Hearing aid benefit in everyday environments
- PMID: 2065838
- DOI: 10.1097/00003446-199104000-00009
Hearing aid benefit in everyday environments
Abstract
Hearing aid benefit was measured for three matched groups of eleven hearing-impaired subjects, each serving in one typical listening environment. Benefit was quantified in terms of improvement in intelligibility score for the Connected Speech Test. Each subject was individually fitted with three hearing aids, differing in nominal frequency response slope by a total of 8 dB/octave. Research questions centered on the amount of benefit typically realized in everyday environments and the interactions of this benefit with frequency response and/or visual cues. Results revealed: (1) mean benefit in a living-room type setting was about 24% and significantly greater than in a reverberant setting (7%) and a noisy setting (-1%); (2) despite the relatively large mean difference in benefit between the reverberant and noisy environments, the difference was not statistically significant (p greater than 0.05); (3) the addition of visual cues did not change hearing aid benefit in any tested environment; (4) there was no significant overall trend for any of the three different frequency-response slopes to give superior benefit in any environment; (5) 76% of the subjects achieved significantly different benefit (p less than 0.05) in at least one hearing aid condition when data were considered on an individual basis; and (6) articulation indices in the aided conditions did not successfully predict the observed within-subject benefit differences. Benefit was significantly related to speech reception threshold in the living-room environment. However, in the less favorable environments, benefit and hearing loss were not related despite the fact that benefit varied considerably across subjects.
Similar articles
-
Preferred hearing aid gain in everyday environments.Ear Hear. 1991 Apr;12(2):123-6. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199104000-00008. Ear Hear. 1991. PMID: 2065837
-
The influence of audiovisual ceiling performance on the relationship between reverberation and directional benefit: perception and prediction.Ear Hear. 2012 Sep-Oct;33(5):604-14. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31825641e4. Ear Hear. 2012. PMID: 22677815
-
Maturation of hearing aid benefit: objective and subjective measurements.Ear Hear. 1992 Jun;13(3):131-41. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199206000-00001. Ear Hear. 1992. PMID: 1397752
-
The effect of equating loudness on audibility-based hearing aid selection procedures.J Am Acad Audiol. 1992 Mar;3(2):113-8. J Am Acad Audiol. 1992. PMID: 1600213 Review.
-
Key issues in hearing aid selection and evaluation.J Am Acad Audiol. 1992 Mar;3(2):67-80. J Am Acad Audiol. 1992. PMID: 1600218 Review.
Cited by
-
Senescent Decline in Verbal-Emotion Identification by Older Hearing-Impaired Listeners - Do Hearing Aids Help?Clin Interv Aging. 2020 Nov 3;15:2073-2081. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S281469. eCollection 2020. Clin Interv Aging. 2020. PMID: 33173288 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of different signal processing options in unilateral and bilateral cochlear freedom implant recipients using R-Space background noise.J Am Acad Audiol. 2011 Feb;22(2):65-80. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.22.2.2. J Am Acad Audiol. 2011. PMID: 21463562 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Comparative studies on hearing aid selection and fitting procedures: a review of the literature.Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2008 Jan;265(1):21-9. doi: 10.1007/s00405-007-0494-7. Epub 2007 Oct 23. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2008. PMID: 17955254 Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous