Literature DB >> 29130438

Segmental and Suprasegmental Perception in Children Using Hearing Aids.

Kaitlyn A Wenrich1, Lisa S Davidson1,2,3, Rosalie M Uchanski1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Suprasegmental perception (perception of stress, intonation, "how something is said" and "who says it") and segmental speech perception (perception of individual phonemes or perception of "what is said") are perceptual abilities that provide the foundation for the development of spoken language and effective communication. While there are numerous studies examining segmental perception in children with hearing aids (HAs), there are far fewer studies examining suprasegmental perception, especially for children with greater degrees of residual hearing. Examining the relation between acoustic hearing thresholds, and both segmental and suprasegmental perception for children with HAs, may ultimately enable better device recommendations (bilateral HAs, bimodal devices [one CI and one HA in opposite ears], bilateral CIs) for a particular degree of residual hearing. Examining both types of speech perception is important because segmental and suprasegmental cues are affected differentially by the type of hearing device(s) used (i.e., cochlear implant [CI] and/or HA). Additionally, suprathreshold measures, such as frequency resolution ability, may partially predict benefit from amplification and may assist audiologists in making hearing device recommendations.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between audibility (via hearing thresholds and speech intelligibility indices), and segmental and suprasegmental speech perception for children with HAs. A secondary goal is to explore the relationships among frequency resolution ability (via spectral modulation detection [SMD] measures), segmental and suprasegmental speech perception, and receptive language in these same children. RESEARCH
DESIGN: A prospective cross-sectional design. STUDY SAMPLE: Twenty-three children, ages 4 yr 11 mo to 11 yr 11 mo, participated in the study. Participants were recruited from pediatric clinic populations, oral schools for the deaf, and mainstream schools. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Audiological history and hearing device information were collected from participants and their families. Segmental and suprasegmental speech perception, SMD, and receptive vocabulary skills were assessed. Correlations were calculated to examine the significance (p < 0.05) of relations between audibility and outcome measures.
RESULTS: Measures of audibility and segmental speech perception are not significantly correlated, while low-frequency pure-tone average (unaided) is significantly correlated with suprasegmental speech perception. SMD is significantly correlated with all measures (measures of audibility, segmental and suprasegmental perception and vocabulary). Lastly, although age is not significantly correlated with measures of audibility, it is significantly correlated with all other outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS: The absence of a significant correlation between audibility and segmental speech perception might be attributed to overall audibility being maximized through well-fit HAs. The significant correlation between low-frequency unaided audibility and suprasegmental measures is likely due to the strong, predominantly low-frequency nature of suprasegmental acoustic properties. Frequency resolution ability, via SMD performance, is significantly correlated with all outcomes and requires further investigation; its significant correlation with vocabulary suggests that linguistic ability may be partially related to frequency resolution ability. Last, all of the outcome measures are significantly correlated with age, suggestive of developmental effects. American Academy of Audiology

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29130438      PMCID: PMC5726292          DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.16105

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


  52 in total

1.  Establishing new criteria in selecting children for a cochlear implant: performance of "platinum" hearing aid users.

Authors:  L S Eisenberg; A S Martinez; G Sennaroglu; M J Osberger
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl       Date:  2000-12

2.  Temporal cues for consonant recognition: training, talker generalization, and use in evaluation of cochlear implants.

Authors:  D J Van Tasell; D G Greenfield; J J Logemann; D A Nelson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  The relative phonetic contributions of a cochlear implant and residual acoustic hearing to bimodal speech perception.

Authors:  Benjamin M Sheffield; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Perception of suprasegmental speech features via bimodal stimulation: cochlear implant on one ear and hearing aid on the other.

Authors:  Tova Most; Tamar Harel; Talma Shpak; Michal Luntz
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2010-09-15       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Relationships among speech perception, production, language, hearing loss, and age in children with impaired hearing.

Authors:  P J Blamey; J Z Sarant; L E Paatsch; J G Barry; C P Bow; R J Wales; M Wright; C Psarros; K Rattigan; R Tooher
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Spectral-ripple resolution correlates with speech reception in noise in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Jong Ho Won; Ward R Drennan; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-06-21

7.  Spectral cues for understanding speech in quiet and in noise.

Authors:  Anthony Spahr; Aniket Saoji; Leonid Litvak; Michael Dorman
Journal:  Cochlear Implants Int       Date:  2011-05

8.  The Influence of Hearing Aid Use on Outcomes of Children With Mild Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Walker; Lenore Holte; Ryan W McCreery; Meredith Spratford; Thomas Page; Mary Pat Moeller
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.297

9.  Contributions of infant word learning to language development.

Authors:  Daniel Swingley
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-12-27       Impact factor: 6.237

10.  Evaluation of the bimodal benefit in a large cohort of cochlear implant subjects using a contralateral hearing aid.

Authors:  Angelika Illg; Margarete Bojanowicz; Anke Lesinski-Schiedat; Thomas Lenarz; Andreas Büchner
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.311

View more
  4 in total

1.  Effects of Early Acoustic Hearing on Speech Perception and Language for Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  Lisa S Davidson; Ann E Geers; Rosalie M Uchanski; Jill B Firszt
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 2.297

Review 2.  Spectral Resolution Development in Children With Normal Hearing and With Cochlear Implants: A Review of Behavioral Studies.

Authors:  Kelly N Jahn; Julie G Arenberg; David L Horn
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 2.674

3.  Spectral Modulation Detection Performance and Speech Perception in Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  Lisa S Davidson; Ann E Geers; Rosalie M Uchanski
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2021-10-20       Impact factor: 1.636

4.  American Cochlear Implant Alliance Task Force Guidelines for Determining Cochlear Implant Candidacy in Children.

Authors:  Andrea D Warner-Czyz; J Thomas Roland; Denise Thomas; Kristin Uhler; Lindsay Zombek
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2022 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 3.562

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.