Predicting Hearing aid Benefit Using Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses in Children With Hearing Loss

Electroencephalography could serve as an objective tool to evaluate hearing aid benefit in infants who are developmentally unable to participate in hearing tests. We investigated whether speech-evoked envelope following responses (EFRs), a type of electroencephalography-based measure, could predict improved audibility with the use of a hearing aid in children with mild-to-severe permanent, mainly sensorineural, hearing loss. In 18 children, EFRs were elicited by six male-spoken band-limited phonemic stimuli––the first formants of /u/ and /i/, the second and higher formants of /u/ and /i/, and the fricatives /s/ and /∫/––presented together as /su∫i/. EFRs were recorded between the vertex and nape, when /su∫i/ was presented at 55, 65, and 75 dB SPL using insert earphones in unaided conditions and individually fit hearing aids in aided conditions. EFR amplitude and detectability improved with the use of a hearing aid, and the degree of improvement in EFR amplitude was dependent on the extent of change in behavioral thresholds between unaided and aided conditions. EFR detectability was primarily influenced by audibility; higher sensation level stimuli had an increased probability of detection. Overall EFR sensitivity in predicting audibility was significantly higher in aided (82.1%) than unaided conditions (66.5%) and did not vary as a function of stimulus or frequency. EFR specificity in ascertaining inaudibility was 90.8%. Aided improvement in EFR detectability was a significant predictor of hearing aid-facilitated change in speech discrimination accuracy. Results suggest that speech-evoked EFRs could be a useful objective tool in predicting hearing aid benefit in children with hearing loss.

[1]  D. Purcell,et al.  Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses in Children and Adults. , 2022, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[2]  S. Scollie,et al.  Variability in the Estimated Amplitude of Vowel-Evoked Envelope Following Responses Caused by Assumed Neurophysiologic Processing Delays , 2022, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[3]  S. Scollie,et al.  The Influence of Sensation Level on Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses , 2021, Ear and hearing.

[4]  S. Scollie,et al.  Characteristics of Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses in Infancy , 2021, Trends in hearing.

[5]  D. Glista,et al.  Perceptual Benefits of Extended Bandwidth Hearing Aids With Children: A Within-Subject Design Using Clinically Available Hearing Aids. , 2020, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[6]  S. Scollie,et al.  The Accuracy of Envelope Following Responses in Predicting Speech Audibility. , 2020, Ear and hearing.

[7]  S. Scollie,et al.  Investigating potential interactions between envelope following responses elicited simultaneously by different vowel formants , 2019, Hearing Research.

[8]  S. Gordon-Salant,et al.  Effects of Age, Cognition, and Neural Encoding on the Perception of Temporal Speech Cues , 2019, Front. Neurosci..

[9]  S. Scollie,et al.  Test-Retest Variability in the Characteristics of Envelope Following Responses Evoked by Speech Stimuli , 2019, Ear and hearing.

[10]  J. Marriage,et al.  A qualitative review of parents’ perspectives on the value of CAEP recording in influencing their acceptance of hearing devices for their child , 2019, International journal of audiology.

[11]  Michael A Stone,et al.  A Set of Time-and-Frequency-Localized Short-Duration Speech-Like Stimuli for Assessing Hearing-Aid Performance via Cortical Auditory-Evoked Potentials , 2019, Trends in hearing.

[12]  T. Reichenbach,et al.  Speech Auditory Brainstem Responses in Adult Hearing Aid Users: Effects of Aiding and Background Noise, and Prediction of Behavioral Measures , 2019, Trends in hearing.

[13]  Frederick J. Gallun,et al.  The Characteristics of Adults with Severe Hearing Loss , 2018, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[14]  Gavin M. Bidelman,et al.  Subcortical sources dominate the neuroelectric auditory frequency-following response to speech , 2018, NeuroImage.

[15]  S. Anderson,et al.  Neural and behavioral changes after the use of hearing aids , 2018, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[16]  Merle Mahon,et al.  Role of Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials in Reducing the Age at Hearing Aid Fitting in Children With Hearing Loss Identified by Newborn Hearing Screening , 2017, Trends in hearing.

[17]  S. Anderson,et al.  Effects of Amplification on Neural Phase Locking, Amplitude, and Latency to a Speech Syllable , 2017, Ear and hearing.

[18]  Marc A Brennan,et al.  Perceptual Implications of Level- and Frequency-Specific Deviations from Hearing Aid Prescription in Children , 2017, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[19]  Brian M. Kreisman,et al.  Equivalence and test–retest reproducibility of conventional and extended-high-frequency audiometric thresholds obtained using pure-tone and narrow-band-noise stimuli , 2017, International journal of audiology.

[20]  Edward L. Bartlett,et al.  Human Frequency Following Response: Neural Representation of Envelope and Temporal Fine Structure in Listeners with Normal Hearing and Sensorineural Hearing Loss , 2016, Ear and hearing.

[21]  Lyndal Carter,et al.  Clinical Experience of Using Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials in the Treatment of Infant Hearing Loss in Australia , 2016, Seminars in Hearing.

[22]  Vicky W. Zhang,et al.  Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials Reveal Changes in Audibility with Nonlinear Frequency Compression in Hearing Aids for Children: Clinical Implications , 2016, Seminars in Hearing.

[23]  T. Ching,et al.  Detection Rates of Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials at Different Sensation Levels in Infants with Sensory/Neural Hearing Loss and Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder , 2016, Seminars in Hearing.

[24]  Vijay Parsa,et al.  Evaluation of Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses as an Objective Aided Outcome Measure: Effect of Stimulus Level, Bandwidth, and Amplification in Adults With Hearing Loss , 2015, Ear and hearing.

[25]  S. Scollie,et al.  Effect of Stimulus Level and Bandwidth on Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses in Adults With Normal Hearing , 2015, Ear and hearing.

[26]  Laura E Beamish,et al.  Sensitivity of envelope following responses to vowel polarity , 2015, Hearing Research.

[27]  Teresa Y C Ching,et al.  Aided cortical response, speech intelligibility, consonant perception and functional performance of young children using conventional amplification or nonlinear frequency compression. , 2014, International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology.

[28]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[29]  M. P. Moeller,et al.  The influence of hearing aids on the speech and language development of children with hearing loss. , 2014, JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery.

[30]  M. Heinz,et al.  Sensorineural hearing loss amplifies neural coding of envelope information in the central auditory system of chinchillas , 2014, Hearing Research.

[31]  M. Heinz,et al.  Noise-induced hearing loss increases the temporal precision of complex envelope coding by auditory-nerve fibers , 2014, Front. Syst. Neurosci..

[32]  Harvey Dillon,et al.  A brief overview of factors affecting speech intelligibility of people with hearing loss: implications for amplification. , 2013, American journal of audiology.

[33]  David W Purcell,et al.  Envelope Following Responses Elicited by English Sentences , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[34]  Frederick J Gallun,et al.  Spectrotemporal modulation sensitivity as a predictor of speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners. , 2013, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[35]  H. R. Dajani,et al.  Objective measurement of physiological signal-to-noise gain in the brainstem response to a synthetic vowel , 2013, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[36]  Nina Kraus,et al.  The Potential Role of the cABR in Assessment and Management of Hearing Impairment , 2013, International journal of otolaryngology.

[37]  David W. Purcell,et al.  Electroacoustic Comparison of Hearing Aid Output of Phonemes in Running Speech versus Isolation: Implications for Aided Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials Testing , 2012, International journal of otolaryngology.

[38]  D. Glista,et al.  A Pilot Study on Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials in Children: Aided CAEPs Reflect Improved High-Frequency Audibility with Frequency Compression Hearing Aid Technology , 2012, International journal of otolaryngology.

[39]  H. Dillon,et al.  The relationship between cortical auditory evoked potential (CAEP) detection and estimated audibility in infants with sensorineural hearing loss , 2012, International journal of audiology.

[40]  R. Bentler,et al.  The Speech Intelligibility Index and the pure-tone average as predictors of lexical ability in children fit with hearing AIDS. , 2012, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[41]  S. Scollie,et al.  The University of Western Ontario Pediatric Audiological Monitoring Protocol (UWO PedAMP) , 2011, Trends in amplification.

[42]  Garrett Cardon,et al.  Cortical maturation and behavioral outcomes in children with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder , 2011, International journal of audiology.

[43]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  Development and analysis of an International Speech Test Signal (ISTS) , 2010, International journal of audiology.

[44]  Sheila Moodie,et al.  Fit to targets, preferred listening levels, and self-reported outcomes for the DSL v5.0a hearing aid prescription for adults , 2010, International journal of audiology.

[45]  N. Kraus,et al.  Auditory Brain Stem Response to Complex Sounds: A Tutorial , 2010, Ear and hearing.

[46]  S. Scollie,et al.  Protocol for the provision of amplification within the Ontario Infant hearing program , 2010, International journal of audiology.

[47]  John H Grose,et al.  Age Effects in Temporal Envelope Processing: Speech Unmasking and Auditory Steady State Responses , 2009, Ear and hearing.

[48]  Terence W. Picton,et al.  Envelope and spectral frequency-following responses to vowel sounds , 2008, Hearing Research.

[49]  S. Scollie.  Children’s Speech Recognition Scores: The Speech Intelligibility Index and Proficiency Factors for Age and Hearing Level , 2008, Ear and Hearing.

[50]  Lorienne M Jenstad,et al.  Evaluation of the Desired Sensation Level [Input/Output] Algorithm for Adults with Hearing Loss: The Acceptable Range for Amplified Conversational Speech , 2007, Ear and hearing.

[51]  Terence W. Picton,et al.  Envelope Following Responses to Natural Vowels , 2006, Audiology and Neurotology.

[52]  T. Hazell.  Newborn hearing screening. , 2006, Paediatric nursing.

[53]  Sheila Moodie,et al.  The Desired Sensation Level Multistage Input/Output Algorithm , 2005, Trends in amplification.

[54]  Gary Rance,et al.  Hearing threshold estimation in infants using auditory steady-state responses. , 2005, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[55]  Terence W Picton,et al.  Estimating audiometric thresholds using auditory steady-state responses. , 2005, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[56]  Terence W Picton,et al.  Human temporal auditory acuity as assessed by envelope following responses. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[57]  Nina Kraus,et al.  Brainstem responses to speech syllables , 2004, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[58]  D. Hawkins.  Limitations and Uses of the Aided Audiogram , 2004 .

[59]  Jacek Smurzynski,et al.  Test-Retest Reliability of Pure-Tone Thresholds from 0.5 to 16 kHz using Sennheiser HDA 200 and Etymotic Research ER-2 Earphones , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[60]  G. Studebaker,et al.  Supplementary formulas and tables for calculating and interconverting speech recognition scores in transformed arcsine units , 2004, International journal of audiology.

[61]  Ian M Colrain,et al.  Event-related potential measures of the inhibition of information processing: II. The sleep onset period. , 2002, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[62]  Susan D Scollie,et al.  Evaluation of Electroacoustic Test Signals I: Comparison with Amplified Speech , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[63]  Gary Rance,et al.  Speech Perception and Cortical Event Related Potentials in Children with Auditory Neuropathy , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[64]  Welfare Agencies,et al.  Year 2000 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs , 2000, Pediatrics.

[65]  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.

[66]  T W Picton,et al.  Objective evaluation of aided thresholds using auditory steady-state responses. , 1998, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

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

[68]  Donald G. Jamieson,et al.  Development, evaluation and scoring of a nonsense word test suitable for use with speakers of Canadian English , 1996 .

[69]  G M Clark,et al.  A comparison of steady-state evoked potentials to modulated tones in awake and sleeping humans. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

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

[71]  J. T. Marsh,et al.  Human frequency following response to synthetic vowels , 1978 .

[72]  Frederique J. Vanheusden,et al.  Improved Detection of Vowel Envelope Frequency Following Responses Using Hotelling’s T2 Analysis , 2019, Ear and hearing.

[73]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[74]  L. Eisenberg,et al.  Newborn hearing screening speeds diagnosis and access to intervention by 20-25 months. , 2009, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[75]  Harvey Dillon,et al.  Aided Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials for Hearing Instrument Evaluation in Infants , 2005 .

[76]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[77]  D B Hawkins,et al.  Aided masked thresholds: case of deception. , 1993, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[78]  A. Stuart,et al.  Test-retest variability in audiometric threshold with supraaural and insert earphones among children and adults. , 1991, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.