Electroacoustic Verification Measures with Modern Hearing Instrument Technology

Modern-day hearing instruments offer a wide variety of signal processing options, including widedynamic range compression (WDRC), multiple channels, selectable compression speeds, dual/directional microphones, and noise detection. Similarly, modernday hearing instrument test systems offer a wide variety of test signals, varying in their bandwidth, spectral shape, level, and temporal characteristics. The process of verifying the performance of a given hearing instrument for a specific infant or child is therefore complicated by the process of matching appropriate test signal characteristics to the signal processing characteristics of the hearing instrument, in order to obtain an accurate test. In this chapter, we will review some current issues in electroacoustic verification of modern-day hearing instruments and we will outline some evidence-based strategies for verification with modern hearing instrument technology.

[1]  Susan Scollie,et al.  Predictive Validity of a Procedure for Pediatric Hearing Instrument Fitting , 1999 .

[2]  Infants are not average adults: Implications for audiometric testing , 1999 .

[3]  B C Moore,et al.  Perceptual consequences of cochlear hearing loss and their implications for the design of hearing aids. , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[4]  D L Zelisko,et al.  Comparison of two methods for estimating the sensation level of amplified speech. , 1992, Ear and hearing.

[5]  P G Stelmachowicz,et al.  Measures of Hearing Aid Gain for Real Speech , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[6]  R C Seewald,et al.  Comparison of Linear Gain and Wide Dynamic Range Compression Hearing Aid Circuits II: Aided Loudness Measures , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[7]  Margaret W. Skinner,et al.  Hearing Aid Evaluation , 1988 .

[8]  Ruth A. Bentler,et al.  Guidelines for hearing aid fitting for adults , 1998 .

[9]  W A Cole,et al.  The Audioscan RM500 Speechmap/DSL Fitting System , 1998, Trends in amplification.

[10]  R M Cox,et al.  Distribution of short-term rms levels in conversational speech. , 1988, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Marlene P. Bagatto.  Optimizing your RECD measurements , 2001 .

[12]  Kathryn Hoberg Arehart,et al.  State of the States: The Status of Universal Newborn Hearing Screening, Assessment, and Intervention Systems in 16 States. , 1998, American journal of audiology.

[13]  R C Seewald,et al.  Validity and Repeatability of Level‐Independent HL to SPL Transforms , 1998, Ear and hearing.

[14]  Fred H. Bess.  Amplification for Infants and Children With Hearing Loss , 1996 .

[15]  Richard C. Seewald,et al.  Procedure for Predicting Real-Ear Hearing Aid Performance in Young Children , 1994 .

[16]  K J Munro,et al.  Customized Acoustic Transform Functions and Their Accuracy at Predicting Real‐Ear Hearing Aid Performance , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[17]  P G Stelmachowicz,et al.  Some theoretical considerations concerning the relation between functional gain and insertion gain. , 1988, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[18]  B. Kruger,et al.  An update on the external ear resonance in infants and young children. , 1987, Ear and hearing.

[19]  P. Stelmachowicz.  How Do We Know We ’ ve Got It Right ? Electroacoustic and Audiometric Measures , 2022 .

[20]  P. Stelmachowicz,et al.  Repeatability of a Real-Ear-to-Coupler Difference Measurement as a Function of Age , 1996 .

[21]  W. Olsen,et al.  Average Speech Levels and Spectra in Various Speaking/Listening Conditions: A Summary of the Pearson, Bennett, & Fidell (1977) Report. , 1998, American journal of audiology.

[22]  D B Hawkins,et al.  Complex and pure-tone signals in the evaluation of hearing-aid characteristics. , 1990, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[23]  S Sinclair,et al.  The Audioscan® RM500 Real-Ear Hearing Aid Analyzer: Measuring for a Successful Fit , 2001, Trends in amplification.

[24]  Heather Robson.  Using a Variety of Signals to Improve Real-Ear Testing , 2001, Trends in amplification.

[25]  J Groth.  Influence of Advanced Hearing Aid Technology on Choice of Signal for Probe Microphone Measures , 2001, Trends in amplification.

[26]  R C Seewald,et al.  Comparison of linear gain and wide dynamic range compression hearing aid circuits: aided speech perception measures. , 1999, Ear and hearing.

[27]  R C Seewald,et al.  Ear level recordings of the long-term average spectrum of speech. , 1991, Ear and hearing.

[28]  R M Cox,et al.  Composite speech spectrum for hearing and gain prescriptions. , 1988, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[29]  C Ludvigsen,et al.  Variables affecting the use of prescriptive formulae to fit modern nonlinear hearing aids. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[30]  D Byrne,et al.  Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  B Majest,et al.  Universal REM-Link and ICRA Signals—High-Tech Fitting Tools for High-Tech Hearing Instruments , 2001, Trends in amplification.

[32]  N P Erber.  Body-baffle and real-ear effects in the selection of hearing aids for deaf children. , 1973, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[33]  Kevin J Munro,et al.  Is the real-ear to coupler difference independent of the measurement earphone?: Es independiente del auricular de medición, la diferencia entre el oído real y el acoplador? , 2002, International journal of audiology.