Literature DB >> 21034701

Effectiveness of the directional microphone in the Baha® Divino™.

Kristi Oeding1, Michael Valente, Jessica Kerckhoff.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients with unilateral sensorineural hearing loss (USNHL) experience great difficulty listening to speech in noisy environments. A directional microphone (DM) could potentially improve speech recognition in this difficult listening environment. It is well known that DMs in behind-the-ear (BTE) and custom hearing aids can provide a greater signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in comparison to an omnidirectional microphone (OM) to improve speech recognition in noise for persons with hearing impairment. Studies examining the DM in bone anchored auditory osseointegrated implants (Baha), however, have been mixed, with little to no benefit reported for the DM compared to an OM.
PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this study was to determine if there are statistically significant differences in the mean reception threshold for sentences (RTS in dB) in noise between the OM and DM in the Baha® Divino™. The RTS of these two microphone modes was measured utilizing two loudspeaker arrays (speech from 0° and noise from 180° or a diffuse eight-loudspeaker array) and with the better ear open or closed with an earmold impression and noise attenuating earmuff. Subjective benefit was assessed using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) to compare unaided and aided (Divino OM and DM combined) problem scores. RESEARCH
DESIGN: A repeated measures design was utilized, with each subject counterbalanced to each of the eight treatment levels for three independent variables: (1) microphone (OM and DM), (2) loudspeaker array (180° and diffuse), and (3) better ear (open and closed). STUDY SAMPLE: Sixteen subjects with USNHL currently utilizing the Baha were recruited from Washington University's Center for Advanced Medicine and the surrounding area. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Subjects were tested at the initial visit if they entered the study wearing the Divino or after at least four weeks of acclimatization to a loaner Divino. The RTS was determined utilizing Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) sentences in the R-Space™ system, and subjective benefit was determined utilizing the APHAB. A three-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) and a paired samples t-test were utilized to analyze results of the HINT and APHAB, respectively.
RESULTS: Results revealed statistically significant differences within microphone (p < 0.001; directional advantage of 3.2 dB), loudspeaker array (p = 0.046; 180° advantage of 1.1 dB), and better ear conditions (p < 0.001; open ear advantage of 4.9 dB). Results from the APHAB revealed statistically and clinically significant benefit for the Divino relative to unaided on the subscales of Ease of Communication (EC) (p = 0.037), Background Noise (BN) (p < 0.001), and Reverberation (RV) (p = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: The Divino's DM provides a statistically significant improvement in speech recognition in noise compared to the OM for subjects with USNHL. Therefore, it is recommended that audiologists consider selecting a Baha with a DM to provide improved speech recognition performance in noisy listening environments. American Academy of Audiology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21034701      PMCID: PMC3005355          DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.21.8.6

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


  26 in total

1.  Directivity quantification in hearing aids: fitting and measurement effects.

Authors:  T Ricketts
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Performance of dual-microphone in-the-ear hearing aids.

Authors:  M Valente; G Schuchman; L G Potts; L B Beck
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 1.664

3.  Efficacy of directional microphone hearing aids: a meta-analytic perspective.

Authors:  A M Amlani
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 1.664

4.  Performance of directional microphones for hearing aids: real-world versus simulation.

Authors:  Cynthia L Compton-Conley; Arlene C Neuman; Mead C Killion; Harry Levitt
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 1.664

5.  An expanded test for speech discrimination utilizing CNC monosyllabic words. Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6. SAM-TR-66-55.

Authors:  T W Tillman; R Carhart
Journal:  Tech Rep SAM-TR       Date:  1966-06

6.  Bone-anchored hearing aids in unilateral inner ear deafness.

Authors:  Arjan J Bosman; Myrthe K S Hol; Ad F M Snik; Emmanuel A M Mylanus; Cor W R J Cremers
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 1.494

7.  Bone-anchored hearing aid in unilateral inner ear deafness: a study of 20 patients.

Authors:  Myrthe K S Hol; Arjan J Bosman; Ad F M Snik; Emmanuel A M Mylanus; Cor W R J Cremers
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2004-08-13       Impact factor: 1.854

8.  Comparison of the bone anchored hearing aid implantable hearing device with contralateral routing of offside signal amplification in the rehabilitation of unilateral deafness.

Authors:  John K Niparko; Kenneth M Cox; Lawrence R Lustig
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 2.311

9.  Transcranial contralateral cochlear stimulation in unilateral deafness.

Authors:  Jack J Wazen; Jaclyn B Spitzer; Soha N Ghossaini; José N Fayad; John K Niparko; Kenneth Cox; Derald E Brackmann; Sigfrid D Soli
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.497

10.  Management of single-sided deafness with the bone-anchored hearing aid.

Authors:  Heng-Wai Yuen; Daniel Bodmer; Kari Smilsky; Julian M Nedzelski; Joseph M Chen
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2009-05-05       Impact factor: 3.497

View more
  2 in total

1.  Influence of directionality and maximal power output on speech understanding with bone anchored hearing implants in single sided deafness.

Authors:  Silvia Krempaska; Juraj Koval; Christoph Schmid; Flurin Pfiffner; Anja Kurz; Martin Kompis
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-05-23       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 2.  Systematic review of outcome domains and instruments used in designs of clinical trials for interventions that seek to restore bilateral and binaural hearing in adults with unilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss ('single-sided deafness').

Authors:  Roulla Katiri; Deborah A Hall; Catherine F Killan; Sandra Smith; Pattarawadee Prayuenyong; Pádraig T Kitterick
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-03-20       Impact factor: 2.279

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.