Literature DB >> 17982367

Evaluation of the desired sensation level [input/output] algorithm for adults with hearing loss: the acceptable range for amplified conversational speech.

Lorienne M Jenstad1, Marlene P Bagatto, Richard C Seewald, Susan D Scollie, Leonard E Cornelisse, Ron Scicluna.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study had two related purposes: first, to define the range of optimal ear canal levels of aided speech in both high frequency and low frequency regions for adults, using both subjective and objective definitions of optimal; and second, to determine whether a prescribed frequency response, such as that given by Desired Sensation Level [Input/Output], falls within the adult listener's optimal range.
DESIGN: Twenty-three adult listeners with mild to moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss were selected from a pool of research volunteers. They were fitted in the laboratory with the Siemens Signia hearing instrument and tested with 20 nominally different frequency responses. All advanced processing options of the hearing instrument were disabled. Subjective ratings of loudness and quality and objective measures of consonant identification were obtained for every frequency response.
RESULTS: These adult listeners had, on average, a 10 dB range of measured responses in both the low and the high frequencies that resulted in optimal performance on all the measurements. The range did not vary with degree or configuration of hearing loss, or previous hearing aid experience. Desired-Sensation-Level Input/Output targets were within the optimal range for the low frequencies, and 3 dB above the optimal range for the high frequencies.
CONCLUSIONS: A range of aided ear canal frequency responses was determined within which adults with mild to moderately severe hearing loss performed optimally on both objective and subjective outcomes. Clinical implications of this finding include the following: prescriptive methods providing different targets may all result in optimal fittings; and a range of targets may be more appropriate than a single target when setting the frequency-gain characteristics of the hearing instrument.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17982367     DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e318157670a

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


  8 in total

1.  An analysis of hearing aid fittings in adults using cochlear implants and contralateral hearing aids.

Authors:  Michael S Harris; Marcia Hay-McCutcheon
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.325

2.  Application of paired-comparison methods to hearing AIDS.

Authors:  Amyn M Amlani; Erin C Schafer
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2009-12

3.  A randomized controlled comparison of NAL and DSL prescriptions for young children: hearing-aid characteristics and performance outcomes at three years of age.

Authors:  Teresa Y C Ching; Harvey Dillon; Sanna Hou; Vicky Zhang; Julia Day; Kathryn Crowe; Vivienne Marnane; Laura Street; Lauren Burns; Patricia Van Buynder; Christopher Flynn; Jessica Thomson
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 2.117

4.  Dynamic Range Across Music Genres and the Perception of Dynamic Compression in Hearing-Impaired Listeners.

Authors:  Martin Kirchberger; Frank A Russo
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 3.293

5.  Discrimination of Gain Increments in Speech.

Authors:  Benjamin Caswell-Midwinter; William M Whitmer
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2019 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

6.  Perceived Sound Quality Dimensions Influencing Frequency-Gain Shaping Preferences for Hearing Aid-Amplified Speech and Music.

Authors:  Jonathan M Vaisberg; Steve Beaulac; Danielle Glista; Ewan A Macpherson; Susan D Scollie
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

7.  Discrimination of Gain Increments in Speech-Shaped Noises.

Authors:  Benjamin Caswell-Midwinter; William M Whitmer
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2019 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

8.  Toward a New Evidence-Based Fitting Paradigm for Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids.

Authors:  Dana Urbanski; Helin Hernandez; Jacob Oleson; Yu-Hsiang Wu
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 1.493

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.