFT-off, (5) new HA LFT-off, (6) bimodal new HA LFT-on, and (7) new HA LFT-on. Data Collection and Analysis: Monosyllabic words in quiet and the Swedish version of Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) were used as speech test materials. Stimuli were presented in sound field at a speech level of 65 dB sound pressure level (SPL) via a loudspeaker at a distance of 1 m from the participant in a sound-treated room. The SSQ was administered in each session evaluating the three bimodal conditions. SPSS software was used for statistical analyses. General linear model (GLM) analysis of variance for repeated measures was performed and followed with Bonferroni-adjusted post hoc pairwise comparisons. Results: Participants performed better with CI only than with HA alone, and the bimodal conditions were superior to the CI alone. No significant differences (p > .05) were observed when comparing the LFT-on with LFT-off regardless of whether the use of CI was included in the different listening conditions in objective and subjective measurements. Conclusions: The results suggest an advantage for CI patients with a HA in the opposite ear, and that the LFT neither degraded nor enhanced speech performance in conjunction with a CI in quiet or in noise in comparison to when it was deactivated.

Can a Commercially Available Auditory Training Program Improve Audiovisual Speech Performance?

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (3S) ◽  
pp. 308-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dania Rishiq ◽  
Aparna Rao ◽  
Tess Koerner ◽  
Harvey Abrams
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Speech Performance ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
B Test ◽  
Experimental Group

Purpose The goal of this study was to determine whether hearing aids in combination with computer-based auditory training improve audiovisual (AV) performance compared with the use of hearing aids alone. Method Twenty-four participants were randomized into an experimental group (hearing aids plus ReadMyQuips [RMQ] training) and a control group (hearing aids only). The Multimodal Lexical Sentence Test for Adults (Kirk et al., 2012) was used to measure auditory-only (AO) and AV speech perception performance at three signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). Participants were tested at the time of hearing aid fitting (pretest), after 4 weeks of hearing aid use (posttest I), and again after 4 weeks of RMQ training (posttest II). Results Results did not reveal an effect of training. As expected, interactions were found between (a) modality (AO vs. AV) and SNR and (b) test (pretest vs. posttests) and SNR. Conclusion Data do not show a significant effect of RMQ training on AO or AV performance as measured using the Multimodal Lexical Sentence Test for Adults.

Effect of a Single-Channel Wide Dynamic Range Compression Circuit on Perception of Stop Consonant Place of Articulation

2000 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 1174-1184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark S. Hedrick ◽  
Tracie Rice
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Dynamic Range ◽  
Single Channel ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Category Boundary ◽  
Frequency Region ◽  
Wide Dynamic Range ◽  
Place Of Articulation ◽  
Dynamic Range Compression

Previous studies have shown that altering the amplitude of a consonant in a specific frequency region relative to an adjacent vowel's amplitude in the same frequency region will affect listeners' perception of the consonant place of articulation. Hearing aids with single-channel, fast-acting wide dynamic range compression (WDRC) alter the overall consonant-vowel (CV) intensity ratio by increasing consonant energy. Perhaps one reason WDRC has had limited success in improving speech recognition performance is that the natural amplitude balances between consonant and vowel are altered in crucial frequency regions, thus disturbing the aforementioned amplitude cue for determining place of articulation. The current study investigated the effect of a WDRC circuit on listeners' perception of place of articulation when the relative amplitude of consonant and vowel was manipulated. The stimuli were a continuum of synthetic CV syllables stripped of all place cues except relative consonant amplitudes. Acoustic analysis of the CVs before and after hearing aid processing showed a predictable increase in high-frequency energy, particularly for the burst of the consonant. Alveolar bursts had more high-frequency energy than labial bursts. Twenty-five listeners with normal hearing and 5 listeners with sensorineural hearing loss labeled the consonant sound of the CV syllables in unaided form and after the syllables were recorded through a hearing aid with single-channel WDRC. There were significantly more listeners who were unable to produce a category boundary when labeling the aided stimuli. Of those listeners who did yield a category boundary for both aided and unaided stimuli, there were significantly more alveolar responses for the aided condition. These results can be explained by the acoustic analyses of the aided stimuli.

scholarly journals The Effects of Extended Input Dynamic Range on Laboratory and Field-Trial Evaluations in Adult Hearing Aid Users

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (07) ◽  
pp. 634-648
Author(s):  
Patrick N. Plyler ◽  
Mary Easterday ◽  
Thomas Behrens
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Field Trial ◽  
Dynamic Range ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Trial Period ◽  
Satisfaction Rating ◽  
Digital Hearing Aids ◽  
Test Conditions ◽  
Noise Test

AbstractDigital hearing aids using a 16-bit analog-to-digital converter (ADC) provide a 96-dB input dynamic range. The level at which the ADC peak clips and distorts input signals ranges between 95 and 105 dB SPL. Recent research evaluated the effect of extending the input dynamic range in a commercially available hearing aid. Although the results were promising, several limitations were noted by the authors. Laboratory testing was conducted using recordings from hearing aids set for a flat 50-dB loss; however, field testing was conducted with hearing aids fitted for their hearing loss. In addition, participants rarely encountered input levels of sufficient intensity to adequately test the feature and were unable to directly compare aids with and without extended input dynamic range (EIDR) under identical conditions.The effects of EIDR under realistic and repeatable test conditions both within and outside the laboratory setting were evaluated.A repeated measures design was used. The experiment was single-blinded.Twenty adults (14 males and six females) between the ages of 30 and 71 years (average age 62 years) who were experienced hearing aid users participated.Each participant was fit with Oticon Opn hearing instruments binaurally using the National Acoustics Laboratory-Nonlinear 1 fitting strategy. Participants completed a two-week trial period using hearing aids with EIDR and a two-week trial period without EIDR. The initial EIDR condition trial period was counterbalanced. After each trial, laboratory evaluations were obtained at 85 dBC using the Connected Speech Test, the Hearing in Noise Test, and the acceptable noise level (ANL). Satisfaction ratings were conducted at 85 dBC using speech in quiet and in noise as well as music. Field-trial evaluations were obtained using the abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB). Satisfaction ratings were also conducted in the field at 85 dBC using speech and music. After the study, each participant indicated which trial period they preferred overall. Repeated measures analysis of variances were conducted to assess listener performance. Pairwise comparisons were then completed for significant main effects.In the laboratory, results did not reveal significant differences between EIDR conditions on any speech perception in noise test or any satisfaction rating measurement. In the field, results did not reveal significant differences between the EIDR conditions on the APHAB or on any of the satisfaction rating measurements. Nine participants (45%) preferred the EIDR condition. Fifteen participants (75%) indicated that speech clarity was the most important factor in determining the overall preference. Sixteen participants (80%) preferred the EIDR condition that resulted in the lower ANL.The use of EIDR in hearing aids within and outside the laboratory under realistic and repeatable test conditions did not positively or negatively impact performance or preference. Results disagreed with previous findings obtained in the laboratory that suggested EIDR improved performance; however, results agreed with previous findings obtained in the field. Future research may consider the effect of hearing aid experience, input level, and noise acceptance on potential benefit with EIDR.

Evaluation of Special Hearing Aids for Deaf Children

1971 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 527-537 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norman P. Erber
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Frequency Range ◽  
Frequency Limit ◽  
Unpublished Studies ◽  
Published Research

Two types of special hearing aid have been developed recently to improve the reception of speech by profoundly deaf children. In a different way, each special system provides greater low-frequency acoustic stimulation to deaf ears than does a conventional hearing aid. One of the devices extends the low-frequency limit of amplification; the other shifts high-frequency energy to a lower frequency range. In general, previous evaluations of these special hearing aids have obtained inconsistent or inconclusive results. This paper reviews most of the published research on the use of special hearing aids by deaf children, summarizes several unpublished studies, and suggests a set of guidelines for future evaluations of special and conventional amplification systems.

Comparison of In-the-Ear and Over-the-Ear Hearing Aid Fittings

1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 362-369 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna M. Risberg ◽  
Robyn M. Cox
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Comparative Evaluation ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Hearing Aid Fitting ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Functional Gain ◽  
The Relationship

A custom in-the-ear (ITE) hearing aid fitting was compared to two over-the-ear (OTE) hearing aid fittings for each of 9 subjects with mild to moderately severe hearing losses. Speech intelligibility via the three instruments was compared using the Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) test. The relationship between functional gain and coupler gain was compared for the ITE and the higher rated OTE instruments. The difference in input received at the microphone locations of the two types of hearing aids was measured for 10 different subjects and compared to the functional gain data. It was concluded that (a) for persons with mild to moderately severe hearing losses, appropriately adjusted custom ITE fittings typically yield speech intelligibility that is equal to the better OTE fitting identified in a comparative evaluation; and (b) gain prescriptions for ITE hearing aids should be adjusted to account for the high-frequency emphasis associated with in-the-concha microphone placement.

Modified Earpieces and CROS for High Frequency Hearing Losses

1968 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 204-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Dodds ◽  
Earl Harford
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Intensity Level ◽  
Test Results ◽  
High Frequency Hearing Loss ◽  
Increased Sensitivity ◽  
Difficult Cases

Persons with a high frequency hearing loss are difficult cases for whom to find suitable amplification. We have experienced some success with this problem in our Hearing Clinics using a specially designed earmold with a hearing aid. Thirty-five cases with high frequency hearing losses were selected from our clinical files for analysis of test results using standard, vented, and open earpieces. A statistical analysis of test results revealed that PB scores in sound field, using an average conversational intensity level (70 dB SPL), were enhanced when utilizing any one of the three earmolds. This result was due undoubtedly to increased sensitivity provided by the hearing aid. Only the open earmold used with a CROS hearing aid resulted in a significant improvement in discrimination when compared with the group’s unaided PB score under earphones or when comparing inter-earmold scores. These findings suggest that the inclusion of the open earmold with a CROS aid in the audiologist’s armamentarium should increase his flexibility in selecting hearing aids for persons with a high frequency hearing loss.

scholarly journals Integrated Bimodal Fitting for Unilateral CI Users with Residual Contralateral Hearing

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-206
Author(s):  
Gennaro Auletta ◽  
Annamaria Franzè ◽  
Carla Laria ◽  
Carmine Piccolo ◽  
Carmine Papa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Performance Difference ◽  
Test Conditions ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Noisy Conditions ◽  
New Formula ◽  
Better Than

Background: The aim of this study was to compare, in users of bimodal cochlear implants, the performance obtained using their own hearing aids (adjusted with the standard NAL-NL1 fitting formula) with the performance using the Phonak Naìda Link Ultra Power hearing aid adjusted with both NAL-NL1 and a new bimodal system (Adaptive Phonak Digital Bimodal (APDB)) developed by Advanced Bionics and Phonak Corporations. Methods: Eleven bimodal users (Naìda CI Q70 + contralateral hearing aid) were enrolled in our study. The users’ own hearing aids were replaced with the Phonak Naìda Link Ultra Power and fitted following the new formula. Speech intelligibility was assessed in quiet and noisy conditions, and comparisons were made with the results obtained with the users’ previous hearing aids and with the Naída Link hearing aids fitted with the NAL-NL1 generic prescription formula. Results: Using Phonak Naìda Link Ultra Power hearing aids with the Adaptive Phonak Digital Bimodal fitting formula, performance was significantly better than that with the users’ own rehabilitation systems, especially in challenging hearing situations for all analyzed subjects. Conclusions: Speech intelligibility tests in quiet settings did not reveal a significant difference in performance between the new fitting formula and NAL-NL1 fittings (using the Naída Link hearing aids), whereas the performance difference between the two fittings was very significant in noisy test conditions.

Reliability and Stability of Various Hearing-Aid Outcome Measures in a Group of Elderly Hearing-Aid Wearers

1996 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 923-935 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry E. Humes ◽  
Dan Halling ◽  
Maureen Coughlin
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Nonsense Syllable ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Elderly Persons ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Hearing Handicap

Twenty elderly persons with hearing impairment were fit with binaural in-the-ear hearing aids and followed for a 6-month period post-fit. Several hearing-aid outcome measures were obtained at 0, 7, 15, 30, 60, 90, and 180 days post-fit. Outcome measures included (a) objective measures of benefit obtained with nonsense-syllable materials in quiet (CUNY Nonsense Syllable Test, NST) and sentences in multitalker babble (Hearing in Noise Test, HINT); (b) two subjective measures of benefit, one derived from pre-fit/post-fit comparisons on a general scale of hearing handicap (Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly, HHIE) and the other based on a subjective scale of post-fit hearing-aid benefit (Hearing Aid Performance Inventory, HAPI); (c) a questionnaire on hearing-aid satisfaction; (d) an objective measure of hearing-aid use; and (e) a subjective measure of hearing-aid use. Reliability and stability of each measure were examined through repeated-measures analyses of variance, a series of test-retest correlations, and, where possible, scatterplots of the scores against their corresponding 95% critical differences. Many of the measures were found to be both reliable and stable indicators of hearing-aid outcome.

scholarly journals Investigating the Impact of Hearing Aid Use and Auditory Training on Cognition, Depressive Symptoms, and Social Interaction in Adults With Hearing Loss: Protocol for a Crossover Trial (Preprint)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Nkyekyer ◽  
Denny Meyer ◽  
Peter J Blamey ◽  
Andrew Pipingas ◽  
Sunil Bhar
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Social Interaction ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Hearing Aid Use

BACKGROUND Sensorineural hearing loss is the most common sensory deficit among older adults. Some of the psychosocial consequences of this condition include difficulty in understanding speech, depression, and social isolation. Studies have shown that older adults with hearing loss show some age-related cognitive decline. Hearing aids have been proven as successful interventions to alleviate sensorineural hearing loss. In addition to hearing aid use, the positive effects of auditory training—formal listening activities designed to optimize speech perception—are now being documented among adults with hearing loss who use hearing aids, especially new hearing aid users. Auditory training has also been shown to produce prolonged cognitive performance improvements. However, there is still little evidence to support the benefits of simultaneous hearing aid use and individualized face-to-face auditory training on cognitive performance in adults with hearing loss. OBJECTIVE This study will investigate whether using hearing aids for the first time will improve the impact of individualized face-to-face auditory training on cognition, depression, and social interaction for adults with sensorineural hearing loss. The rationale for this study is based on the hypothesis that, in adults with sensorineural hearing loss, using hearing aids for the first time in combination with individualized face-to-face auditory training will be more effective for improving cognition, depressive symptoms, and social interaction rather than auditory training on its own. METHODS This is a crossover trial targeting 40 men and women between 50 and 90 years of age with either mild or moderate symmetric sensorineural hearing loss. Consented, willing participants will be recruited from either an independent living accommodation or via a community database to undergo a 6-month intensive face-to-face auditory training program (active control). Participants will be assigned in random order to receive hearing aid (intervention) for either the first 3 or last 3 months of the 6-month auditory training program. Each participant will be tested at baseline, 3, and 6 months using a neuropsychological battery of computer-based cognitive assessments, together with a depression symptom instrument and a social interaction measure. The primary outcome will be cognitive performance with regard to spatial working memory. Secondary outcome measures include other cognition performance measures, depressive symptoms, social interaction, and hearing satisfaction. RESULTS Data analysis is currently under way and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in June 2018. CONCLUSIONS Results from the study will inform strategies for aural rehabilitation, hearing aid delivery, and future hearing loss intervention trials. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03112850; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03112850 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6xz12fD0B).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document