Relative benefits of linear analogue and advanced digital hearing aids

被引:19
作者
Wood, SA [1 ]
Lutman, ME [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Southampton, ISVR, Hearing & Balance Ctr, Southampton SO9 5NH, Hants, England
关键词
hearing aid; analogue; digital; hearing aid benefit; quality of life; speech recognition in noise; real-ear insertion gain;
D O I
10.1080/14992020400050020
中图分类号
R36 [病理学]; R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100104 ; 100213 ;
摘要
Speech recognition performance and self-reported benefit from linear analogue and advanced (digital) hearing aids were compared in 100 first-time hearing aid users with mild-to-mode rate sensorineural hearing loss fitted monaurally with a behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aid in a single-blind randomized crossover trial. Subjects used each aid for 5 weeks in turn, with aid order balanced across subjects. Three alternative models of digital hearing aid were assigned to subjects according to a balanced design. Aid type was disguised to keep subjects blind within practical limitations. Aided speech recognition performance in noise was measured at speech levels of 65 and 75 dB at a speech-to-noise ratio (SNR) of +2 dB for closed sets of single words. Self-rated benefit was measured using the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) and the Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile (GHABP). Quality of life, hearing aid use and user preferences were also assessed. Speech recognition scores with the digital aids were significantly better at 75dB than with the analogue aids. Self-reported benefit (APHAB, GHABP) and improvement in quality of life were generally not significantly different between analogue and digital aids, although aversiveness measured with the APHAB was significantly lower with digital aids, and satisfaction measured with the GHABP was greater. The digital aids were preferred significantly more often than the analogue aids, with 61 subjects choosing their digital aid, 26 choosing the analogue aid, and nine being equivocal. Overall, this study shows advantages for advanced digital over simple linear analogue aids in terms of both objective and subjective outcomes, although average differences are not large.
引用
收藏
页码:144 / 155
页数:12
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1999, J AM ACAD AUDIOL
[2]   Clinical trial of a digital hearing aid [J].
Arlinger, S ;
Billermark, E ;
Oberg, M ;
Lunner, T ;
Hellgren, J .
SCANDINAVIAN AUDIOLOGY, 1998, 27 (01) :51-61
[3]   Impact of digital labeling on outcome measures [J].
Bentler, RA ;
Niebuhr, DP ;
Johnson, TA ;
Flamme, GA .
EAR AND HEARING, 2003, 24 (03) :215-224
[4]  
Boymans M, 1999, AUDIOLOGY, V38, P99
[5]   THE NATIONAL-ACOUSTIC-LABORATORIES (NAL) NEW PROCEDURE FOR SELECTING THE GAIN AND FREQUENCY-RESPONSE OF A HEARING-AID [J].
BYRNE, D ;
DILLON, H .
EAR AND HEARING, 1986, 7 (04) :257-265
[6]  
CORNELISSE LE, 1994, HEARING J, V47, P23
[7]   THE ABBREVIATED PROFILE OF HEARING-AID BENEFIT [J].
COX, RM ;
ALEXANDER, GC .
EAR AND HEARING, 1995, 16 (02) :176-186
[8]  
COX RM, 1996, PHONAK FOCUSNO, V21
[9]   The national acoustic laboratories' procedure for selecting the saturation sound pressure level of hearing aids: Theoretical derivation [J].
Dillon, H ;
Storey, L .
EAR AND HEARING, 1998, 19 (04) :255-266
[10]  
FOSTER JR, 1984, IHR INT REPORT SERIE