Literature DB >> 24351612

Acclimatization to hearing aids.

Piers Dawes1, Kevin J Munro, Sridhar Kalluri, Brent Edwards.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Evidence for a clinically significant effect of acclimatization to hearing aids is mixed. The aim of this study was to test for auditory acclimatization effects in new unilateral and bilateral adult hearing aid users. Hypotheses were i) there would be improvements in aided speech recognition in new hearing aid users, compared with unaided listening and with a control group of experienced hearing aid users, and ii) improvements would correlate with severity of hearing loss, hearing aid use, and cognitive capacity.
DESIGN: Speech recognition in noise was measured for a 65 and a 75 dB SPL target with the Four Alternative Auditory Feature test. Speech recognition in noise was measured within 1 week of fitting and retested at 12 weeks postfitting in new hearing aid users (16 unilateral and 16 bilateral fit). A control group of experienced hearing aid users (n = 17) was tested over a similar time scale. Cognitive capacity (reaction time and working memory) was measured, and self-reported change in performance was assessed using the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale. Hearing aid use was assessed via data logging at the completion of the study.
RESULTS: Mean improvements in speech recognition of up to 4% were observed across conditions and across groups consistent with a general practice effect. On average there was no evidence of auditory acclimatization in the new hearing aid user groups in terms of improvement in aided listening conditions above that observed in unaided recognition or in the control group. There was no correlation between change in aided speech recognition and severity of hearing loss, hearing aid use, or cognitive capacity. New users reported significant improvement over time in aided performance on a self-report questionnaire compared with the control group.
CONCLUSIONS: On average, there was no improvement over time in new users' aided speech recognition relative to unaided recognition or to the control group. This does not support a robust acclimatization effect with nonlinear hearing aids. Test-retest variability may obscure small average acclimatization effects; variability was not accounted for by individual differences in severity of hearing loss, hearing aid use, or cognitive capacity. New users' subjective report of increased benefit over time may be reflective of other aspects of adjustment to hearing aid use not examined in this study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24351612     DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182a8eda4

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


  17 in total

Review 1.  Is Listening in Noise Worth It? The Neurobiology of Speech Recognition in Challenging Listening Conditions.

Authors:  Mark A Eckert; Susan Teubner-Rhodes; Kenneth I Vaden
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  The use of self-report measures to examine changes in perception in response to fittings using different signal processing parameters.

Authors:  Melinda Anderson; Varsha Rallapalli; Tim Schoof; Pamela Souza; Kathryn Arehart
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2018-07-27       Impact factor: 2.117

3.  Neural and behavioral changes after the use of hearing aids.

Authors:  Hanin Karawani; Kimberly A Jenkins; Samira Anderson
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2018-04-07       Impact factor: 3.708

4.  Neural Plasticity Induced by Hearing Aid Use.

Authors:  Hanin Karawani; Kimberly Jenkins; Samira Anderson
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 5.702

5.  Benefit From Directional Microphone Hearing Aids: Objective and Subjective Evaluations.

Authors:  Hee-Sung Park; Il Joon Moon; Sun Hwa Jin; Ji Eun Choi; Yang-Sun Cho; Sung Hwa Hong
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 3.372

6.  The effects of frequency lowering on speech perception in noise with adult hearing-aid users.

Authors:  Christi W Miller; Emily Bates; Marc Brennan
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 2.117

7.  Aided and unaided speech perception by older hearing impaired listeners.

Authors:  David L Woods; Tanya Arbogast; Zoe Doss; Masood Younus; Timothy J Herron; E William Yund
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-02       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Long-term use benefits of personal frequency-modulated systems for speech in noise perception in patients with stroke with auditory processing deficits: a non-randomised controlled trial study.

Authors:  Nehzat Koohi; Deborah Vickers; Jason Warren; David Werring; Doris-Eva Bamiou
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  An economic evaluation of the healthcare cost of tinnitus management in the UK.

Authors:  David Stockdale; Don McFerran; Peter Brazier; Clive Pritchard; Tony Kay; Christopher Dowrick; Derek J Hoare
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-08-22       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Efficacy and Effectiveness of Advanced Hearing Aid Directional and Noise Reduction Technologies for Older Adults With Mild to Moderate Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Yu-Hsiang Wu; Elizabeth Stangl; Octav Chipara; Syed Shabih Hasan; Sean DeVries; Jacob Oleson
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.