Spatial benefit of bilateral hearing aids

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 203-218

  Ahlstrom, Jayne B ^a   Horwitz, Amy R ^a   Dubno, Judy R ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; AUDITORY CANAL; AUDITORY DISCRIMINATION; CALCULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FREQUENCY DISCRIMINATION; HEARING; HEARING AID; HUMAN; MICROPHONE; NOISE; PREDICTION; SPATIAL FREQUENCY DISCRIMINATION; SPECTRUM; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; ADAPTATION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHONETICS; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; PURE TONE AUDIOMETRY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SOUND DETECTION; SPEECH PERCEPTION; VERY ELDERLY;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; NOISE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHONETICS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PSYCHOACOUSTICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SOUND LOCALIZATION; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 69049107474     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31819769c1     Document Type: Article

References (113)

1. Abel, S. M., Giguère, C., Consoli, A., et al. (2000). The effect of aging on horizontal plane localization. J Acoust Soc Am, 108, 743-752. (Pubitemid 30625899)
2. American National Standards Institute. (1969). Methods for the Calculation of the Articulation Index. (ANSI S3.5-1969). New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.
3. American National Standards Institute. (1992). American National Standard: Testing Hearing Aids with a Broadband Noise Signal (ANSI S3.42-1992). New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.
4. American National Standards Institute. (1997). American National Standard Specifications for Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index (ANSI S3.5-1997). New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.
5. American National Standards Institute. (2004). American National Standard Specifications for Audiometers (ANSI S3.6-2004). New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.
6. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1991). Sound field measurement tutorial [Relevant paper]. Available at: www.asha.org/policy. Accessed January 15, 2009.
7. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (2005). Guidelines for Manual Pure-Tone Threshold Audiometry. Rockville, MD: ASHA.
8. Arehart, K. H., Kates, J. M., Anderson, M. C., et al. (2007). Effects of noise and distortion on speech quality judgments in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 122, 1150-1164.
9. Bronkhorst, A. W., & Plomp, R. (1988). The effect of head-induced interaural time and level differences on speech intelligibility in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 83, 1508-1516.
10. Byrne, D. (1981). Clinical issues and options in binaural hearing aid fittings. Ear Hear, 2, 187-193.
11. Byrne, D. (1986). Effects of frequency response characteristics on speech discrimination and perceived intelligibility and pleasantness of speech for hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 80, 494-504.
12. Byrne, D., Dillon, H., Ching, T., et al. (2001). NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures. J Am Acad Audiol, 12, 37-51. (Pubitemid 33040892)
13. Byrne, D., & Tonisson, W. (1976). Selecting the gain of hearing aids for persons with sensori-neural hearing impairments. Scand Audiol, 5, 51-59.
14. Ching, T. Y., 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, 1128-1140. (Pubitemid 28087582)
15. Ching, T. Y., Dillon, H., Katsch, R., et al. (2001). Maximizing effective audibility in hearing aid fitting. Ear Hear, 22, 212-224. (Pubitemid 32531963)
16. Cienkowski, K. M., & Saunders, G. H. (2000). Client-attitude questionnaire provides data that can help shape counseling strategies. Hear J, 53, 42-49.
17. Cox, R. M., & Alexander, G. C. (1999). Measuring satisfaction with amplification in daily life: the SADL Scale. Ear Hear, 20, 306-320.
18. Cranford, J., Boose, M., & Moore, C. (1990). Effects of aging on the precedence effect in sound localization. J Speech Hear Res, 33, 654-659.
19. Crowley, H., & Nabelek, A. (1996). Estimation of client-assessed hearing aid performance based on unaided variables. J Speech Hear Res, 39, 19-27. (Pubitemid 26179109)
20. Day, G. A., Browning, G. G., & Gatehouse, S. (1988). Benefit from binaural hearing aids in individuals with severe hearing impairment. Br J Audiol, 22, 273-277.
21. Dhar, S., Humes, L. E., Calandruccio, L., et al. (2004). Predictability of speech-in-noise performance from real ear measures of directional hearing aids. Ear Hear, 25, 147-158. (Pubitemid 38451764)
22. Dillon, H. (2001). Hearing Aids. New York, NY: Thieme.
23. Dillon, H., Keidser, G., & Silberstein, H. (2003). Sound quality comparisons of advanced hearing aids. Hear J, 19, 62-71. (Pubitemid 37161394)
24. Dirks, D. D., Ahlstrom, J. B., & Eisenberg, L. S. (1996). Comparison of probe insertion methods on estimates of ear canal SPL. J Am Acad Audiol, 7, 31-38.
25. Dirks, D. D., Morgan, D. E., & Dubno, J. R. (1982). A procedure for quantifying the effects of noise on speech recognition. J Speech Hear Dis, 47, 114-123. (Pubitemid 12033431)
26. Drennan, W. R., Gatehouse, S., Howell, P., et al. (2005). Localization and speech-identification ability of hearing-impaired listeners using phase-preserving amplification. Ear Hear, 26, 461-472. (Pubitemid 41510892)
27. Dreschler, W. A., Verschuure, H., Ludvigsen, C., et al. (2001). ICRA noises: artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing instrument assessment. International Collegium for Rehabilitative Audiology. Audiology, 40, 148-157.
28. Dubno, J. R., & Ahlstrom, J. B. (1995a). Masked thresholds and consonant recognition in low-pass maskers for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 97, 2430-2441.
29. Dubno, J. R., & Ahlstrom, J. B. (1995b). Growth of low-pass masking of pure tones and speech for hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 98, 3113-3124.
30. Dubno, J. R., Ahlstrom, J. B., & Horwitz, A. R. (2002). Spectral contributions to the benefit from spatial separation of speech and noise. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 45, 1297-1310.
31. Dubno, J. R., Ahlstrom, J. B., & Horwitz, A. R. (2008). Binaural advantage for younger and older adults with normal hearing. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 51, 539-556.
32. Duquesnoy, A. J. (1983). Effect of a single interfering noise or speech source upon the binaural sentence intelligibility of aged persons. J Acoust Soc Am, 74, 739-743.
33. Eisenberg, L. S., Dirks, D. D., & Bell, T. S. (1995). Speech recognition in amplitude-modulated noise of listeners with normal and listeners with impaired hearing. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 38, 222-233.
34. Eisenberg, L. S., Dirks, D. D., Takayanagi, S., et al. (1998). Subjective judgments of clarity and intelligibility for filtered stimuli with equivalent speech intelligibility index predictions. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 41, 327-339. (Pubitemid 28178195)
35. Erber, N. (1973). Body-baffle and real-ear effects in the selection of hearing aids for deaf children. J Speech Hear Dis, 38, 224-231.
36. Festen, J., & Plomp, R. (1986). Speech-reception threshold in noise with one and two hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am, 79, 465-471. (Pubitemid 16186561)
37. Freyaldenhoven, M. C., Nabelek, A. K., Burchfield, S. B., et al. (2005). Acceptable noise level as a measure of directional hearing aid benefit. J Am Acad Audiol, 16, 228-236.
38. Freyaldenhoven, M. C., Nabelek, A. K., & Tampas, J. W. (2008). Relationship between acceptable noise level and the abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 51, 136-146.
39. Freyaldenhoven, M. C., & Smiley, D. F. (2006). Acceptance of background noise in children with normal hearing. J Ed Audiol, 13, 27-31.
40. Gatehouse, S. (1999). Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile: derivation and validation of a client-centered outcome measure for hearing aid services. J Am Acad Audiol, 10, 80-103.
41. Gatehouse, S., & Akeroyd, M. (2006). Two-eared listening in dynamic situations. Int J Audiol, 45, S120-S124.
42. Gatehouse, S., Naylor, G., & Elberling, C. (2003). Benefits from hearing aids in relation to the interaction between the user and the environment. Int J Audiol, 42, S77-S85. (Pubitemid 41626013)
43. Gatehouse, S., & Noble, W. (2004). The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol, 43, 85-99. (Pubitemid 38295489)
44. Gelfand, S. A., Ross, L., & Miller, S. (1988). Sentence recognition in noise from one versus two sources: effects of aging and hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am, 83, 248-257. (Pubitemid 18036639)
45. Green, D. M. (1993). A maximum-likelihood method for estimating thresholds in a yes-no task. J Acoust Soc Am, 93, 2096-2105.
46. Hanks, W. D., & Johnson, G. D. (1998). HINT list equivalency using older listeners. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 41, 1335-1340.
47. Häusler, R., Colburn, S., & Marr, E. (1983). Sound localization in subjects with impaired hearing. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl, 400, 1-62.
48. Henning, G. B. (1974). Detectability of interaural delay in high-frequency complex waveforms. J Acoust Soc Am, 55, 84-90.
49. Hogan, C., & Turner, C. (1998). High-frequency audibility: benefits for hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 104, 432-441. (Pubitemid 28321731)
50. Holmes, A. E. (2003). Bilateral amplification for the elderly: are two aids better than one? Int J Audiol, 42, 2S63-2S67.
51. Hornsby, B. W., & Ricketts, T. A. (2003). The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding. J Acoust Soc Am, 113, 1706-1717.
52. Hornsby, B. W., & Ricketts, T. A. (2007). Effects of noise source configuration on directional benefit using symmetric and asymmetric directional hearing aid fittings. Ear Hear, 28, 177-186.
53. Horwitz, A. R., Ahlstrom, J. B., & Dubno, J. R. (2008). Factors affecting the benefits of high-frequency amplification. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 51, 798-813.
54. Horwitz, A. R., Dubno, J. R., & Ahlstrom, J. B. (2002). Recognition of low-pass-filtered consonants in noise with normal and impaired high-frequency hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 111, 409-416. (Pubitemid 34093335)
55. Humes, L. E. (1996). Speech understanding in the elderly. J Am Acad Audiol, 7, 161-167.
56. Humes, L. E. (2002). Factors underlying the speech-recognition performance of elderly hearing-aid wearers. J Acoust Soc Am, 112, 1112-1132.
57. Humes, L. E. (2007). The contributions of audibility and cognitive factors to the benefit provided by amplified speech to older adults. J Am Acad Audiol, 18, 590-603.
58. Humes, L. E., Garner, C. B., Wilson, D. L., et al. (2001). Hearing-aid outcome measured following one month of hearing aid use by the elderly. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 44, 469-486.
59. Joris, P. X., Smith, P. H., & Yin, T. C. (1994). Enhancement of neural synchronization in the anteroventral cochlear nucleus: II - Responses in the tuning curve tail. J Neurophysiol, 71, 1037-1051. (Pubitemid 24094873)
60. Kalikow, D. N., Stevens, K. N., & Elliott, L. L. (1977). Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. J Acoust Soc Am, 61, 1337-1351.
61. Kates, J. M., & Arehart, K. H. (2005). Coherence and the speech intelligibility index. J Acoust Soc Am, 117, 2224-2237.
62. Kiang, N. Y., & Moxon, E. C. (1974). Tails of tuning curves of auditory-nerve fibers. J Acoust Soc Am, 55, 620-630.
63. Lee, L. W., & Humes, L. E. (1993). Evaluating a speech-reception threshold model for hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 93, 2879-2885.
64. Leek, M. R., Dubno, J. R., He, N. -j., et al. (2000). Experience with a yes-no single-interval maximum-likelihood procedure. J Acoust Soc Am, 107, 2674-2684.
65. Levitt, H. (1971). Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. J Acoust Soc Am, 49, 467-477.
66. Levitt, H., & Rabiner, L. R. (1967). Binaural release from masking for speech and gain in intelligibility. J Acoust Soc Am, 42, 601-608.
67. Lorenzi, C., Gatehouse, S., & Lever, C. (1999). Sound localization in noise in hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 105, 3454-3463. (Pubitemid 29270309)
68. Lunner, T. (2003). Cognitive function in relation to hearing aid use. Int J Audiol, 42, S49-S58. (Pubitemid 41626010)
69. Marrone, N. L., Mason, C. R., & Kidd, G., Jr. (2007). Listening in a multisource environment with and without hearing aids. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, Helsingor, Denmark.
70. McArdle, R. A., Wilson, R. H., & Burks, C. A. (2005). Speech recognition in multitalker babble using digits, words, and sentences. J Am Acad Audiol, 16, 726-739. (Pubitemid 43375774)
71. Mendel, L. L. (2007). Objective and subjective hearing aid assessment outcomes. Am J Audiol, 16, 118-129.
72. Mencher, G. T., & Davis, A. (2006). Bilateral or unilateral amplification: is there a difference? A brief tutorial. Int J Audiol, 45, S3-S11.
73. Mueller, H. G., Weber, J., & Hornsby, B. W. (2006). The effects of digital noise reduction on the acceptance of background noise. Trends Amplif, 10, 83-93. (Pubitemid 44257136)
74. Musa-Shufani, S., Walger, M., von Wedel, H., et al. (2006). Influence of dynamic compression on directional hearing in the horizontal plane. Ear Hear, 27, 279-285. (Pubitemid 44350551)
75. Nabelek, A. K., Freyaldenhoven, M. C., Tampas, J. W., et al. (2006). Acceptable noise level as a predictor of hearing aid use. J Am Acad Audiol, 17, 626-639.
76. Nabelek, A. K., Tampas, J. W., & Burchfield, S. B. (2004). Comparison of speech perception in background noise with acceptance of background noise in aided and unaided conditions. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 47, 1001-1111.
77. Nabelek, A. K., Tucker, F., & Letowski, T. (1991). Toleration of background noises: relationship with patterns of hearing aid use by elderly persons. J Speech Lang Hear Res, 34, 679-685.
78. Nilsson, M. J., McCaw, V. M., & Soli, S. D. (1997). Comparison of percent intelligibility and adaptive thresholds in noise for listeners with normal and impaired intelligibility. Paper presented at the Second Biennial Hearing Aid Research and Development Conference, Bethesda, MD.
79. Nilsson, M. J., Soli, S. D., & Sullivan, J. A. (1994). Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 95, 1085-1099.
80. Noble, W. (2006). Bilateral hearing aids: a review of self-reports of benefit in comparison with unilateral fitting. Int J Audiol, 45, S63-S71.
81. Noble, W., & Byrne, D. (1990). A comparison of different binaural hearing aid systems for sound localization in the horizontal and vertical planes. Br J Audiol, 24, 335-346. (Pubitemid 20348567)
82. Noble, W., & Byrne, D. (1991). Auditory localization under conditions of unilateral fitting of different hearing aid systems. Br J Audiol, 25, 237-250.
83. Noble, W., Byrne, D., & LePage, B. (1994). Effects on sound localization of configuration and type of hearing impairment. J Acoust Soc Am, 95, 992-1005. (Pubitemid 24056365)
84. Noble, W., & Gatehouse, S. (2006). Effects of bilateral versus unilateral hearing aid fitting on abilities measured by the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol, 45, 172-181. (Pubitemid 43315654)
85. Nordlund, B. (1962). Physical factors in angular localization. Acta Otolaryngol, 54, 75-93.
86. Pavlovic, C. (1989). Speech spectrum considerations and speech intelligibility predictions in hearing aid evaluations. J Speech Hear Dis, 54, 3-8. (Pubitemid 19055735)
87. Peissig, J., & Kollmeier, B. (1997). Directivity of binaural noise reduction in spatial multiple noise-source arrangements for normal and impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am, 101, 1660-1670. (Pubitemid 27114270)
88. Plomp, R. (1976). Binaural and monaural speech intelligibility of connected discourse in reverberation as a function of azimuth of a single competing sound source (speech or noise). Acustica, 31, 200-211.
89. Plomp, R. (1978). Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am, 63, 533-549.
90. Plomp, R. (1986). A signal-to-noise ratio model for the speech-reception threshold of the hearing-impaired. J Speech Hear Res, 29, 146-154. (Pubitemid 16068576)
91. Ricketts, T. A., Henry, P. P., & Hornsby, B. W. (2005). Application of frequency importance functions to directivity for prediction of benefit in uniform fields. Ear Hear, 26, 473-486.
92. Rogers, D. S., Harkrider, A. W., Burchfield, S. B., et al. (2003). The influence of listener's gender on the acceptance of background noise. J Am Acad Audiol, 14, 372-382.
93. Royster, J., Berger, E., Merry, C., et al. (1996). Development of a new standard laboratory protocol for estimating the field attenuation of hearing protection devices: Part I - Research of Working Group 11, Accredited Standards Committee S12, Noise. J Acoust Soc Am, 99, 1506-1526. (Pubitemid 26085419)
94. Saunders, G. H., Chisolm, T. H., & Abrams, H. B. (2005). Measuring hearing aid outcomes - not as easy as it seems. J Rehab Res Dev, 42, 157-168.
95. Saunders, G. H., & Cienkowski, K. M. (2002). A test to measure subjective and objective speech intelligibility. J Am Acad Audiol, 13, 38-49. (Pubitemid 34960037)
96. Saunders, G. H., & Morgan, D. E. (2003). Impact on hearing aid targets of measuring thresholds in dB HL versus dB SPL. Int J Audiol, 42, 319-326.
97. Silman, S., Gelfand, S., & Silverman, C. (1984). Late-onset auditory deprivation: effects of monaural versus binaural hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am, 76, 1357-1362. (Pubitemid 15192679)
98. Simon, H. J. (2005). Bilateral amplification and sound localization: then and now. J Rehab Res Dev, 42, 117-132.
99. Souza, P., & Turner, C. W. (1999). Quantifying the contribution of audibility to recognition of compression-amplified speech. Ear Hear, 20, 12-20. (Pubitemid 29072420)
100. Stelmachowicz, P. G., Lewis, D., Kalberer, A., et al. (1994). Situational hearing-aid response profile users manual (SHARP, v. 2.0). Omaha, NE: Boys Town National Research Hospital.
101. Stelmachowicz, P. G., Pittman, A. L., Hoover, B. M., et al. (2002). Aided perception of /s/ and /z/ by hearing-impaired children. Ear Hear, 23, 316-324.
102. Strouse, A., Ashmead, D. H., Ohde, R. N., et al. (1998). Temporal processing in the aging auditory system. J Acoust Soc Am, 104, 2385-2399. (Pubitemid 28463135)
103. Tonning, F. (1971). Directional audiometry II. The influence of azimuth on the perception of speech. Acta Otolaryngol, 72, 352-357.
104. Tremblay, K. L., Piskosz, M., & Souza, P. (2003). Effects of age and age-related hearing loss on the neural representation of speech cues. Clin Neurophysiol, 114, 1332-1343. (Pubitemid 36776832)
105. Van den Bogaert, T., Klasen, T. J., Moonen, M., et al. (2006). Horizontal localization with bilateral hearing aids: without is better than with. J Acoust Soc Am, 119, 515-526. (Pubitemid 43104732)
106. van Rooij, J. C. G., & Plomp, R. (1990). Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners: II - Multivariate analysis. J Acoust Soc Am, 88, 2611-2624.
107. van Rooij, J. C. G., Plomp, R., & Orlebeke, J. F. (1992). Auditive and cognitive factors in speech perception by elderly listeners: III - Additional data and final discussion. J Acoust Soc Am, 91, 1028-1033.
108. Van Tasell, D. J., & Yanz, J. L. (1987). Speech recognition threshold in noise: effects of hearing loss, frequency response, and speech materials. J Speech Hear Res, 30, 377-386.
109. Walden, B. E., Demorest, M., & Hepler, E. (1984). Self-report approach to assessing benefit derived from amplification. J Speech Hear Res, 27, 49-56. (Pubitemid 14135539)
110. Wightman, F., & Kistler, D. (1992). The dominant role of low-frequency interaural time differences in sound localization. J Acoust Soc Am, 91, 1648-1661.
111. Woods, W. S., Van Tasell, D. J., Rickert, M. E., et al. (2006). SII and fit-to-target analysis of compression system performance as a function of number of compression channels. Int J Audiol, 45, 630-644.
112. Zurek, P. M. (1993a). Binaural Advantages and Directional Effects in Speech Intelligibility. In G. Studebaker & I. Hochberg (Eds.). Acoustical Factors Affecting Hearing Aid Performance (2nd ed., pp, 255-276). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
113. Zurek, P. M. (1993b). A note on onset effects in binaural hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 93, 1200-1201.