Perceptual evaluation of six hearing-aid processing strategies from the perspective of auditory profiling: Insights from the BEAR project

Authors

  • Mengfan Wu Institute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8794-4490
  • Raul Sanchez Lopez Hearing Systems Section, Department of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5239-2339
  • Mouhamad El-Haj-Ali Institute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
  • Silje Grini Nielsen Hearing Systems Section, Department of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark
  • Michal Fereczkowski Institute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; Hearing Systems Section, Department of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark
  • Torsten Dau Hearing Systems Section, Department of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8110-4343
  • Sébastien Santurette Hearing Systems Section, Department of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark; Oticon A/S, Smørum, Denmark https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6868-5734
  • Tobias Neher Institute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1107-9274

Abstract

The current study forms part of the Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project, which aims at developing new clinical tools for characterizing individual hearing loss and for assessing hearing-aid (HA) benefit. Its purpose was to investigate potential interactions between four auditory profiles and three measures of HA outcome obtained for six HA processing strategies. Measurements were carried out in a realistic noise environment at signal-to-noise ratios that were set based on individual aided speech reception thresholds (SRT50). Speech recognition scores and ratings of overall quality and noise annoyance were collected in two spatial conditions. The stimuli were generated with the help of a HA simulator and presented via headphones to 60 older, habitual HA users who had previously been profiled based on a data-driven approach (Sanchez-Lopez et al., 2019). The four auditory profiles differed significantly in terms of mean aided SRT50 and interacted significantly with the HA processing strategies for speech recognition in one spatial condition. Moreover, the correlation-pattern between the speech recognition scores and subjective ratings differed among the auditory profiles.

 

References

Bisgaard, N., Vlaming, M. S., and Dahlquist, M. (2010). “Standard audiograms for the IEC 60118-15 measurement procedure,” Trends Amplif., 14(2), 113-120. doi:10.1177/1084713810379609
Brons, I., Houben, R., and Dreschler, W. A. (2014). “Effects of noise reduction on speech intelligibility, perceived listening effort, and personal preference in hearing-impaired listeners,” Trends Hear., 18, 2331216514553924.
Cox, R. M., Johnson, J. A., and Xu, J. (2016). “Impact of hearing aid technology on outcomes in daily life I: the patients’ perspective,” Ear Hearing, 37(4), e224.
Gatehouse, S., Naylor, G., and Elberling, C. (2006). “Linear and nonlinear hearing aid fittings–1. Patterns of benefit,” Int. J. Audiol., 45(3), 130-152. doi:10.1080/14992020500429518
Holube, I., Fredelake, S., Vlaming, M., and Kollmeier, B. (2010). “Development and analysis of an international speech test signal (ISTS),” Int. J. Audiol., 49(12), 891-903. doi:10.3109/14992027.2010.506889
Johannesen, P. T., Pérez-González, P., Kalluri, S., Blanco, J. L., and Lopez-Poveda, E. A. (2016). “The influence of cochlear mechanical dysfunction, temporal processing deficits, and age on the intelligibility of audible speech in noise for hearing-impaired listeners,” Trends Hear, 20, 2331216516641055.
Keidser, G., Dillon, H., Convery, E., and Mejia, J. (2013). “Factors influencing individual variation in perceptual directional microphone benefit,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 24(10), 955-968.
Keidser, G., Dillon, H., Flax, M., Ching, T., and Brewer, S. (2011). “The NAL-NL2 prescription procedure,” Audiol. Res., 1(1).
Keidser, G., and Grant, F. (2001). “Comparing loudness normalization (IHAFF) with speech intelligibility maximization (NAL-NL1) when implemented in a two- channel device,” Ear Hearing, 22(6), 501-515.
Lopez-Poveda, E. A., Johannesen, P. T., Perez-González, P., Blanco, J. L., Kalluri, S., and Edwards, B. (2017). “Predictors of hearing-aid outcomes,” Trends Hear, 21, 2331216517730526.
Neher, T., Laugesen, S., Søgaard Jensen, N., and Kragelund, L. (2011). “Can basic auditory and cognitive measures predict hearing-impaired listeners’ localization and spatial speech recognition abilities?,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 130(3), 1542- 1558. doi:10.1121/1.3608122
Picou, E. M., Marcrum, S. C., and Ricketts, T. A. (2015). “Evaluation of the effects of nonlinear frequency compression on speech recognition and sound quality for adults with mild to moderate hearing loss,” Int. J. Audiol., 54(3), 162-169. doi:10.3109/14992027.2014.961662
Plomp, R. (1978). “Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 63(2), 533-549. doi: 10.1121/1.381753
Prosser, S., Turrini, M., and Arslan, E. (1991). “Effects of different noises on speech discrimination by the elderly,” Acta Otolaryngol., 111(sup476), 136-142. Sanchez-Lopez, R., Fereczkowski, M., Bianchi, F., Piechowiak, T., Hau, O.,
Pedersen, M. S., Behrens, T., Neher, T., Dau, T. and Santurette, S. (2018). “Technical evaluation of hearing-aid fitting parameters for different auditory profiles,” Euronoise 2018.
Sanchez-Lopez, R., Fereczkowski, M., Neher, T., Santurette, S., and Dau, T. (2019). “Robust auditory profiling: Improved data-driven method and profile definitions for better hearing rehabilitation,” Poster presented at the 7th International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, August 21 - 23 2019, Nyborg, Denmark. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19762.35526
Sanchez-Lopez R, Nielsen. S. G,, El-Haj-Ali M, Bianchi F, Fereckzowski M, Cañete O, Wu M, Neher T, Dau, T and Santurette S. (2020). “Auditory tests for characterizing hearing deficits: The BEAR test battery,” medRxiv. doi:10.1101/2020.02.17.20021949
SenseLab. (2017). SenseLabOnline (4.0.2 ed.). Hørsholm, Denmark: FORCE Technology.
Wagener, K., Josvassen, J. L., and Ardenkjær, R. (2003). “Design, optimization and evaluation of a Danish sentence test in noise,” Int. J. Audiol., 42(1), 10-17. doi: 10.3109/14992020309056080
Auditory Learning in Biological and Artificial Systems

Additional Files

Published

2020-04-08

How to Cite

Wu, M., Sanchez Lopez, R., El-Haj-Ali, M., Nielsen, S. G., Fereczkowski, M., Dau, T., … Neher, T. (2020). Perceptual evaluation of six hearing-aid processing strategies from the perspective of auditory profiling: Insights from the BEAR project. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, 7, 265–272. Retrieved from https://proceedings.isaar.eu/index.php/isaarproc/article/view/2019-30

Issue

Vol. 7 (2019): Auditory Learning in Biological and Artificial Systems

Section

2019/4. Novel directions in hearing-instrument technology

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a. Authors retain copyright* and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

*From the 2017 issue onward. The Danavox Jubilee Foundation owns the copyright of all articles published in the 1969-2015 issues. However, authors are still allowed to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.