Hearing Loss and the Limits of Amplification

This review article summarizes the effects of sensorineural hearing loss on the recognition of amplified speech, both for speech presented in quiet and in a noise background. Some hypotheses are presented regarding the underlying damage in the cochlea that leads to the deficits in speech recognition for hearing losses of various configurations. For severe hearing losses in the high frequencies, amplification is often ineffective. While the existing data also suggest that sensorineural hearing loss can lead to poor frequency resolution, which leads to problems understanding speech in noise, the frequency resolution of the cochlear implant is usually even poorer. Therefore a strategy of preserving low-frequency residual hearing combined with electrical stimulation for the higher frequencies is an attractive solution for patients with severe high-frequency hearing loss.

[1]  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.

[2]  M W Skinner,et al.  Speech intelligibility in noise-induced hearing loss: effects of high-frequency compensation. , 1980, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  C. Turner,et al.  High-frequency audibility: benefits for hearing-impaired listeners. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  G. A. Miller,et al.  Erratum: An Analysis of Perceptual Confusions Among Some English Consonants [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 27, 339 (1955)] , 1955 .

[5]  Do tests for cochlear dead regions provide important information for fitting hearing aids? , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Michael K. Qin,et al.  Effects of simulated cochlear-implant processing on speech reception in fluctuating maskers. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  C W Turner,et al.  Use of temporal envelope cues in speech recognition by normal and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1995, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[8]  B. Moore,et al.  Effects of low pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in noise for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Bruce J Gantz,et al.  Preservation of Hearing in Cochlear Implant Surgery: Advantages of Combined Electrical and Acoustical Speech Processing , 2005, The Laryngoscope.

[10]  Belinda A Henry,et al.  Spectral peak resolution and speech recognition in quiet: normal hearing, hearing impaired, and cochlear implant listeners. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Q J Fu,et al.  Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  M. Ruggero,et al.  Kanamycin and bumetanide ototoxicity: Anatomical, physiological and behavioral correlates , 1982, Hearing Research.

[13]  B. Moore,et al.  Effects of low-pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in quiet for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  G. A. Miller,et al.  An Analysis of Perceptual Confusions Among Some English Consonants , 1955 .

[15]  Providing low- and mid-frequency speech information to listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  E D Young,et al.  Effects of acoustic trauma on the representation of the vowel "eh" in cat auditory nerve fibers. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  N. P. Erber,et al.  Speech-envelope cues as an acoustic aid to lipreading for profoundly deaf children. , 1972, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  M. Liberman,et al.  Single-neuron labeling and chronic cochlear pathology. III. Stereocilia damage and alterations of threshold tuning curves , 1984, Hearing Research.

[19]  Bruce J Gantz,et al.  Speech recognition in noise for cochlear implant listeners: benefits of residual acoustic hearing. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.