A double-blind cross-over study of a non-linear hearing aid

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 1997, Pages 325-338

  Nilsson, Per ^a   Vesterager, Vibeke ^a   Sibelle, Philip ^a   Sieck, Lisbeth ^a   Christensen, Birger ^a  

^a BISPEBJERG HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Acoustics Ear; Compression; Double blind cross over Non linear hearing aids Sensorineural hearing loss Partial dynamic range

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AWARENESS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; HEARING AID; HUMAN; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; TELECOMMUNICATION; TELEVISION;

AGED; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; ELECTRIC STIMULATION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 0030694623     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: 17088186     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/00206099709071983     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Ludvigsen C. Processing for optimum speech intelligibility. Hear Instr 1992; 43: 22–28
2. Waldhauer F, Villchur E. Full dynamic range multiband compression in a hearing aid. Hear J 1988; 9: 29–32
3. Knight J A. A subjective evaluation of K-amp vs linear hearing aids. Hear Instr 1992; 43: 8–10
4. Petersen M E. Fitting children with multifocal hearing aids. Hear Instr 1993; 44: 33–35
5. Benson D, Clark T M, Johnson J S. Patient experiences with multiband full dynamic range compression. Ear Hear 1992; 13: 320–330
6. Moore B CJ, Johnson J S, Clark T M. Evaluation of a dual-channel full dynamic range compression system for people with sensorineural hearing loss. Ear Hear 1992; 13: 349–370
7. Biering-Sarensen M, Riess H, Boisen G, Parving A. A clinical comparative investigation of a non-linear versus linear hearing aid. Scand Audiol 1995; 24: 125–132
8. Harrowven R GC, Greener J DF, Stephens S DG. A double-blind crossover study of high-frequency emphasis hearing aids in individuals with noise-induced hearing loss. Br J Audiol 1987; 21: 209–219
9. Elberling C, Ludvigsen C, Lyregaard PDantale E. A new Danish speech material. Scand Audiol 1989; 18: 169–175
10. Byrne D, Dillon H. The National Acoustic Laboratories (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear Hear 1986; 7: 257–265
11. Silverman S R, Pascoe D P. Counselling about hearing aids. Hearing and Deafness, H, Davis, SR, Silverman. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York 1978; 348
12. Ringdahl A, Eriksson-Mangold M, Israelsson B, Lindqvist A, Leijon A, Mangold S. Evaluation of a programmable hearing aid with multiple memories. Hearing Aid Fitting, 13th Danavox Symposium, JH, Jensen. Jensen, Copenhagen 1988; 391–412
13. Ringdahl A. Does the hearing aid user take advantage of the different settings in multi-programmable hearing aids in acoustically various listening environments. Recent Developments in Hearing Instrument Technology, 15th Danavox Symposium., J, Beilin, GR, Jensen. Stougaard Jensen, Copenhagen 1993; 453–4764
14. Gatehouse S. The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 92: 1258–1268
15. Green R, Day S, Bamford J. A comparative evaluation of four hearing-aid selection procedures. II. Quality judgements as measures of benefit. Br J Audiol 1989; 23: 201–206
16. McClymont L G, Browning G G, Gatehouse S. Reliability of patient choice between hearing aid systems. Br J Audiol 1991; 25: 35–39
17. Pollack M C. Contemporary and future output-limiting and noise-reduction systems. Hear J 1987; 40: 22–29
18. Armstrong S. The dynamics of compression: some key elements explored. Hear J 1993; 46: 11–4347
19. Killion M C. A high fidelity hearing aid. Hear Instr 1990; 41: 8
20. Kruger B, Kruger F M. The K-amp hearing aid_ a summary of features and benefits. Hear Instr 1993; 44: 1: 20–24
21. Sullivan J A, Allsman C S, Nielsen L B, Mobley J R. An experimental comparison of four hearing aid prescription methods. Ear Hear 1992; 13: 35–45
22. Johnson W A, Killion M C. Amplification: Is class D better than class B. Am J Audiol 1994; 3: 11–13
23. Liberman M C, Dodds L W. Single-neuron labeling and chronic cochlear pathology III: stereocilia damage and alterations in the threshold tuning curves. Hear Res 1984; 15: 55–74
24. Killion M C. The K-amp hearing aid_ an attempt to present high fidelity for persons with impaired hearing. Am J Audiol 1993; 2: 52–74
25. Dreschler W A. Fitting multichannel-compression hearing aids. Audiology 1992; 31: 121–131
26. Keidser G. Selecting amplification for different listening conditions. Thesis. The Acoustics Laboratory, Technical University of Denmark. 1994, Report No. 61. ISSN 0105–3027
27. Ringdahl A, Eriksson-Mangold M, Sandström G. Perceived sound quality of three bone-anchored hearing aid models. Br J Audiol 1995; 29: 309–314
28. Borg G. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1982; 5: 377–381