Full time directional versus user selectable microphone modes in hearing aids

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 424-439

  Ricketts, Todd ^a   Henry, Paula ^a   Gnewikow, David ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIRECTIONAL HEARING; HEARING AID; HUMAN; LABORATORY; MICROPHONE; NOISE; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; RATING SCALE; SELF EVALUATION; SELF REPORT; SOUND DETECTION; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION;

AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; PATIENT SELECTION; QUESTIONNAIRES; SOUND LOCALIZATION; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0141959090     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.AUD.0000094555.89110.0A     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Cord, M. T., Surr, R. K., & Walden, B. E. (2002). Performance of directional microphone hearing aids in everyday life. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 13, 295-307.
2. Cox, R. M., & Alexander, G. C. (1995). The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB). Ear and Hearing, 16, 176-186.
3. Cox, R. M., Alexander, G. C., & Gilmore, C. A. (1987). Development of the connected speech test (CST). Ear and Hearing, 8(Suppl.), 119S-126S.
4. Cox, R. M., Alexander, G. C., Gilmore, C., & Pusakulich, K. M. (1988). Use of the connected speech test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners. Ear and Hearing, 9, 198-207.
5. Cox, R. M., Gilmore, C. G., & Alexander, G. C. (1991). Comparison of two questionnaires for patient-assessed hearing aid benefit. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 2, 134-145.
6. Cox, R. M., & Rivera, I. M. (1992). Predictability and reliability of hearing aid benefit measured using the PHAB. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 3, 242-254.
7. Dillon H. (1999). NAL-NL1: A new prescriptive fitting procedure for non-linear hearing aids. Hearing Journal, 52(4), 10-17.
8. Dillon, H., James, A., & Ginis, J. M. (1997). Client oriented scale of improvement (COSI) and its relationship to several other measures of benefit and satisfaction provided by hearing aids. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 8, 27-43.
9. Fortune, T. (1997). Real ear polar patterns and aided directional sensitivity. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 8, 119-131.
10. Frank, T., & Gooden, R. G. (1973). The effect of hearing aid microphone types on speech scores in a background of multitalker noise. Maico Audiological Library Series, 11(5), 1-4.
11. Gatehouse, S. (1999). The Glasgow hearing aid benefit profile: Derivation and validation of a client-centred outcome measure for hearing aid services. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 10, 80-103.
12. Gatehouse, S. (2001). Self-report outcome measures for adult hearing aid services, some uses, users and options. Trends in Amplification, 5, 91-110.
13. Hawkins, D. B., & Yacullo, W. S. (1984). Signal-to-noise ratio advantage of binaural hearing aids and directional microphones under different levels of reverberation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49, 278-286.
14. Jerger, J. (2000). Directional microphones-they work [editorial]. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 11.
15. Killion, M. C., Schulien, R., Christensen, L., Fabry, D., Revit, L., Niquette, P., & Chung, K. (1998). Real world performance of an ITE directional microphone. Hearing Journal, 51(4), 24-26, 30, 32-36, 38.
16. Kuk, F. K. (1996). Subjective preference for microphone types in daily listening environments. Hearing Instruments, 49(4), 29-30, 32-35.
17. Lee, L., Lau, C., & Sullivan, D. (1998). The advantage of a low compression threshold in directional microphones. Hearing Review, 5(8), 30-32.
18. Mueller, H. G., Grimes, A. M., & Erdman, S. A. (1983). Subjective ratings of directional amplification. Hearing Instruments, 34(2), 14-16, 47-48.
19. Nielsen, H., & Ludvigsen, C. (1978). Effects of hearing aids with directional microphones in different acoustic environments. Scandinavian Audiology, 7, 217-224.
20. Nilsson, M. J., Gellnet, D., Sullivan, J., & Soli, S. D. (1992). Norms for the hearing in noise test: The influence of spatial separation, hearing loss and English language experience on speech reception thresholds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 92, S2385.
21. Nilsson, M. J., Soli, S. D., & Sullivan, J. (1994). Development of a hearing in noise test for the measurement of speech reception threshold. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 1985-1999.
22. Nunally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory, (3rd Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
23. Preves, D. A., Sammeth, C. A., & Wynne, M. K. (1999). Field trial evaluations of a switched directional/omnidirectional in-the-ear hearing instrument. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 10, 273-84.
24. Pumford, J. M., Seewald, R. C., Scollie, S., & Jenstad, L. M. (2000). Speech recognition with in-the-ear and behind-the-ear dual-microphone hearing instruments. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 11, 23-35.
25. Ricketts, T. A. (2000a). Impact of noise source configuration on directional hearing aid benefit and performance. Ear and Hearing, 21, 194-205.
26. Ricketts, T. A. (2000b). The impact of head angle on monaural and binaural performance with directional and omnidirectional hearing aids. Ear and Hearing, 21, 318-329.
27. Ricketts, T. A. (2000c). Directivity quantification in hearing aids: Fitting and measurement effects. Ear and Hearing, 21, 45-58.
28. Ricketts, T. A., & Dahr, S. (1999). Aided benefit across directional and omni-directional hearing aid microphones for behind-the-ear hearing aids. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 10, 180-189.
29. Ricketts, T. A., & Dittberner, A. B. (2002). Directional amplification for improved signal-to-noise ratio: strategies, measurement, and limitations. In M. Valente (Ed.), Strategies For Selecting And Verifying Hearing Aid Fittings (2nd Edition) (pp. 274-346). New York: Thieme Medical Publishers.
30. Ricketts, T. A., & Henry, P. (2002). Gain equalization in directional hearing aids. American Journal of Audiology, 11, 29-41.
31. Ricketts, T. A., Lindley, G., & Henry, P. (2001). Impact of compression and hearing aid style on directional hearing aid benefit and performance. Ear and Hearing, 22, 348-361.
32. Surr, R. K., Walden, B. E., Cord, M. T., & Olson, L. (2002). The influence of environmental factors on hearing aid microphone preference. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 13, 308-322.
33. Thompson, S. C. (1999). Dual microphones or directional-plus-omni: Which is best? In: S. Kochkin, K. E. Strom (Eds.), High Performance Hearing Solutions Vol. 3 (pp. 31-35). Supplement to Hearing Review.
34. Valente, M., Fabry, D. A., & Potts, L. G. (1995). Recognition of speech in noise with hearing aids using dual microphones. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 6, 440-449.
35. Valente, M., Schuchman, G., Potts, L. G., & Beck, L. B. (2000). Performance of dual-microphone in-the-ear hearing aids. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 11, 181-189.
36. Voss, T. (1997). Clinical evaluation of multi-microphone hearing instruments. Hearing Review, 4(11), 36, 45-46, 74.
37. Walden, B. E., Surr, R. K., Cord, M. T., Edwards, B., & Olson, L. (2000). Comparison of benefits provided by different hearing aid technologies. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 11, 540-560.
38. Wolf, R. P., Hohn, W., Martin, R., & Powers, T. A. (1999). Directional microphone hearing instruments: How and why they work. In: S. Kochkin, K. E. Strom (Eds.), High Performance Hearing Solutions Vol. 3 (pp. 23-25). Supplement to Hearing Review.
39. Wouters, J., Litere, L., & van Wieringen, A. (1999). Speech intelligibility in noisy environments with one and two microphone hearing aids. Audiology, 38, 91-98.
40. Pearsons, K. S., Bennett, R. L., & Fidell, S. (1977). Speech levels in various environments (EPA-600/1-77-025). Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency.