Comparison of benefits provided by different hearing aid technologies.

The performance of 40 hearing-impaired adults with the GN ReSound digital BZ5 hearing instrument was compared with performance with linear hearing aids with input compression limiting (AGC-I) or two-channel analog wide dynamic range compression (WDRC) instruments. The BZ5 was evaluated with an omnidirectional microphone, dual-microphone directionality, and a noise reduction circuit in combination with dual-microphone directionality. Participants were experienced hearing aid users who were wearing linear AGC-I or analog WDRC instruments at the time of enrolment. Performance was assessed using the Connected Speech Test (CST) presented at several presentation levels and under various conditions of signal degradation and by the Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (PHAB). Subjective ratings of speech understanding, listening comfort, and sound quality/naturalness were also obtained using 11-point interval scales. Small performance advantages were observed for WDRC over linear AGC-I, although WDRC did not have to be implemented digitally for these performance advantages to be realized. Substantial performance advantages for the dual microphones over the omnidirectional microphone were observed in the CST results in noise, but participants generally did not perceive these large advantages in everyday listening. The noise reduction circuit provided improved listening comfort but little change in speech understanding.

[1]  G. Studebaker A "rationalized" arcsine transform. , 1985, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[2]  Hearing aids and assistive listening devices. , 1992, South Dakota journal of medicine.

[3]  H Dillon Tutorial Compression? Yes, But for Low or High Frequencies, for Low or High Intensities, and with What Response Times? , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[4]  D Benson,et al.  Patient experiences with multiband full dynamic range compression. , 1992, Ear and hearing.

[5]  D B Hawkins,et al.  Signal-to-noise ratio advantage of binaural hearing aids and directional microphones under different levels of reverberation. , 1984, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[6]  S Gatehouse,et al.  Role of perceptual acclimatization in the selection of frequency responses for hearing aids. , 1993, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[7]  T Ricketts,et al.  Impact of Noise Source Configuration on Directional Hearing Aid Benefit and Performance , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[8]  L G Potts,et al.  Differences in performance between Oticon MultiFocus Compact and ReSound BT2-E hearing aids. , 1997, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[9]  E W Yund,et al.  Enhanced speech perception at low signal-to-noise ratios with multichannel compression hearing aids. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  R M Cox,et al.  Development of the Profile of Hearing Aid Performance (PHAP). , 1990, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[12]  H. Nielsen,et al.  Clinical study of a digital vs an analogue hearing aid. , 1999, Scandinavian audiology.

[13]  R Plomp,et al.  The negative effect of amplitude compression in multichannel hearing aids in the light of the modulation-transfer function. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  M Valente,et al.  Performance of dual-microphone in-the-ear hearing aids. , 2000, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[15]  R K Surr,et al.  Long-term versus short-term hearing aid benefit. , 1998, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[16]  Fabry Da,et al.  Noise-reduction hearing aids. What is the fate of the ART (adaptive response technology)? , 1990 .

[17]  T Ricketts,et al.  Comparison of performance across three directional hearing aids. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[18]  V Pluvinage,et al.  Evaluation of a dual-channel full dynamic range compression system for people with sensorineural hearing loss. , 1992, Ear and hearing.

[19]  R M Cox,et al.  Predictability and reliability of hearing aid benefit measured using the PHAB. , 1992, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[20]  S. Arlinger,et al.  One year follow-up of users of a digital hearing aid. , 1999, British journal of audiology.

[21]  Brian E. Walden Toward a Model Clinical-Trials Protocol for Substantiating Hearing Aid User-Benefit Claims , 1997 .

[22]  H. Gustav Mueller Do Hearing Aids Work In Noise? Thatʼs A Simple Question With No Easy Answer , 1995 .

[23]  H. Dillon,et al.  The National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) New Procedure for Selecting the Gain and Frequency Response of a Hearing Aid , 1986, Ear and hearing.

[24]  Michael Valente,et al.  Digital versus analog signal processing: Effect of directional microphone , 1999 .

[25]  W A Dreschler,et al.  Advantages of directional hearing aid microphones related to room acoustics. , 1991, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[26]  C A Sammeth,et al.  Field trial evaluations of a switched directional/omnidirectional in-the-ear hearing instrument. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[27]  Robyn M. Cox,et al.  Development of the Connected Speech Test (CST) , 1987, Ear and hearing.

[28]  M Valente,et al.  Recognition of speech in noise with hearing aids using dual microphones. , 1995, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[29]  B E Walden,et al.  Self-report approach to assessing benefit derived from amplification. , 1984, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[30]  C W Turner,et al.  Quantifying the contribution of audibility to recognition of compression-amplified speech. , 1999, Ear and hearing.

[31]  R C Seewald,et al.  Speech recognition with in-the-ear and behind-the-ear dual-microphone hearing instruments. , 2000, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[32]  F H Bess,et al.  A comparison of the aided performance and benefit provided by a linear and a two-channel wide dynamic range compression hearing aid. , 1999, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[33]  R M Cox,et al.  Use of the Connected Speech Test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners. , 1988, Ear and hearing.

[34]  P. Peterson Simulating the response of multiple microphones to a single acoustic source in a reverberant room. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[35]  C Ludvigsen,et al.  Effect of hearing aids with directional microphones in different acoustic environments. , 1978, Scandinavian audiology.

[36]  Gerald A. Studebaker,et al.  Acoustical Factors Affecting Hearing Aid Performance , 1992 .

[37]  D A Fabry,et al.  Comparing the performance of the Widex SENSO digital hearing aid with analog hearing aids. , 1998, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.