Literature DB >> 26801889

[The age effect in evaluation of hearing aid benefits by speech audiometry].

A Müller1, T Hocke2, U Hoppe3, P Mir-Salim4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Hearing loss is one of the most common disabilities in the elderly. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between pure-tone hearing loss and maximum monosyllabic perception and speech perception with hearing aids. The focus of the investigation was elderly patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective study, 188 patients with sensorineural hearing loss were included. The pure-tone audiogram (4FPTA), the Freiburg speech intelligibility test with headphones and the word recognition score with hearing aids at 65 dB SPL were measured and evaluated.
RESULTS: An increasing age was associated with higher discrepancy between the maximum speech perception and speech understanding with hearing aids. The mean difference between maximum monosyllabic perception and speech perception with hearing aids is about 20% in the elderly population.
CONCLUSION: The intended goal of hearing aid prescription, the match between maximum monosyllabic perception and word recognition score with hearing aids within 5 to 10%, is not achieved in the elderly population.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Elderly; Hearing Aids; Pure-Tone audiogram; Speech Audiometry; Speech Intelligibility

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26801889     DOI: 10.1007/s00106-015-0115-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HNO        ISSN: 0017-6192            Impact factor:   1.284


  10 in total

1.  [Check of hearing aid fitting].

Authors:  K Schorn
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  [Prevalence of hearing impairment in northwestern Germany. Results of an epidemiological study on hearing status (HÖRSTAT)].

Authors:  P von Gablenz; I Holube
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 3.  Clinical implications of a damaged cochlea: pure tone thresholds vs information-carrying capacity.

Authors:  Chris Halpin; Steven D Rauch
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.497

4.  Computer-based auditory phoneme discrimination training improves speech recognition in noise in experienced adult cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Annette Schumann; Maja Serman; Olaf Gefeller; Ulrich Hoppe
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2014-12-31       Impact factor: 2.117

5.  Audiometry-Based Screening Procedure for Cochlear Implant Candidacy.

Authors:  Ulrich Hoppe; Anne Hast; Thomas Hocke
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.311

6.  [Speech perception with hearing aids in comparison to pure-tone hearing loss].

Authors:  U Hoppe; A Hast; T Hocke
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.284

7.  Predicting success with hearing aids in everyday living.

Authors:  Therese C Walden; Brian E Walden
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 1.664

8.  [Evaluation of the Freiburg monosyllabic speech test in background noise].

Authors:  J Löhler; B Akcicek; M Pilnik; K Saager-Post; S Dazert; S Biedron; J Oeken; D Mürbe; J Löbert; R Laszig; T Wesarg; C Langer; S Plontke; T Rahne; U Machate; R Noppeney; K Schultz; P Plinkert; S Hoth; M Praetorius; P Schlattmann; E F Meister; H W Pau; K Ehrt; R Hagen; W Shehata-Dieler; M Cebulla; L E Walther; A Ernst
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 9.  [The tasks of the ENT specialist by hearing aid fitting. Part 2: checking the fit, subjective satisfaction, ear mold and hearing aid].

Authors:  K Schorn
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 1.284

10.  Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids.

Authors:  R Plomp
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1978-02       Impact factor: 1.840

  10 in total
  9 in total

Review 1.  [Speech audiometry for indication of conventional and implantable hearing aids].

Authors:  U Hoppe; A Hast
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  [Examination of a training effect in the Freiburg monosyllabic test].

Authors:  T Schmidt; I Baljić
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 3.  [Evaluation of hearing aid rehabilitation using the Freiburg Monosyllabic Test].

Authors:  U Hoppe
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.284

4.  [Speech recognition with hearing aids for 10 standard audiograms].

Authors:  C Dörfler; T Hocke; A Hast; U Hoppe
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 5.  Hearing aids: indications, technology, adaptation, and quality control.

Authors:  Ulrich Hoppe; Gerhard Hesse
Journal:  GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2017-12-18

Review 6.  Diagnostics and therapy of sudden hearing loss.

Authors:  Stefan K Plontke
Journal:  GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2018-02-19

7.  Speech Perception in Bilateral Hearing Aid Users With Different Grades of Asymmetric Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Ulrich Hoppe; Anne Hast; Thomas Hocke
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 4.677

8.  Age-Related Decline of Speech Perception.

Authors:  Ulrich Hoppe; Thomas Hocke; Heinrich Iro
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2022-06-22       Impact factor: 5.702

9.  [Effectiveness of hearing aid provision for severe hearing loss].

Authors:  Max Engler; Frank Digeser; Ulrich Hoppe
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 1.330

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.