Clinical evaluation of Australian Hearing's guidelines for fitting multiple memory hearing aids

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Audiology

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 51-68

  Keidser, Gitte ^a   Limareff, Heidi Silberstein ^b   Simmons, Sandie ^b   Gul, Corina ^b   Hayes, Zoe ^b   Sawers, Caren ^b   Thomas, Bronwyn ^b   Holland, Kathy ^b   Korchek, Kelly ^b  

^a NATIONAL ACOUSTIC LABORATORIES   (Australia)

^b Australian Hearing   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; AUDIOMETRY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVALUATION; HEARING AID; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE;

EID: 23444446690     PISSN: 01571532     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1375/audi.2005.27.1.51     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Byrne, D., Parkinson, A., & Newall, P. (1990). Hearing aid gain and frequency response requirements for the severely/profoundly hearing-impaired. Ear and Hearing, 11(1), 40-49.
2. Ching, T.Y.C., Dillon, H., & Byrne, D. (1998). Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: Predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 103(2), 1128-1140.
3. Cox, R.M. & Alexander, G.G. (1995). The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear and Hearing, 16, 176-186.
4. Cox, R.M., Alexander, G.C., Taylor, I.M., & Gray, G.A. (1997). The contour test of loudness perception. Ear and Hearing, 18(5), 388-400.
5. Dillon, H. (1991). Allowing for real ear venting effects when selecting the coupler gain of hearing aids. Ear and Hearing, 12, 406-416.
6. Dillon, H. (2001). Hearing aids. Sydney, Australia: Boomerang Press.
7. Dillon, H., James, A., & Ginis, J. (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.
8. Folstein, M.F., Folstein, S.E., & McHugh, P.R. (1972). 'Mini-Mental State': A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinicians. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189-198.
9. Keidser, G. (1995). The relationship between listening conditions and alternative amplification schemes for multiple memory hearing aids. Ear and Hearing, 16(6), 575-586.
10. Keidser, G. (1996). Selecting different amplification for different listening conditions. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 7, 92-104.
11. Keidser, G. (1998). Fitting multiple-memory hearing aids: A practical guideline. The Hearing Journal, 51(10), 36-48.
12. Keidser, G., Dillon, H., & Byrne D. (1995). Candidates for multiple frequency response characteristics. Ear and Hearing, 16(6), 562-574.
13. Keidser, G., Dillon, H., & Byrne, D. (1996). Guidelines for fitting multiple memory hearing aids. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 7(6), 406-418.
14. Keidser, G., Pellegrino, A., Delifotis, A., Ridgway, J., & Clarke, M. (1997). The use of different frequency response characteristics in everyday environments. The Australian Journal of Audiology, 19(1), 9-21.
15. Keidser, G., Ching, T., Dillon, H., Agung, K., Brew, C., Brewer, S., et al. (2002). The National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) CDs of speech and noise for hearing aid evaluation: Normative data and potential applications. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Audiology, 24(1), 16-35.
16. Keidser, G., Brew, C., Brewer, S., Dillon, H., Grant, F., & Storey, L. (in press). The preferred response slopes and two-channel compression ratios in twenty different listening conditions by hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners and their relationship to the acoustic input. International Journal of Audiology.
17. Kuk, F.K. (1993). Clinical considerations in fitting a multimemory hearing aid. American Journal of Audiology, 11, 23-27.
18. Tombaugh, T.N., & McIntyre, N.J. (1992). The Mini-Mental State Examination: A comprehensive review. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 40, 922-935.