Impact of compression and hearing aid style on directional hearing aid benefit and performance.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of low-threshold compression and hearing aid style (in-the-ear [ITE] versus behind-the-ear [BTE]) on the directional benefit and performance of commercially available directional hearing aids. DESIGN: Forty-seven adult listeners with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss were fit bilaterally with one BTE and four different ITE hearing aids. Speech recognition performance was measured through the Connected Speech Test (CST) and Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) for a simulated noisy restaurant environment. RESULTS: For both the HINT and CST, speech recognition performance was significantly greater for subjects fit with directional in comparison with omnidirectional microphone hearing aids. Performance was significantly poorer for the BTE instrument in comparison with the ITE hearing aids when using omnidirectional microphones. No differences were found for directional benefit between compression and linear fitting schemes. CONCLUSIONS: No systematic relationship was found between the relative directional benefit and hearing aid style; however, the speech recognition performance of the subjects was somewhat predictable based on Directivity Index measures of the individual hearing aid models. The fact that compression did not interact significantly with microphone type agrees well with previously reported electroacoustic data.     

Directivity of different hearing aid microphone locations

In this study, we present a new method to derive a single-number measure of the directivity of hearing aids. The method is an extension of the conventional directivity index (DI), and is called overall directivity index (ODI). The directivities of five different hearing aid styles were compared with that of the open ear. The behind-the-ear (BTE) style showed the lowest directionality compared to the other hearing aid styles and the open ear. There were only minor differences in directivity between any of the four different hearing aid styles placed in the ear and of the open ear canal. The conventional measure of DI is less suitable for hearing aids, because it ignores sound coming from other than the frontal direction. To quantify directionality of a hearing aid in a real-life situation, we suggest the single-number ODI, weighted with the articulation index and related to a listening segment of 0-30 degrees. An application of the data is shown for a BTE with a directional microphone.     

An audit of hearing aid quality in Denmark.

This investigation was aimed towards an evaluation of the quality of hearing aids, dispensed from a National Hearing Health Service. During a twelve month period all subjects attending the hearing aid servicing section were recorded, and the reason for the visit noted. A total of 4450 people attended (45% males, 55% females) with a median age of 71 years, range 8-99 years. Among these 60.4% of attendances could be ascribed to defective hearing aids. Among the defective hearing aids 20.6% had been used less than one year and 91.4% of the defective aids had been used less than four years, that is within the guarantee period. The recording demonstrated that specific series of aids have a defect rate of 6.6-70.9% within the first year of use. A comparison between the frequency of defects in different types of hearing aids (BTE, ITE, ITC and other hearing aids) was performed indicating that there is a risk of 8.6% that BTE will be defective within one year of provision. As 20.6% of the applicants' defective hearing aids had been used less than one year, it is concluded that the quality of hearing aids should be improved; the hearing aid manufacturers' main categories for fault finding can be used in the audiological departments within the National Hearing Health Service; the recording offers valuable data on the quality of hearing aids, and specifically poor series can be revealed within a limited period.     

Predictability of speech-in-noise performance from real ear measures of directional hearing AIDS

OBJECTIVE: Inability to understand speech in noise has been cited repeatedly as the principal complaint of hearing aid users. While data exist documenting the benefit provided by hearing aids with directional microphones when listening to speech in noise, little work has been done to develop a standard clinical protocol for fitting these hearing aids. Our goal was to evaluate a clinical measure of the acoustic directivity of a directional hearing aid, including its association with a test of speech perception in noise. DESIGN: The performance of two commercially available directional behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids was evaluated using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) and the Real Ear Aided Response (REAR) on 24 adult participants with symmetric, mild to moderately severe, sensorineural hearing loss. The HINT was conducted with the speech signal presented from 0 degrees and the noise from 180 degrees and either 135 degrees or 225 degrees, depending on the ear tested. REAR was measured at the above three angles using swept pure tones, and these measures were used to compute in situ directivity for each subject and hearing aid. CONCLUSIONS: Directional benefit for the HINT was greatest when noise was presented from the azimuth of the published polar diagram null of a given hearing aid in its directional mode (180 or 135/225 degrees). The only significant correlation between HINT and REAR results, however, was found when the noise source was at 180 degrees. These results confirm the validity of using real ear measures as a way to assess directionality in situ, but also indicate the complexity of predicting perceptual benefit from them. These data suggest that factors beyond acoustic directionality may contribute to improvement in speech perception in noise when such improvements are found.     

Unaided and aided performance with a directional open-fit hearing aid

Differences in performance between unaided and aided performance (omnidirectional and directional) were measured using an open-fit behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aid. Twenty-six subjects without prior experience with amplification were fitted bilaterally using the manufacturer's recommended procedure. After wearing the hearing aids for one week, the fitting parameters were fine-tuned, based on subjective comments. Four weeks later, differences in performance between unaided and aided (omnidirectional and directional) were assessed by measuring reception thresholds for sentences (RTS in dB), using HINT sentences presented at 0 degrees with R-Space restaurant noise held constant at 65dBA and presented via eight loudspeakers set 45 degrees apart. In addition, the APHAB was administered to assess subjective impressions of the experimental aid. Results revealed that significant differences in RTS (in dB) were present between directional and omnidirectional performance, as well as directional and unaided performance. Aided omnidirectional performance, however, was not significantly different from unaided performance. These findings suggest for the hearing aids and experimental condition used in this study, a patient would require directional microphones in order to perform significantly better than unaided or aided with omnidirectional microphones, and that performance with an omnidirectional microphone would not be significantly better than unaided. Finally, the APHAB-aided scores were significantly better than unaided scores for the EC, BN, RV, and AV subscales indicating the subjects, on average, perceived the experimental aid to provide significantly better performance than unaided, and that aided performance was more aversive than unaided.     

A new hearing aid variant. Preliminary evaluation

An attempt was made to combine the advantages of a behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aid (trouble-free use, powerful amplification, room for high-quality components, space for large energy source, use of extra equipment), with the advantages of the in-the-ear (ITE) hearing aid (improved intelligibility, improved directional hearing, improved signal/noise ratio). A BTE hearing aid was equipped with filters and provided with an external microphone. A first experiment, carried out in an anechoic chamber on KEMAR (Knowles Electronic Manikin for Acoustical Research), showed that directional variation of the frequency response of the hearing aid microphone was better in the new hearing aid than in the original BTE. A second experiment was carried out with a group of 6 normal-hearing persons concerning the frequency characteristic of sound transmission from twelve angles in the horizontal plane without a hearing aid, with a normal BTE aid, with the 'new aid', and with an ITE aid. The new instrument gave significantly better directional hearing than the original BTE aid. A clinical study will be started to verify and extend the experimental results obtained.     

Vent configurations on subjective and objective occlusion effect

The current study reexamined the effect of vent diameters on objective and subjective occlusion effect (OE) while minimizing two possible sources of variability. Nine hearing-impaired participants with primarily a high-frequency hearing loss were evaluated. Laser shell-making technology was used to make ear inserts of completely-in-the-canal (CIC) hearing aids for the study. This was to minimize any potential slit leakage from the inserts. The vent dimensions were systematically altered during the study. Participants sustained /i/ for 5 sec, and the real-ear occluded response was measured with a custom-made program that performed frequency averaging to reduce response variability. Participants also repeated the phrase "Baby Jeannie is teeny tiny" and rated their own voice. The results showed a systematic change in the objective OE and subjective ratings of OE as the vent diameter was modified. Furthermore, a significant correlation was seen between subjective rating and objective occlusion effect.     

Effects of CIC hearing aids on auditory localization by listeners with normal hearing.

An experiment was conducted to determine the effects of completely-in-the-canal (CIC) hearing aids on auditory localization performance. Six normal-hearing listeners localized a 750-ms broadband noise from loudspeakers ranging in azimuth from -180 degrees to +180 degrees and in elevation from -75 degrees to +90 degrees. Independent variables included the presence or absence of the hearing aid and the elevation of the source. Dependent measures included azimuth error, elevation error, and the percentage of trials resulting in a front-back confusion. The findings indicate a statistically significant decrement in localization acuity, both in azimuth and elevation, occasioned by the wearing of CIC hearing aids. However, the magnitude of this decrement was small compared to those typically caused by other ear-canal occlusions, such as earplugs, and would probably not engender mislocalization of real-world sounds.     

Performance of dual-microphone in-the-ear hearing aids

Fifty subjects with mild to moderate-severe sensorineural hearing loss and prior experience with binaural amplification were evaluated at two sites (25 subjects at each site). Signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) were measured using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) after each subject wore binaural in-the-ear hearing aids programmed for omnidirectional and dual-microphone performance, for 4 weeks. Both microphone conditions were evaluated under "ideal" (signal at 0 degrees; noise at 180 degrees) and "diffuse" (signal at 0 degrees; correlated noise at 45 , 135 degrees, 225 degrees, and 315 degrees) listening conditions. Results revealed statistically significant mean improvements in SNRs between 3.7 and 3.5 dB at Site I and 3.2 and 2.7 dB at Site II for the ideal and diffuse listening conditions, respectively, for the dual-microphones in comparison to the performance provided by the omnidirectional microphone.     

A "virtual hearing aid" for comparing hearing aids in children: a double-blind crossover study.

In this study, a "virtual hearing aid" was used to compare different types of hearing aids. A digital hearing aid (Oticon DigiFocus Compact) and an analogue, automatic reference hearing aid were compared in a group of 17 schoolchildren (median age: 10 years) with moderate to severe, symmetrical, sensorineural hearing loss. Differences in performance were assessed using routine diagnostic methods (speech recognition performance tests, loudness scaling), subjective assessments (questionnaires) and the "virtual hearing aid". Guaranteeing double-blind testing conditions, the "virtual hearing aid" offers the possibility to directly compare individual in-situ recordings of different hearing aids. In contrast to the clear subjective preferences for the digital hearing aid, we could not obtain any significant results with routine diagnostic methods. Using the "virtual hearing aid", the subjective comparison and speech recognition performance tasks yielded significant differences. The "virtual hearing aid" proved to be suitable for directly comparing different hearing aids under double-blind testing conditions.     

New hearing aid users' perception of the "hearing aid effect"

The negative attitude elicited by the presence of a hearing aid has been termed the "hearing aid effect." The purpose of this study was to examine the negative reactions associated with hearing aids among new hearing aid users themselves and their perception of the hearing aid effect in their immediate environment. This was accomplished through a questionnaire completed just prior to hearing aid fitting and again 6 months after initial use of amplification. The responses to the questionnaires were compared between individuals who had chosen either in the ear or behind the ear type hearing aids, and between those using either monaural or binaural instruments. The effect of age on the data was also examined. The results indicated that the hearing aid effect was not expected or perceived very widely among these subjects, as only about 10% of them reported sensing negative attitudes to the use of hearing aids. Positive responses to the benefits of hearing aid use from other people often fell short of expectations.     

Loudness perception is influenced by long-term hearing aid use.

The aim of this study was to explore possible differences in the perception of loudness between long-term hearing aid full-time users and non-users. Categorical loudness scaling using pure-tone stimuli was carried out by hearing-impaired subjects. The mean levels of loudness categories at one frequency (hearing threshold: 50-75 dB HL) in a group of 18 hearing aid users (daily use < or = 15 hours per day) were compared with the corresponding levels found in 18 hearing-impaired non-users with the same distribution of hearing thresholds. The results show that, for hearing losses of 50-75 dB HL, the mean level rated as 'loud' by long-term full-time users of hearing aids is 4.5 dB above the mean level of the corresponding category rated by non-users. This difference is statistically significant (P<0.05). No significant differences were found for the lower categories. Among those subjects who had been wearing hearing aids for at least six months, no significant correlation was found between the levels of the 'loud' category and the length of time that hearing aids had been used.     

Acoustic versus electronic modifications of hearing aid low-frequency output

The rated quality and intelligibility of speech processed by hearing aids in which the low-frequency output had been reduced by either electronic modification (low-cut tone controls) or acoustic modification (vented or open earmolds) was investigated. Fifteen subjects with high-frequency hearing loss provided data for nine commercial hearing aids and both high and low background noise levels. Results for both background noise levels indicated that for hearing aids with a low-frequency cut off at or above 750 Hz (as measured in this investigation), the use of a vented or open earmold significantly improved both quality and intelligibility even when it had essentially no effect on the hearing aid's low-frequency output. The implication of the outcome is that for an individual with essentially normal low-frequency sensitivity and a high-frequency hearing loss, an earmold incorporating an opening should be used whenever possible, even though it may not be used for the purpose of controlling low-frequency amplification.     

Health care providers' and peers' impressions of elderly hearing aid wearers

This study investigated whether (1) health care providers (nursing home and hospital staff personnel) and elderly peer observers formed negative initial impressions of elderly persons shown in three conditions of hearing aid use; (2) whether the groups differed in their ratings; and (3) whether size of the aid affected their ratings. Stimuli were 36 photographic slides, three each of six male and six female elderly persons shown wearing a body hearing aid, a postauricular aid, and no aid. Observers rated the 12 stimulus subjects on a 16-item semantic differential. Factor analysis of the ratings resulted in three factors: achievement, personality, and appearance. Analysis of variance revealed that no "hearing aid effect" was present, since none of the observer groups rated the stimulus subjects lower on any of the three factors when they were shown wearing hearing aids. Further, the groups did not differ in their observations, and size of the hearing aid did not affect their ratings. The findings differ somewhat from earlier studies and have implications for counseling potential hearing aid users.     

Speech and music quality ratings for linear and nonlinear hearing aid circuitry

This study evaluated quality ratings for speech and music stimuli processed using peak clipping (PC), compression limiting (CL), and wide-dynamic range compression (WDRC) hearing aid circuitry. Eighteen listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss were binaurally fitted with behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids and instructed to rate the quality of speech under various conditions in quiet and noise and two genres of music. Results for speech revealed a slight preference for WDRC at 80 dB SPL, and equivalent ratings for the three circuits under all other listening conditions. Music ratings revealed a marginally significant preference for WDRC and a preference for classical over popular music. For music, judgments on pleasantness were the most influential on overall circuit preference.     

Patient satisfaction with the bone-anchored hearing aid: a 14-year experience.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the self-rated quality of life (QoL) and benefits associated with the use of bone-anchored hearing aids (BAHAs) and to identify potential improvements in comparison to the previous conventional hearing aids. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: BAHA program in tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: One hundred fifty-two adults who underwent BAHA procedure for more than 6 months. INTERVENTION: Rehabilitative. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Results of the Entific Medical Systems questionnaire. RESULTS: One hundred seventeen responses (77%) were obtained. Overall satisfaction was excellent (median = 9). BAHA was rated very good/excellent in single-person conversation (85%), but fared less well in group situation (45%). BAHA was reported as better than the previous aid by more than 50% of patients within each subcategory where applicable (handling, 64%; comfort, 56%; cosmetic, 60%; sound, 68%; infections, 75%). Of those who reported improvement of ear infections, one quarter remained unsatisfied of improvement in QoL. Patients who used BAHA for 3 years or less (n = 45) had a similar rating to sound quality and conversation as those who used it longer (n = 72). Surprisingly, a subset of patients (n = 8) with poor bone-conduction thresholds (> 45 dB) remained satisfied with the device (median = 8). CONCLUSIONS: The BAHA can improve QoL and hearing outcome with full acclimatization to the device being achievable within a reasonable amount of time. As with conventional aids, sound quality in group situations remains poor with the BAHA. Our results provide a predictive value during preoperative counseling of patients.     

A comparison of CIC and BTE hearing aids for three-dimensional localization of speech

Abstract

Three-dimensional sound localization of speech in anechoic space was examined for eleven listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. The listeners were fitted bilaterally with CIC and BTE hearing aids having similar bandwidth capabilities. The goal was to determine whether differences in microphone placement for these two styles (CICs at the ear canal entrance; BTEs above the pinna) would influence the availability of pinna-related spectral cues and hence localization performance. While lateral and polar angle localization was unaffected by the hearing aid style, the rate of front-back reversals was lower with CICs. This pattern persisted after listeners accommodated to each set of aids for a six week period, although the overall rate of reversals declined. Performance on all measures in all conditions was considerably poorer than in a control group of listeners with normal hearing.

Sumario

Se evaluó la localización tridimensional de sonidos del habla en un espacio anecoide en once personas con pérdida auditiva sensorineural. A los once se les adaptaron CIC y BTE bilateralmente con capacidad de ancho de banda similar. El objetivo fue determinar si las diferencias en la colocación del micrófono con ambos tipos (CIC en el ingreso del conducto auditivo; BTE sobre el pabellón auricular) podría influenciar la disponibilidad de claves espectrales relacionadas con el pabellón y por ello, el rendimiento para la localización. Mientras que la localización del ángulo lateral y polar no fue afectada por el tipo de auxiliar, la tasa de inversiones frente-atrás fue menor con los CIC. Este patrón persistió después de que estas personas se acostumbraron a cada set de auxiliares por un período de seis semanas, a pesar de que declinó la tasa global de reversiones. El rendimiento en todas las mediciones y condiciones fue considerablemente más pobre que en el grupo control de personas con audición normal.     

The impact of head angle on monaural and binaural performance with directional and omnidirectional hearing aids

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of head turn and monaural and binaural fittings on the sentence reception thresholds of hearing-impaired listeners wearing directional and omnidirectional hearing aids. DESIGN: Sentence reception thresholds were measured for 20 listeners fit monaurally and binaurally with behind-the-ear hearing aids set in both directional and omnidirectional modes. All listeners exhibited symmetrical, sloping, sensorineural hearing loss. The aided performance across these four fittings was evaluated for three different head and body angles. The three angles reflected body turns of 0 degrees, 15 degrees, and 30 degrees as measured relative to the primary sound source, with 0 degrees denoting the listener directly facing the sound source. Listeners were instructed to keep their heads in a fixed horizontal position and turn their heads and bodies to face visual targets at the three test angles. Sentences from the Hearing in Noise Test presented with a background of five, spatially separated, uncorrelated samples of cafeteria noise served as test material. All testing was performed in a moderately reverberant (Rt = 631 msec) "living room" environment. RESULTS: Participants generally performed significantly better when fit with directional versus omnidirectional hearing aids, and when fit binaurally versus monaurally across test conditions. The measured "binaural advantage" was reduced with increasing head angle. Participants performed significantly better with a 30 degree head angle than when directly facing the primary speaker. This "head turn advantage" was most prominent for monaural (versus binaural) conditions. Binaural and head turn advantages were not significantly different across directional and omnidirectional modes. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide additional support for the use of directional hearing aids and binaural amplification to improve speech intelligibility in noisy environments. The magnitude of these advantages was similar to that reported in previous investigations. The data also showed that hearing aid wearers achieved significantly better speech intelligibility in noise by turning their heads and bodies to a position in which they were not directly facing the sound source. This head turn advantage was in good agreement with the increase in Directivity Index with head turn and reflected the fact that hearing aids are generally most sensitive to sounds arriving from angles other than directly in front of the hearing aid wearer. Although these data suggest that many monaural hearing aid wearers may significantly improve speech intelligibility in noise through the use of head turn, the interaction between this advantage and the potential loss of visual cues with head turn is unknown.     

Speech understanding and directional hearing for hearing-impaired subjects with in-the-ear and behind-the-ear hearing aids

With respect to acoustical properties, in-the-ear (ITE) aids should give better understanding and directional hearing than behind-the-ear (BTE) aids. Also hearing-impaired subjects often prefer ITEs. A study was performed to assess objectively the improvement in speech understanding and directional hearing afforded by ITE aids versus BTEs. In 28 hearing-impaired subjects, who visited our Centre for a check-up of their ITEs, the following parameters were measured: (a) thresholds for third-octave bandpass noises between 0.25 and 4 kHz, (b) speech reception thresholds for short Dutch sentences in quiet and with background noise, (c) directional hearing. All three experiments were done binaurally with the subjects wearing their ITEs, BTEs, and no hearing aid. With the 2-cc coupler, the gain used by the subject was measured. The SRT values for the ITE were significantly lower than those for BTE. More gain at 2 and 4 kHz in the ITE proved to be a responsible factor for this improvement. Directional hearing was not improved by wearing an ITE. Large interindividual differences were found between functional gain and the 2-cc coupler measurements. The mean functional gain at 4 kHz for an ITE is higher than the gain measured in a 2-cc coupler. For a BTE, the functional gain at 2 and 4 kHz is lower than the 2-cc coupler gain.