Literature DB >> 21336138

Effects of degree and configuration of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to bilateral speech understanding.

Benjamin W Y Hornsby1, Earl E Johnson, Erin Picou.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of degree and configuration of hearing loss on the use of, and benefit from, information in amplified high- and low-frequency speech presented in background noise.
DESIGN: Sixty-two adults with a wide range of high- and low-frequency sensorineural hearing loss (5 to 115+ dB HL) participated in the study. To examine the contribution of speech information in different frequency regions, speech understanding in noise was assessed in multiple low- and high-pass filter conditions, as well as a band-pass (713 to 3534 Hz) and wideband (143 to 8976 Hz) condition. To increase audibility over a wide frequency range, speech and noise were amplified based on each individual's hearing loss. A stepwise multiple linear regression approach was used to examine the contribution of several factors to (1) absolute performance in each filter condition and (2) the change in performance with the addition of amplified high- and low-frequency speech components.
RESULTS: Results from the regression analysis showed that degree of hearing loss was the strongest predictor of absolute performance for low- and high-pass filtered speech materials. In addition, configuration of hearing loss affected both absolute performance for severely low-pass filtered speech and benefit from extending high-frequency (3534 to 8976 Hz) bandwidth. Specifically, individuals with steeply sloping high-frequency losses made better use of low-pass filtered speech information than individuals with similar low-frequency thresholds but less high-frequency loss. In contrast, given similar high-frequency thresholds, individuals with flat hearing losses received more benefit from extending high-frequency bandwidth than individuals with more sloping losses.
CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous work, benefit from speech information in a given frequency region generally decreases as degree of hearing loss in that frequency region increases. However, given a similar degree of loss, the configuration of hearing loss also affects the ability to use speech information in different frequency regions. Except for individuals with steeply sloping high-frequency losses, providing high-frequency amplification (3534 to 8976 Hz) had either a beneficial effect on, or did not significantly degrade, speech understanding. These findings highlight the importance of extended high-frequency amplification for listeners with a wide range of high-frequency hearing losses, when seeking to maximize intelligibility.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21336138      PMCID: PMC3113662          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31820e5028

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


  48 in total

1.  Contribution of high frequencies to speech recognition in quiet and noise in listeners with varying degrees of high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss.

Authors:  Nathan E Amos; Larry E Humes
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  The effects of high presentation levels on consonant feature transmission.

Authors:  Benjamin W Y Hornsby; Timothy D Trine; Ralph N Ohde
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Recognition of filtered words in noise at higher-than-normal levels: decreases in scores with and without increases in masking.

Authors:  Judy R Dubno; Amy R Horwitz; Jayne B Ahlstrom
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  The contributions of audibility and cognitive factors to the benefit provided by amplified speech to older adults.

Authors:  Larry E Humes
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2007 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.664

5.  Factors affecting the benefits of high-frequency amplification.

Authors:  Amy R Horwitz; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Repeatability of the TEN(HL) test for detecting cochlear dead regions.

Authors:  Susan Cairns; Rachel Frith; Kevin J Munro; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.117

Review 7.  Enhanced frequency discrimination in hearing-impaired individuals: a review of perceptual correlates of central neural plasticity induced by cochlear damage.

Authors:  Hung Thai-Van; Christophe Micheyl; Arnaud Norena; Evelyne Veuillet; Damien Gabriel; Lionel Collet
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-06-09       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Speech recognition as a function of high-pass filter cutoff frequency for people with and without low-frequency cochlear dead regions.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Dead regions in the cochlea at 4 kHz in elderly adults: relation to absolute threshold, steepness of audiogram, and pure-tone average.

Authors:  Hashir Aazh; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 1.664

10.  Prevalence of dead regions in subjects with sensorineural hearing loss.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.570

View more
  24 in total

1.  Cochlear implant patients' localization using interaural level differences exceeds that of untrained normal hearing listeners.

Authors:  Justin M Aronoff; Daniel J Freed; Laurel M Fisher; Ivan Pal; Sigfrid D Soli
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 2.  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

3.  Speech Perception in Noise and Listening Effort of Older Adults With Nonlinear Frequency Compression Hearing Aids.

Authors:  James Shehorn; Nicole Marrone; Thomas Muller
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  The Effect of Hearing Aid Bandwidth and Configuration of Hearing Loss on Bimodal Speech Recognition in Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Arlene C Neuman; Annette Zeman; Jonathan Neukam; Binhuan Wang; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Modern prescription theory and application: realistic expectations for speech recognition with hearing AIDS.

Authors:  Earl E Johnson
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2013-11-18

6.  Maximizing audibility and speech recognition with nonlinear frequency compression by estimating audible bandwidth.

Authors:  Ryan W McCreery; Marc A Brennan; Brenda Hoover; Judy Kopun; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Effect of hearing aid bandwidth on speech recognition performance of listeners using a cochlear implant and contralateral hearing aid (bimodal hearing).

Authors:  Arlene C Neuman; Mario A Svirsky
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Listening Effort and Speech Recognition with Frequency Compression Amplification for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Marc A Brennan; Dawna Lewis; Ryan McCreery; Judy Kopun; Joshua M Alexander
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  The influence of audibility on speech recognition with nonlinear frequency compression for children and adults with hearing loss.

Authors:  Ryan W McCreery; Joshua Alexander; Marc A Brennan; Brenda Hoover; Judy Kopun; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Effects of frequency compression and frequency transposition on fricative and affricate perception in listeners with normal hearing and mild to moderate hearing loss.

Authors:  Joshua M Alexander; Judy G Kopun; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.