The Relationship between the Acceptance of Noise and Acoustic Environments in Young Adults with Normal Hearing: A Pilot Study

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (06) ◽  
pp. 584-591 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clifford A. Franklin ◽  
Letitia J. White ◽  
Thomas C. Franklin ◽  
Laura Smith-Olinde
Keyword(s):  
Background Noise ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Directional Microphone ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Listening Environments ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
Acoustic Environments ◽  
Different Characteristics

Background: The acceptable noise level (ANL) indicates how much background noise a listener is willing to accept while listening to speech. The clinical impact and application of the ANL measure is as a predictor of hearing-aid use. The ANL may also correlate with the percentage of time spent in different listening environments (i.e., quiet, noisy, noisy with speech present, etc). Information retrieved from data logging could confirm this relationship. Data logging, using sound scene analysis, is a method of monitoring the different characteristics of the listening environments that a hearing-aid user experiences during a period. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if the ANL procedure reflects the proportion of time a person spends in different acoustic environments. Research Design: This was a descriptive quasi-experimental design to collect pilot data in which participants were asked to maintain their regular, daily activities while wearing a data-logging device. Study Sample: After completing the ANL measurement, 29 normal-hearing listeners were provided a data-logging device and were instructed on its proper use. Data Collection/Analysis: ANL measures were obtained along with the percentage of time participants spent in listening environments classified as quiet, speech-in-quiet, speech-in-noise, and noise via a data-logging device. Results: An analysis of variance using a general linear model indicated that listeners with low ANL values spent more time in acoustic environments in which background noise was present than did those with high ANL values; the ANL data did not indicate differences in how much time listeners spent in environments of differing intensities. Conclusions: To some degree, the ANL is reflective of the acoustic environments and the amount of noise that the listener is willing to accept; data logging illustrates the acoustic environments in which the listener was present. Clinical implications include, but are not limited to, decisions in patient care regarding the need for additional counseling and/or the use of digital noise reduction and directional microphone technology.

Use of a Mild-Gain Hearing Aid by Middle-Age Normal-Hearing Adults Who Do and Do Not Self-Report Trouble Hearing in Background Noise

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 419-428
Author(s):  
Jasleen Singh ◽  
Karen A. Doherty
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Middle Age ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Hearing Handicap ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Hearing Problems

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.

The Robustness of Hearing Aid Microphone Preferences in Everyday Listening Environments

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (05) ◽  
pp. 358-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian E. Walden ◽  
Rauna K. Surr ◽  
Mary T. Cord ◽  
Ken W. Grant ◽  
Van Summers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Laboratory Setting ◽  
Hearing Ability ◽  
Directional Microphone ◽  
Listening Environments ◽  
Processing Modes ◽  
Acoustic Environments ◽  
High Degree

Automatic directionality algorithms currently implemented in hearing aids assume that hearing-impaired persons with similar hearing losses will prefer the same microphone processing mode in a specific everyday listening environment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the robustness of microphone preferences in everyday listening. Two hearing-impaired persons made microphone preference judgments (omnidirectional preferred, directional preferred, no preference) in a variety of everyday listening situations. Simultaneously, these acoustic environments were recorded through the omnidirectional and directional microphone processing modes. The acoustic recordings were later presented in a laboratory setting for microphone preferences to the original two listeners and other listeners who differed in hearing ability and experience with directional microphone processing. The original two listeners were able to replicate their live microphone preferences in the laboratory with a high degree of accuracy. This suggests that the basis of the original live microphone preferences were largely represented in the acoustic recordings. Other hearing-impaired and normal-hearing participants who listened to the environmental recordings also accurately replicated the original live omnidirectional preferences; however, directional preferences were not as robust across the listeners. When the laboratory rating did not replicate the live directional microphone preference, listeners almost always expressed no preference for either microphone mode. Hence, a preference for omnidirectional processing was rarely expressed by any of the participants to recorded sites where directional processing had been preferred as a live judgment and vice versa. These results are interpreted to provide little basis for customizing automatic directionality algorithms for individual patients. The implications of these findings for hearing aid design are discussed. Los algoritmos automáticos de direccionalidad actualmente implementados en auxiliares auditivos asumen que las personas hipoacúsicas con pérdidas similares preferirán el mismo modo de procesamiento del micrófono en los ambientes cotidianos específicos de escucha. El propósito de este estudio fue evaluar la firmeza de las preferencias de micrófonos para la audición cotidiana. Dos personas hipoacúsicas establecieron juicios de preferencia en cuanto a los micrófonos (preferencia omnidireccional, preferencia direccional, sin preferencia) en una variedad de situaciones cotidianas de escucha. Simultáneamente, estos ambientes acústicos fueron registrados a través de modos omnidireccionales y direccionales de procesamiento del micrófono. Las grabaciones acústicas fueron luego presentadas en un contexto de laboratorio para preferencias del micrófono a los dos sujetos originales y a dos sujetos que diferían en su habilidad auditiva y en su experiencia con procesamiento direccional de micrófonos. Los dos sujetos originales pudieron replicar en el laboratorio sus preferencias de micrófono en vivo con un alto grado de exactitud. Esto sugiere que las bases para la preferencia original y aquella en vivo de los micrófonos fueron correctamente representadas en los registros acústicos. Otros participantes con hipoacusia y normoyentes que escucharon los registros ambientales también replicaron con exactitud las preferencias omnidireccionales originales en vivo; sin embargo, las preferencias direccionales no fueron tan consistentes entre todos ellos. Cuando la clasificación de laboratorio no replicó la preferencia direccional de micrófono en vivo, los sujetos casi siempre dejaron de expresar preferencia por ningún modo de micrófono. Por lo tanto, la preferencia para procesamiento omnidireccional raramente fue escogida por ninguno de los participantes para situaciones donde se había preferido el registro direccional como un juicio en vivo y viceversa. Se interpreta que estos resultados aportan poco en la búsqueda de adecuar automáticamente los algoritmos de direccionalidad para pacientes individuales. Se discuten las implicaciones de estos hallazgos en el diseño de auxiliares auditivos.

Hearing Aid Amplification Reduces Communication Effort of People With Hearing Impairment and Their Conversation Partners

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 1299-1311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Beechey ◽  
Jörg M. Buchholz ◽  
Gitte Keidser
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Impairment ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Referential Communication ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Directional Hearing ◽  
Acoustic Environment ◽  
Communication Task ◽  
Acoustic Environments ◽  
The Impact

Objectives This study investigates the hypothesis that hearing aid amplification reduces effort within conversation for both hearing aid wearers and their communication partners. Levels of effort, in the form of speech production modifications, required to maintain successful spoken communication in a range of acoustic environments are compared to earlier reported results measured in unaided conversation conditions. Design Fifteen young adult normal-hearing participants and 15 older adult hearing-impaired participants were tested in pairs. Each pair consisted of one young normal-hearing participant and one older hearing-impaired participant. Hearing-impaired participants received directional hearing aid amplification, according to their audiogram, via a master hearing aid with gain provided according to the NAL-NL2 fitting formula. Pairs of participants were required to take part in naturalistic conversations through the use of a referential communication task. Each pair took part in five conversations, each of 5-min duration. During each conversation, participants were exposed to one of five different realistic acoustic environments presented through highly open headphones. The ordering of acoustic environments across experimental blocks was pseudorandomized. Resulting recordings of conversational speech were analyzed to determine the magnitude of speech modifications, in terms of vocal level and spectrum, produced by normal-hearing talkers as a function of both acoustic environment and the degree of high-frequency average hearing impairment of their conversation partner. Results The magnitude of spectral modifications of speech produced by normal-hearing talkers during conversations with aided hearing-impaired interlocutors was smaller than the speech modifications observed during conversations between the same pairs of participants in the absence of hearing aid amplification. Conclusions The provision of hearing aid amplification reduces the effort required to maintain communication in adverse conditions. This reduction in effort provides benefit to hearing-impaired individuals and also to the conversation partners of hearing-impaired individuals. By considering the impact of amplification on both sides of dyadic conversations, this approach contributes to an increased understanding of the likely impact of hearing impairment on everyday communication.

Monitoring Progress for Children with Hearing Loss

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-81
Author(s):  
Monica Weston ◽  
Karen F. Muñoz ◽  
Kristina Blaiser
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Standardized Measures ◽  
Word Structure ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
Language Measures ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss

Purpose This study investigated average hours of daily hearing aid use and speech-language outcomes for children age 3 to 6 years of age with hearing loss. Method Objective measures of hearing aid use were collected via data logging. Speech and language measures included standardized measures GFTA-2, CELF Preschool-2 and additional item analyses for the word structure subtest CELF Preschool-2 and the GFTA-2. Results Hearing aid use was full time for 33% of the children (n=3; M=8.84 hours; Range: 2.9–12.1) at the beginning of the study, and for 78% at the end of the study (n=7; M=9.89 hours; Range 2.6–13.2). All participants demonstrated an improvement in articulation and language standard scores and percentiles however continued to demonstrate areas of weakness in sounds high-frequency in nature. Conclusions Through early identification and fitting, children gain access to speech sounds. Both standardized measures and individual language analysis should be used to identify and support children with hearing loss in language and subsequent literacy development.

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

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 883-892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha J. Gustafson ◽  
Todd A. Ricketts ◽  
Anne Marie Tharpe
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Parent Report ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
School Age ◽  
Data Logging ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
System Use ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss

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.

A Clinical Perspective on Cochlear Dead Regions: Intelligibility of Speech and Subjective Hearing Aid Benefit

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (08) ◽  
pp. 600-613 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill E. Preminger ◽  
Ryan Carpenter ◽  
Craig H. Ziegler
Keyword(s):  
Background Noise ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Clinical Population ◽  
Clinical Perspective ◽  
Listening Environments ◽  
Noise Test ◽  
Cochlear Dead Regions ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Using the threshold equalizing noise (TEN) test, 49 subjects with at least two pure-tone thresholds per ear greater than 50 dB HL and none greater than 80 dB HL were evaluated for the presence or absence of dead regions. The purpose of this study was to (1) assess the prevalence of cochlear dead regions in this clinical population, (2) measure whether listeners with dead regions performed differently than listeners without dead regions on a speech intelligibility in noise test, and (3) determine whether cochlear dead regions are associated with reduced subjective hearing aid performance. The results showed that (1) twenty-nine percent of the subjects tested positive for dead regions, (2) listeners with dead regions had poorer sentence understanding in noise than listeners without dead regions and (3) listeners with dead regions perceived poorer subjective hearing aid performance in listening environments with reverberation or background noise as compared to those without dead regions.

Noise Exposure Associated With Hearing Aid Use in Industry

1996 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas G. Dolan ◽  
James F. Maurer
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Noise Exposure ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
High Gain ◽  
Sound Level ◽  
Weighted Averages ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Listening Environments ◽  
Level Meter

Although noise may be innocuous in many vocational environments, there is a growing concern in industry that it can reach hazardous levels when amplified by hearing aids. This study examined the daily noise exposures associated with hearing aid use in industry. This was done by both laboratory and site measurements in which hearing aids were coupled to the microphone of an integrating sound level meter or dosimeter. The former method involved the use of recorded railroad and manufacturing noise and a Bruel and Kjaer 4128 Head and Torso simulator. In the latter procedure, a worker wore one of three hearing aids coupled to a dosimeter during 8-hour shifts in a manufacturing plant. Both methods demonstrated that even when amplified by mild-gain hearing aids, noise exposures rose from time-weighted averages near 80 dBA to well above the OSHA maximum of 90 dBA. The OSHA maximum was also exceeded when moderate and high gain instruments were worn in non-occupational listening environments. The results suggest that current OSHA regulations that limit noise exposure in sound field are inappropriate for hearing aid users.

Hearing Aid Use and Mild Hearing Impairment: Learnings from Big Data

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (08) ◽  
pp. 731-741 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbra H. B. Timmer ◽  
Louise Hickson ◽  
Stefan Launer
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Impairment ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Personal Information ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
British Society ◽  
Hearing Aid Use ◽  
Listening Environments ◽  
And Gender ◽  
The Right

AbstractPrevious research, mostly reliant on self-reports, has indicated that hearing aid (HA) use is related to the degree of hearing impairment (HI). No large-scale investigation of the relationship between data-logged HA use and HI has been conducted to date.This study aimed to investigate if objective measures of overall daily HA use and HA use in various listening environments are different for adults with mild HI compared to adults with moderate HI.This retrospective study used data extracted from a database of fitting appointments from an international group of HA providers. Only data from the participants’ most recent fitting appointment were included in the final dataset.A total of 8,489 bilateral HA fittings of adults over the age of 18 yr, conducted between January 2013 and June 2014, were included. Participants were subsequently allocated to HI groups, based on British Society of Audiology and American Speech-Language-Hearing Association audiometric descriptors.Fitting data from participating HA providers were regularly transferred to a central server. The data, with all personal information except age and gender removed, contained participants’ four-frequency average (at 500, 1000, 2000, and 4000 Hz) as well as information on HA characteristics and usage. Following data cleaning, bivariate and post hoc statistical analyses were conducted.The total sample of adults’ average daily HA use was 8.52 hr (interquartile range [IQR] = 5.49–11.77) in the left ear and 8.51 hr (IQR = 5.49–11.72) in the right ear. With a few exceptions, there were no statistical differences between hours of HA use for participants with mild HI compared to those with moderate impairment. Across all mild and moderate HI groups, the most common overall HA usage was between 8 and 12 hr per day. Other factors such as age, gender, and HA style also showed no relationship to hours of use. HAs were used, on average, for 7 hr (IQR = 4.27–9.96) per day in quiet and 1 hr (IQR = 0.33–1.41) per day in noisy listening situations.Clinical populations with mild HI use HAs as frequently as those with a moderate HI. These findings support the recommendation of HAs for adults with milder degrees of HI.

Relationship between acceptance of background noise and hearing aid use

2003 ◽  
Vol 113 (4) ◽  
pp. 2289-2289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna K. Nabelek ◽  
Samuel B. Burchfield ◽  
Joanna D. Webster
Keyword(s):  
Background Noise ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Hearing Aid Use

scholarly journals Electroacoustic assessment of wireless remote microphone systems

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Haniyeh Salehi ◽  
Vijay Parsa ◽  
Paula Folkeard
Keyword(s):  
Acoustic Signal ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Computational Models ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
The Other ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Significant Interest ◽  
Acoustic Environments ◽  
Acoustic Conditions

Wireless remote microphones (RMs) transmit the desired acoustic signal to the hearing aid (HA) and facilitate enhanced listening in challenging environments. Fitting and verification of RMs, and benchmarking the relative performance of different RM devices in varied acoustic environments are of significant interest to Audiologists and RM developers. This paper investigates the application of instrumental speech intelligibility and quality metrics for characterizing the RM performance in two acoustic environments with varying amounts of background noise and reverberation. In both environments, two head and torso simulators (HATS) were placed 2 m apart, where one HATS served as the talker and the other served as the listener. Four RM systems were interfaced separately with a HA programmed to match the prescriptive targets for the N4 standard audiogram and placed on the listener HATS. The HA output in varied acoustic conditions was recorded and analyzed offline through computational models predicting speech intelligibility and quality. Results showed performance differences among the four RMs in the presence of noise and/or reverberation, with one RM exhibiting significantly better performance. Clinical implications and applications of these results are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document