Investigation of Extended Bandwidth Hearing Aid Amplification on Speech Intelligibility and Sound Quality in Adults with Mild-to-Moderate Hearing Loss

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background:

Advances in digital signal processing have made it possible to provide a wide-band frequency response with smooth, precise spectral shaping. Several manufacturers have introduced hearing aids that are claimed to provide gain for frequencies up to 10–12 kHz. However, there is currently limited evidence and very few independent studies evaluating the performance of the extended bandwidth hearing aids that have recently become available.

Purpose:

This study investigated an extended bandwidth hearing aid using measures of speech intelligibility and sound quality to find out whether there was a significant benefit of extended bandwidth amplification over standard amplification.

Research Design:

Repeated measures study designed to examine the efficacy of extended bandwidth amplification compared to standard bandwidth amplification.

Study Sample:

Sixteen adult participants with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss.

Intervention:

Participants were bilaterally fit with a pair of Widex Mind 440 behind-the-ear hearing aids programmed with a standard bandwidth fitting and an extended bandwidth fitting; the latter provided gain up to 10 kHz.

Data Collection and Analysis:

For each fitting, and an unaided condition, participants completed two speech measures of aided benefit, the Quick Speech-in-Noise test (QuickSIN™) and the Phonak Phoneme Perception Test (PPT; high-frequency perception in quiet), and a measure of sound quality rating.

Results:

There were no significant differences found between unaided and aided conditions for QuickSIN™ scores. For the PPT, there were statistically significantly lower (improved) detection thresholds at high frequencies (6 and 9 kHz) with the extended bandwidth fitting. Although not statistically significant, participants were able to distinguish between 6 and 9 kHz 50% better with extended bandwidth. No significant difference was found in ability to recognize phonemes in quiet between the unaided and aided conditions when phonemes only contained frequency content <6 kHz. However significant benefit was found with the extended bandwidth fitting for recognition of 9-kHz phonemes. No significant difference in sound quality preference was found between the standard bandwidth and extended bandwidth fittings.

Conclusions:

This study demonstrated that a pair of currently available extended bandwidth hearing aids was technically capable of delivering high-frequency amplification that was both audible and useable to listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. This amplification was of acceptable sound quality. Further research, particularly field trials, is required to ascertain the real-world benefit of high-frequency amplification.

This research was funded by a School of Population Health Student Research grant to AS.

• REFERENCES

• Ahlstrom JB, Horwitz AR, Dubno JR. 2014; Spatial separation benefit for unaided and aided listening. Ear Hear 35 (01) 72-85
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Amos NE, Humes LE. 2007; Contribution of high frequencies to speech recognition in quiet and noise in listeners with varying degrees of high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res 50 (04) 819-834
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Baekgaard L, Kuk F. 2008; Hearing aid selection and BTEs: choosing among various “open-ear” and “receiver-in-canal” options. Hear Rev 15: 22-36
  Google Scholar
• Baer T, Moore BCJ, Kluk K. 2002; Effects of low pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in noise for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am 112 3 Pt 1 1133-1144
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Best V, Carlile S, Jin C, van Schaik A. 2005; The role of high frequencies in speech localization. J Acoust Soc Am 118 (01) 353-363
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Byrne D, Dillon H. 1986; The National Acoustic Laboratories’ (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear Hear 7 (04) 257-265
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Byrne D, Dillon H, Ching T, Katsch R, Keidser G. 2001; NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures. J Am Acad Audiol 12 (01) 37-51
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Carhart R, Jerger J. 1959; Preferred method for clinical determination of pure-tone thresholds. J Speech Hear Disord 24: 330-345
  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
• Ching TYC, Dillon H, Byrne D. 1998; Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification. J Acoust Soc Am 103 (02) 1128-1140
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Crandell CC, Henoch M, Dunkerson K. 1991; A review of speech perception and aging: some implications for aural rehabilitation. J Acad Rehabilitative Audiol 24: 121-132
  Google Scholar
• Dittberner AB, Johnson EE, Ricketts TA. 2008; High-frequency amplification and sound quality in listeners with normal through moderate hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res 51 (01) 160-172
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dubno JR, Dirks DD, Morgan DE. 1984; Effects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 76 (01) 87-96
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Franks JR. 1982; Judgments of hearing aid processed music. Ear Hear 3 (01) 18-23
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Füllgrabe C, Baer T, Stone MA, Moore BCJ. 2010; Preliminary evaluation of a method for fitting hearing aids with extended bandwidth. Int J Audiol 49 (10) 741-753
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Helfer KS, Wilber LA. 1990; Hearing loss, aging, and speech perception in reverberation and noise. J Speech Hear Res 33 (01) 149-155
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hogan CA, Turner CW. 1998; High-frequency audibility: benefits for hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 104 (01) 432-441
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hornsby BWY, Ricketts TA. 2003; The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding. J Acoust Soc Am 113 (03) 1706-1717
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hornsby BWY, Ricketts TA. 2006; The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding. II. Sloping hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 119 (03) 1752-1763
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Horwitz AR, Ahlstrom JB, Dubno JR. 2008; Factors affecting the benefits of high-frequency amplification. J Speech Lang Hear Res 51 (03) 798-813
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Horwitz AR, Dubno JR, Ahlstrom JB. 2002; Recognition of low-pass-filtered consonants in noise with normal and impaired high-frequency hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 111 1 Pt 1 409-416
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Killion MC. 2004; Myths that discourage improvements in hearing aid design. Hear Rev 11: 32-40 , 70
  Google Scholar
• Killion MC, Niquette PA, Gudmundsen GI, Revit LJ, Banerjee S. 2004; Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 116 4 Pt 1 2395-2405
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Killion MC, Tillman TW. 1982; Evaluation of high-fidelity hearing aids. J Speech Hear Res 25 (01) 15-25
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kochkin S. 2002; 10-year customer satisfaction trends in the US hearing instrument market. Hear Rev 9: 14-46
  Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ. 2001; Dead regions in the cochlea: diagnosis, perceptual consequences, and implications for the fitting of hearing AIDS. Trends Amplif 5 (01) 1-34
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore BCJ, Füllgrabe C, Stone MA. 2010; Effect of spatial separation, extended bandwidth, and compression speed on intelligibility in a competing-speech task. J Acoust Soc Am 128 (01) 360-371
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Murray N, Byrne D. 1986; Performance of hearing-impaired and normal hearing listeners with various high-frequency cut-offs in hearing aids. Aust J Audiol 8: 21-28
  Google Scholar
• Phonak 2012. Phoneme Perception Test Handbook. Stäfa, Switzerland: Phonak AG;
  Google Scholar
• Plyler PN, Fleck EL. 2006; The effects of high-frequency amplification on the objective and subjective performance of hearing instrument users with varying degrees of high-frequency hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res 49 (03) 616-627
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Simpson A, McDermott HJ, Dowell RC. 2005; Benefits of audibility for listeners with severe high-frequency hearing loss. Hear Res 210 1–2 42-52
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sjolander ML, Holmberg M. 2009; Broader bandwidth improves sound quality for hearing-impaired listeners. Hear Rev 16: 40
  Google Scholar
• Turner CW, Cummings KJ. 1999; Speech audibility for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss. Am J Audiol 8 (01) 47-56
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turner CW, Henry BA. 2002; Benefits of amplification for speech recognition in background noise. J Acoust Soc Am 112 (04) 1675-1680
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vickers DA, Moore BCJ, Baer T. 2001; Effects of low-pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in quiet for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am 110 (02) 1164-1175
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar