Literature DB >> 16959732

The effects of digital noise reduction on the acceptance of background noise.

H Gustav Mueller1, Jennifer Weber, Benjamin W Y Hornsby.   

Abstract

Modern hearing aids commonly employ digital noise reduction (DNR) algorithms. The potential benefit of these algorithms is to provide improved speech understanding in noise or, at the least, to provide relaxed listening or increased ease of listening. In this study, 22 adults were fitted with 16-channel wide-dynamic-range compression hearing aids containing DNR processing. The DNR includes both modulation-based and Wiener-filter-type algorithms working simultaneously. Both speech intelligibility and acceptable noise level (ANL) were assessed using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) with DNR on and DNR off. The ANL was also assessed without hearing aids. The results showed a significant mean improvement for the ANL (4.2 dB) for the DNR-on condition when compared to DNR-off condition. Moreover, there was a significant correlation between the magnitude of ANL improvement (relative to DNR on) and the DNR-off ANL. There was no significant mean improvement for the HINT for the DNR on condition, and on an individual basis, the HINT score did not significantly correlate with either aided ANL (DNR on or DNR off). These findings suggest that at least within the constraints of the DNR algorithms and test conditions employed in this study, DNR can significantly improve the clinically measured ANL, which may result in improved ease of listening for speech-in-noise situations.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16959732      PMCID: PMC4111517          DOI: 10.1177/1084713806289553

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trends Amplif        ISSN: 1084-7138


  14 in total

1.  Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality.

Authors:  M Boymans; W A Dreschler
Journal:  Audiology       Date:  2000 Sep-Oct

2.  Evaluation of the noise reduction system in a commercial digital hearing aid.

Authors:  José L Alcántara; Brian C J Moore; Volker Kühnel; Stefan Launer
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 2.117

Review 3.  Effectiveness of directional microphones and noise reduction schemes in hearing aids: a systematic review of the evidence.

Authors:  Ruth A Bentler
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2005 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.664

4.  Acceptable noise level, phoneme recognition in noise, and measures of auditory efferent activity.

Authors:  Ashley W Harkrider; Steven Brad Smith
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 1.664

5.  Sound quality measures for speech in noise through a commercial hearing aid implementing digital noise reduction.

Authors:  Todd A Ricketts; Benjamin W Y Hornsby
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.664

6.  Acceptable noise level as a measure of directional hearing aid benefit.

Authors:  Melinda C Freyaldenhoven; Anna K Nabelek; Samuel B Burchfield; James W Thelin
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 1.664

Review 7.  Digital noise reduction: an overview.

Authors:  Ruth Bentler; Li-Kuei Chiou
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-06

8.  Acceptable noise level as a predictor of hearing aid use.

Authors:  Anna K Nabelek; Melinda C Freyaldenhoven; Joanna W Tampas; Samuel B Burchfiel; Robert A Muenchen
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  Toleration of background noises: relationship with patterns of hearing aid use by elderly persons.

Authors:  A K Nabelek; F M Tucker; T R Letowski
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1991-06

10.  Comparison of benefits provided by different hearing aid technologies.

Authors:  B E Walden; R K Surr; M T Cord; B Edwards; L Olson
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2000 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.664

View more
  27 in total

1.  Dispensing rates of four common hearing aid product features: associations with variations in practice among audiologists.

Authors:  Earl E Johnson; Todd A Ricketts
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2010-05-10

2.  Innovative technology in hearing instruments: matching needs in the developing world.

Authors:  Bradley McPherson
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2011-11-07

3.  A method to remove differences in frequency response between commercial hearing aids to allow direct comparison of the sound quality of hearing-aid features.

Authors:  Rolph Houben; Inge Brons; Wouter A Dreschler
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2011-11-07

Review 4.  Digital noise reduction: an overview.

Authors:  Ruth Bentler; Li-Kuei Chiou
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-06

5.  Survey of Current Practice in the Fitting and Fine-Tuning of Common Signal-Processing Features in Hearing Aids for Adults.

Authors:  Melinda C Anderson; Kathryn H Arehart; Pamela E Souza
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.664

6.  From the editor.

Authors:  Arlene C Neuman
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2007-03

7.  Amplification with digital noise reduction and the perception of annoying and aversive sounds.

Authors:  Catherine V Palmer; Ruth Bentler; H Gustav Mueller
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-06

8.  Listening effort and perceived clarity for normal-hearing children with the use of digital noise reduction.

Authors:  Samantha Gustafson; Ryan McCreery; Brenda Hoover; Judy G Kopun; Pat Stelmachowicz
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 9.  An evidence-based systematic review of directional microphones and digital noise reduction hearing aids in school-age children with hearing loss.

Authors:  Ryan W McCreery; Rebecca A Venediktov; Jaumeiko J Coleman; Hillary M Leech
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2012-08-02       Impact factor: 1.493

10.  Spatial benefit of bilateral hearing AIDS.

Authors:  Jayne B Ahlstrom; Amy R Horwitz; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.