Literature DB >> 11409857

Maximizing effective audibility in hearing aid fitting.

T Y Ching1, H Dillon, R Katsch, D Byrne.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This paper examines why more audibility is not always better than less audibility if hearing-impaired people are to best understand speech.
DESIGN: We used speech perception data from 14 normally hearing and 40 hearing-impaired people to quantify the contribution of audibility to speech intelligibility. The quantification revealed that the effectiveness of audibility decreased with hearing loss, and the decrement was greater at high frequencies than at lower frequencies. To apply the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) model to predict speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired people, we modified the model to take account of effective audibility rather than physical audibility.
RESULTS: The modified SII model provided an adequate description of speech performance of people with a wide range of hearing threshold levels. We applied the model to the evaluation of two prescriptions for a sloping audiogram at prescribed levels and at equated loudness levels to demonstrate the necessity of considering loudness and effective audibility in prescribing amplification. Effective audibility is defined as audibility corrected for the effects of level distortion and hearing loss desensitization, and this paper proposes a method of estimating effective audibility from hearing threshold level at different frequencies.
CONCLUSIONS: The practical implication of considering effective audibility in prescribing hearing aids is that for a given listening level, less gain is provided at frequencies where the hearing is most impaired to allow more gain at frequencies where audibility is most useful. In developing the NAL-NL1 prescription for nonlinear hearing aids, we adopted the modified SII model together with a loudness model to derive optimal gain-frequency response characteristics that maximize predicted speech intelligibility for people with different degrees of hearing losses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11409857     DOI: 10.1097/00003446-200106000-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  27 in total

1.  Audiologist-driven versus patient-driven fine tuning of hearing instruments.

Authors:  Monique Boymans; Wouter A Dreschler
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2011-12-04

2.  The relative phonetic contributions of a cochlear implant and residual acoustic hearing to bimodal speech perception.

Authors:  Benjamin M Sheffield; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  A comparison of NAL and DSL prescriptive methods for paediatric hearing-aid fitting: predicted speech intelligibility and loudness.

Authors:  Teresa Y C Ching; Earl E Johnson; Sanna Hou; Harvey Dillon; Vicky Zhang; Lauren Burns; Patricia van Buynder; Angela Wong; Christopher Flynn
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.117

4.  Spectrotemporal modulation sensitivity for hearing-impaired listeners: dependence on carrier center frequency and the relationship to speech intelligibility.

Authors:  Golbarg Mehraei; Frederick J Gallun; Marjorie R Leek; Joshua G W Bernstein
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Methods and applications of the audibility index in hearing aid selection and fitting.

Authors:  Amyn M Amlani; Jerry L Punch; Teresa Y C Ching
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2002-09

Review 6.  The Use of Frequency Lowering Technology in the Treatment of Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss: A Review of the Literature and Candidacy Considerations for Clinical Application.

Authors:  Danielle Glista; Susan Scollie
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2018-10-26

7.  The Effect of Binaural Beamforming Technology on Speech Intelligibility in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  Jantien L Vroegop; Nienke C Homans; André Goedegebure; J Gertjan Dingemanse; Teun van Immerzeel; Marc P van der Schroeff
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 1.854

8.  Phonological Awareness at 5 years of age in Children who use Hearing Aids or Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Teresa Y C Ching; Linda Cupples
Journal:  Perspect Hear Hear Disord Child       Date:  2015-09

9.  The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding. II. Sloping hearing loss.

Authors:  Benjamin W Y Hornsby; Todd A Ricketts
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Evaluation of nonlinear frequency compression: clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Danielle Glista; Susan Scollie; Marlene Bagatto; Richard Seewald; Vijay Parsa; Andrew Johnson
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.117

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.