Literature DB >> 18326152

The value of routine real ear measurement of the gain of digital hearing aids.

Hashir Aazh1, Brian C J Moore.   

Abstract

The main aims of this study were: (1) to determine whether routine real ear insertion gain (REIG) measurement is necessary in fitting digital hearing aids; and (2) to assess the extent to which modifying the frequency-gain response of an aid can lead to better matches to the target in cases where the target gain was not initially achieved. The target formula was selected as NAL-NL1 in the programming software of four types of digital hearing aids. REIG measurements on 42 ears showed that 64% of cases failed to come within +/-10 dB of the target at one or more of the following frequencies: 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, and 4 kHz. After adjusting the frequency-gain response of the aids, based on the REIG results, 83% of cases came within +/-10 dB of the target. The target was met more often, both before and after adjustment, for aids with seven gain "handles" than for aids with four gain "handles". The results indicate that REIG measurements can and should be used to achieve more accurate fittings but that accurate adjustments are difficult with some aids.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18326152     DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.18.8.3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol        ISSN: 1050-0545            Impact factor:   1.664


  12 in total

1.  Audiological practice in India: an internet-based survey of audiologists.

Authors:  Vijayalakshmi Easwar; Sriram Boothalingam; Srikanth Chundu; Vinaya K C Manchaiah; S Mohammed Ismail
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2013-08-02

Review 2.  [Basic knowledge on the efficacy of hearing aids depending on the type of hearing impairment for Ear, Nose & Throat specialists].

Authors:  T Steffens; S C Marcrum
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 3.  Conventional Amplification for Children and Adults with Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Lindsey E Jorgensen; Emily A Benson; Ryan W McCreery
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2018-10-26

4.  Decision-Making in Audiology: Balancing Evidence-Based Practice and Patient-Centered Care.

Authors:  Isabelle Boisvert; Jennifer Clemesha; Erik Lundmark; Erica Crome; Caitlin Barr; Catherine M McMahon
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2017 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

5.  Hearing Aids Do Not Alter Cortical Entrainment to Speech at Audible Levels in Mild-to-Moderately Hearing-Impaired Subjects.

Authors:  Frederique J Vanheusden; Mikolaj Kegler; Katie Ireland; Constantina Georga; David M Simpson; Tobias Reichenbach; Steven L Bell
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2020-04-03       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  Knowledge and Expectations of Hearing Aid Apps Among Smartphone Users and Hearing Professionals: Cross-sectional Survey.

Authors:  Jae-Hyun Seo; Moo Kyun Park; Jae Sang Han; Yong-Ho Park; Jae-Jun Song; Il Joon Moon; Woojoo Lee; Yoonjoong Kim; Young Sang Cho
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 4.773

7.  Benefit on daily listening with technological advancements: comparison of basic and premium category hearing aids.

Authors:  Praveen Prakash; Adithya Sreedhar; Jithin Raj Balan; Archana Mariam Varghese
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 3.236

Review 8.  Verification and validation of hearing aids: Opportunity not an obstacle.

Authors:  Lindsey E Jorgensen
Journal:  J Otol       Date:  2016-05-14

9.  Does probe-tube verification of real-ear hearing aid amplification characteristics improve outcomes in adult hearing aid users? A protocol for a systematic review.

Authors:  Ibrahim Almufarrij; Kevin J Munro; Harvey Dillon
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-19       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.