Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Feb 15:20:2331216516631741.
doi: 10.1177/2331216516631741.

Open Versus Closed Hearing-Aid Fittings: A Literature Review of Both Fitting Approaches

Alexandra Winkler  1 , Matthias Latzel  2 , Inga Holube  3
Affiliations
Review

Open Versus Closed Hearing-Aid Fittings: A Literature Review of Both Fitting Approaches

Alexandra Winkler et al. Trends Hear. .

Abstract

One of the main issues in hearing-aid fittings is the abnormal perception of the user's own voice as too loud, "boomy," or "hollow." This phenomenon known as the occlusion effect be reduced by large vents in the earmolds or by open-fit hearing aids. This review provides an overview of publications related to open and closed hearing-aid fittings. First, the occlusion effect and its consequences for perception while using hearing aids are described. Then, the advantages and disadvantages of open compared with closed fittings and their impact on the fitting process are addressed. The advantages include less occlusion, improved own-voice perception and sound quality, and increased localization performance. The disadvantages associated with open-fit hearing aids include reduced benefits of directional microphones and noise reduction, as well as less compression and less available gain before feedback. The final part of this review addresses the need for new approaches to combine the advantages of open and closed hearing-aid fittings.

Keywords: earmold; hearing aid; occlusion; open fit; real-ear measurements.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Sketch of an example of a vent configuration from Kuk et al. (2005a).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Sketch of a “Flex-Vent™”. Medial view (left) and lateral view (right).
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Sketch of a “hollow” (middle) and a “solid” (right) earmold described by Kuk et al. (2009).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Sketch of a “nugget” earmold described by Saile (2010).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Aazh H., Moore B. C. J., Prasher D. (2012a) The accuracy of matching target insertion gain with open-fit hearing aid. American Journal of Audiology 21: 175–180. - PubMed
    1. Aazh H., Moore B. C. J., Prasher D. (2012b) Real ear measurement methods for open fit hearing aids: Modified pressure concurrent equalization (MPCE) versus modified pressure stored equalization (MPSE). International Journal of Audiology 51(2): 103–107. - PubMed
    1. ANSI S3.46 (1997) Methods of measurement of real-ear performance characteristics of hearing aids, New York, NY: American National Standard Institute, Inc., Acoustical Society of America.
    1. Bayer, E. (2008). Otoplasty for behind-the-ear hearing aids. U.S. Patent No. 7,340,075 B2.
    1. Bentler R., Wu Y.- H., Jeon J. (2006) Effectiveness of directional technology in open-canal hearing instruments. The Hearing Journal 59(11): 40, 42, 44, 46–47.

Publication types