Literature DB >> 3398491

Evaluation of the National Acoustic Laboratories' new hearing aid selection procedure.

D Byrne1, S Cotton.   

Abstract

This study evaluated the National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) new formula for prescribing the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. The frequency response prescribed for 44 clients (67 fitted ears) was compared with a series of variations having increased or decreased low-frequency and/or high-frequency emphasis. The evaluations consisted of paired-comparison judgments of the intelligibility of speech in quiet and the pleasantness of speech in noise. There were only 4 ears (6%) where a comparison response was more intelligible than the NAL response, but there were 16 ears (24%) where one of the comparison responses was more pleasant. On the average, hearing aid gain that was used by each subject agreed closely with prescribed gain. These trends were not affected by audiogram configuration, experience in aid usage, or type of aid limiting. The formula was found to be highly effective, but there were some cases where a change in aid prescription was indicated. A simple evaluation procedure using paired-comparison judgments is proposed for detecting such cases.

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3398491     DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3102.178

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Hear Res        ISSN: 0022-4685


  14 in total

1.  Temporal intraspeech masking of plosive bursts: effects of hearing loss and frequency shaping.

Authors:  Carol L Mackersie
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  Evidence for the use of hearing assistive technology by adults: the role of the FM system.

Authors:  Theresa Hnath Chisolm; Colleen M Noe; Rachel McArdle; Harvey Abrams
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2007-06

3.  Application of paired-comparison methods to hearing AIDS.

Authors:  Amyn M Amlani; Erin C Schafer
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2009-12

4.  Effects of fundamental frequency and vocal-tract length cues on sentence segregation by listeners with hearing loss.

Authors:  Carol L Mackersie; James Dewey; Lesli A Guthrie
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Longitudinal Predictors of Aided Speech Audibility in Infants and Children.

Authors:  Ryan W McCreery; Elizabeth A Walker; Meredith Spratford; Ruth Bentler; Lenore Holte; Patricia Roush; Jacob Oleson; John Van Buren; Mary Pat Moeller
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Evaluation of cellular phone technology with digital hearing aid features: effects of encoding and individualized amplification.

Authors:  Carol L Mackersie; Yingyong Qi; Arthur Boothroyd; Nicole Conrad
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 1.664

Review 7.  NAL-NL2 empirical adjustments.

Authors:  Gitte Keidser; Harvey Dillon; Lyndal Carter; Anna O'Brien
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2012-11-30

8.  Hearing aid fitting and developmental outcomes of children fit according to either the NAL or DSL prescription: fit-to-target, audibility, speech and language abilities.

Authors:  Teresa Y C Ching; Vicky W Zhang; Earl E Johnson; Patricia Van Buynder; Sanna Hou; Lauren Burns; Laura Button; Christopher Flynn; Karen McGhie
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2017-10-03       Impact factor: 2.117

9.  Characteristics of hearing aid fittings in infants and young children.

Authors:  Ryan W McCreery; Ruth A Bentler; Patricia A Roush
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Self-reported disability and handicap after hearing-aid fitting and benefit of hearing aids: comparison of fitting procedures, degree of hearing loss, experience with hearing aids and uni- and bilateral fittings.

Authors:  Mick Metselaar; Bert Maat; Pieta Krijnen; Hans Verschuure; Wouter A Dreschler; Louw Feenstra
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2008-11-13       Impact factor: 2.503

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.