Literature DB >> 28806193

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

James Shehorn1, Nicole Marrone, Thomas Muller.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this laboratory-based study was to compare the efficacy of two hearing aid fittings with and without nonlinear frequency compression, implemented within commercially available hearing aids. Previous research regarding the utility of nonlinear frequency compression has revealed conflicting results for speech recognition, marked by high individual variability. Individual differences in auditory function and cognitive abilities, specifically hearing loss slope and working memory, may contribute to aided performance. The first aim of the study was to determine the effect of nonlinear frequency compression on aided speech recognition in noise and listening effort using a dual-task test paradigm. The hypothesis, based on the Ease of Language Understanding model, was that nonlinear frequency compression would improve speech recognition in noise and decrease listening effort. The second aim of the study was to determine if listener variables of hearing loss slope, working memory capacity, and age would predict performance with nonlinear frequency compression.
DESIGN: A total of 17 adults (age, 57-85 years) with symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss were tested in the sound field using hearing aids fit to target (NAL-NL2). Participants were recruited with a range of hearing loss severities and slopes. A within-subjects, single-blinded design was used to compare performance with and without nonlinear frequency compression. Speech recognition in noise and listening effort were measured by adapting the Revised Speech in Noise Test into a dual-task paradigm. Participants were required trial-by-trial to repeat the last word of each sentence presented in speech babble and then recall the sentence-ending words after every block of six sentences. Half of the sentences were rich in context for the recognition of the final word of each sentence, and half were neutral in context. Extrinsic factors of sentence context and nonlinear frequency compression were manipulated, and intrinsic factors of hearing loss slope, working memory capacity, and age were measured to determine which participant factors were associated with benefit from nonlinear frequency compression.
RESULTS: On average, speech recognition in noise performance significantly improved with the use of nonlinear frequency compression. Individuals with steeply sloping hearing loss received more recognition benefit. Recall performance also significantly improved at the group level, with nonlinear frequency compression revealing reduced listening effort. The older participants within the study cohort received less recall benefit than the younger participants. The benefits of nonlinear frequency compression for speech recognition and listening effort did not correlate with each other, suggesting separable sources of benefit for these outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS: Improvements of speech recognition in noise and reduced listening effort indicate that adult hearing aid users can receive benefit from nonlinear frequency compression in a noisy environment, with the amount of benefit varying across individuals and across outcome measures. Evidence supports individualized selection of nonlinear frequency compression, with results suggesting benefits in speech recognition for individuals with steeply sloping hearing losses and in listening effort for younger individuals. Future research is indicated with a larger data set on the dual-task paradigm as a potential cognitive outcome measure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28806193      PMCID: PMC5809244          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000481

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


  53 in total

Review 1.  Cognition and hearing aids.

Authors:  Thomas Lunner; Mary Rudner; Jerker Rönnberg
Journal:  Scand J Psychol       Date:  2009-10

2.  Evaluation of the effects of nonlinear frequency compression on speech recognition and sound quality for adults with mild to moderate hearing loss.

Authors:  Erin M Picou; Steven C Marcrum; Todd A Ricketts
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 2.117

3.  Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users.

Authors:  Elaine Hoi Ning Ng; Mary Rudner; Thomas Lunner; Michael Syskind Pedersen; Jerker Rönnberg
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2013-04-04       Impact factor: 2.117

4.  Evaluation of nonlinear frequency compression for school-age children with moderate to moderately severe hearing loss.

Authors:  Jace Wolfe; Andrew John; Erin Schafer; Myriel Nyffeler; Michael Boretzki; Teresa Caraway
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2010 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.664

5.  Long-term effects of non-linear frequency compression for children with moderate hearing loss.

Authors:  Jace Wolfe; Andrew John; Erin Schafer; Myriel Nyffeler; Michael Boretzki; Teresa Caraway; Mary Hudson
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 2.117

6.  Paired comparisons of nonlinear frequency compression, extended bandwidth, and restricted bandwidth hearing aid processing for children and adults with hearing loss.

Authors:  Marc A Brennan; Ryan McCreery; Judy Kopun; Brenda Hoover; Joshua Alexander; Dawna Lewis; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.664

7.  Age-related changes in listening effort for various types of masker noises.

Authors:  Jamie L Desjardins; Karen A Doherty
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  High-frequency audibility: benefits for hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  C A Hogan; C W Turner
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Listening effort and fatigue: what exactly are we measuring? A British Society of Audiology Cognition in Hearing Special Interest Group 'white paper'.

Authors:  Ronan McGarrigle; Kevin J Munro; Piers Dawes; Andrew J Stewart; David R Moore; Johanna G Barry; Sygal Amitay
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2014-03-27       Impact factor: 2.117

Review 10.  The perceptual significance of high-frequency energy in the human voice.

Authors:  Brian B Monson; Eric J Hunter; Andrew J Lotto; Brad H Story
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-06-16
View more
  5 in total

1.  Understanding Variability in Individual Response to Hearing Aid Signal Processing in Wearable Hearing Aids.

Authors:  Pamela Souza; Kathryn Arehart; Tim Schoof; Melinda Anderson; Dorina Strori; Lauren Balmert
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Audibility and Spectral-Ripple Discrimination Thresholds as Predictors of Word Recognition with Nonlinear Frequency Compression.

Authors:  Marc A Brennan; Ryan W McCreery
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 1.245

Review 3.  Lipreading: A Review of Its Continuing Importance for Speech Recognition With an Acquired Hearing Loss and Possibilities for Effective Training.

Authors:  Lynne E Bernstein; Nicole Jordan; Edward T Auer; Silvio P Eberhardt
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 1.636

Review 4.  Hearing and speech processing in midlife.

Authors:  Karen S Helfer; Alexandra Jesse
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2020-10-17       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  Comparison of Frequency Transposition and Frequency Compression for People With Extensive Dead Regions in the Cochlea.

Authors:  Marina Salorio-Corbetto; Thomas Baer; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2019 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.