A comparison of NAL and DSL prescriptive methods for paediatric hearing-aid fitting: Predicted speech intelligibility and loudness

International Journal of Audiology

Volumn 52, Issue S2, 2013, Pages

  Ching, Teresa Y C ^a,b   Johnson, Earl E ^c,d   Hou, Sanna ^a,b   Dillon, Harvey ^a,b   Zhang, Vicky ^a,b   Burns, Lauren ^a,b   Van Buynder, Patricia ^a,b   Wong, Angela ^a,b   Flynn, Christopher ^a,e  

^a NATIONAL ACOUSTIC LABORATORIES   (Australia)

^b HEARing Cooperative Research Center   (Australia)

^c James H Quillen VA Medical Center   (United States)

^d EAST TENNESSEE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e Australian Hearing   (Australia)

Author keywords

Children; DSL m i o ; DSL v4.1; Hearing aid prescription; Loudness; NAL NL1; NAL NL2; SII; Speech intelligibility

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEARING; HEARING AID; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; INFANT; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRESCRIPTION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; THEORETICAL MODEL;

CHILD, PRESCHOOL; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; INFANT; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PRESCRIPTIONS; SPEECH INTELLIGIBILITY; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 84891108311     PISSN: 14992027     EISSN: 17088186     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/14992027.2013.765041     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. American National Standards Institute. 1997. Methods for calculation of the speech intelligibility index, (ANSI S3.5-1997. (R2007)). New York, USA. American National Standards Institute.
2. Bentler R. 1994. External ear resonance characteristics in children. J Speech Hear Dis, 54, 264-268.
3. 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, 37-51. (Pubitemid 33040892)
4. Byrne D., Dillon H., Tran K., Arlinger S., Wilbraham K. et al. 1994. An international comparison of long-term average speech spectra. J Acoust Soc Am, 96, 2108-2120. (Pubitemid 24311638)
5. Ching T.Y.C., Crowe K., Martin V., Day J., Mahler N. et al. 2010c. Language development and everyday functioning of children with hearing loss assessed at 3 years of age. Int J Speech Lang Path, 12, 124-131.
6. Ching T.Y.C., Dillon H. & Byrne D. 1998. Speech recognition of hearingimpaired listeners: Predictions from audibility and the limited role of high frequency audibility. J Acoust Soc Am, 103, 1128-1140. (Pubitemid 28087582)
7. Ching T.Y.C., Dillon H., Hou S., Zhang V., Day J. et al. (this issue). A randomized controlled comparison of NAL and DSL prescriptions for children: Hearing-aid characteristics and performance outcomes at 3 years of age. Int J Audiol.
8. Ching T.Y.C., Dillon H., Katsch R. & Byrne D. 2001. Maximizing effective audibility in hearing-aid fitting. Ear Hear, 22, 212-224. (Pubitemid 32531963)
9. Ching T.Y.C., Dillon H., Lockhart F., Van Wanrooy E. & Flax M. 2011. Audibility and speech intelligibility revisited: Implications for amplification. In: T. Dau, J.C. Dalsgaard, M.L. Jepsen & T. Poulsen (eds.).
10. Speech Perception and Auditory Disorders, 3rd International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research. The Danavox Jubilee Foundation, Denmark, pp. 11-19.
11. Ching T.Y.C. & Hill M. 2007. The parents' evaluation of aural/oral performance of children (PEACH) scale: Normative data. J Am Acad Audiol, 18, 221-237
12. Ching T.Y.C., Scollie S.D., Dillon H. & Seewald R.C. 2010a. A cross-over, double-blind comparison of the NAL-NL1 and the DSL v4.1 prescriptions for children with mild to moderately severe hearing loss. Int J Audiol, 49, S4-S15.
13. Ching T.Y.C., Scollie S.D., Dillon H., Britton L., Steinberg M.J. et al. 2010b. Prescribed real-ear and achieved real-life differences in children's hearing aids adjusted according to the NAL-NL1 and the DSL v.4.1 prescriptions. Int J Audiol, 49, S16-S25.
14. Ching T.Y.C., Scollie S.D., Dillon H., Seewald R.C., Britton L. et al. 2010d. Evaluation of the NAL-NL1 and the DSL v.4.1 prescriptions for children: Paired-comparison intelligibility judgments and functional performance rating. Int J Audiol, 49, S35-S48.
15. Cornelisse L., Seewald R. & Jamieson D. 1995. The input/output formula: A theoretical approach to the fitting of personal amplification devices. J Acoust Soc Am, 97, 1854-164.
16. Dillon H. 1999. NAL-NL1: A new procedure for fitting non-linear hearing aids. Hear J, 52, 10-16.
17. Dillon H. 2012. Hearing Aids. Second Edition. Sydney, Australia: Boomerang Press.
18. Dillon H., Keidser G., Ching T.Y.C., Flax M. & Brewer S. 2011. The NAL- NL2 prescription procedure. Phonak Focus, 40, 1-10.
19. Glasberg B.R. & Moore B.C.J. 1986. Auditory filter shapes in subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear impairments, J Acoust Soc Am, 79, 1020-1033. (Pubitemid 16109589)
20. Glasberg B.R. & Moore B.C.J. 1990. Derivation of auditory filter shapes from notched-noise data, Hear Res, 47, 103-138. (Pubitemid 20244652)
21. Gustafson S.J. & Pittman A.L. 2011. Sentence perception in listening conditions having similar speech intelligibility indices. Int J Audiol, 50, 34-40.
22. Johnson E.E. & Dillon H. 2011. A comparison of gain for adults from generic hearing aid prescriptive methods: Impacts on predicted loudness, frequency bandwidth, and speech intelligibility. J Am Acad Audiol, 22, 441-459.
23. King A.M. 2010. The national protocol for paediatric amplification in Australia. Int J Audiol, 49, S64-S69.
24. Macrae J.H. 1994. Prediction of asymptotic threshold shift caused by hearing- aid use. J Speech Hear Res, 37, 1450-1458.
25. Macrae J.H. 1995. Temporary and permanent threshold shift caused by hearing- aid use. J Speech Hear Res, 38, 949-959.
26. Macrae J.H. 1996. Deterioration of thresholds associated with hearing-aid use. Aust J Audiol, 18, 73-80. (Pubitemid 27037326)
27. McCreery R.W. & Stelmachowicz P.G. 2011. Audibility-based predictions of speech recognition for children and adults with normal hearing. J Acoust Soc Am, 130, 4070-4081. doi: 10.1121/1.3658476.
28. Moore B.C.J. 2000. Use of a loudness model for hearing-aid fitting. IV. Fitting hearing aids with multi-channel compression so as to restore 'normal' loudness for speech at different levels. Br J Audiol, 34, 165-177. (Pubitemid 30453559)
29. Moore B.C.J., Glasberg B.R. & Baer T. 1997. A model for the prediction of thresholds, loudness, and partial loudness. J Audio Eng Soc, 45, 224-240.
30. Moore B.C.J., Glasberg B.R. & Stone M.A. 1999. Use of a loudness model for hearing-aid fitting. III. A general method for deriving initial fittings for hearing aids with multi-channel compression. Br J Audiol, 33, 241-258. (Pubitemid 29438483)
31. Moore B.C.J. & Glasberg B.R. 2004. A revised model of loudness perception applied to cochlear hearing loss. Hear Res, 188, 70-88. 162.
32. Moore B.C.J., Glasberg B.R. & Stone M.A. 2010. Development of a new method for deriving initial fitting for hearing aids with multi-channel compression: CAMEQ2-HF. Int J Audiol, 49, 216-227.
33. Pavlovic C.V. 1994. Band importance functions for audiological applications. Ear Hear, 15, 100-104. (Pubitemid 24081649)
34. Pavlovic C.V., Studebaker G.A. & Sherbecoe R.L. 1986. An articulation index based procedure for predicting the speech recognition performance of hearing-impaired individuals. J Acoust Soc Am, 80, 50-57. (Pubitemid 16061360)
35. Rankovic C. 1991. An application of the articulation index to hearing-aid fitting. J Speech Hear Res, 34, 391-402.
36. Scollie S.D., Seewald R.C., Moodie K.S. & Dekok K. 2000. Preferred listening levels of children who use hearing aids: Comparison to prescriptive targets. J Am Acad Audiol, 11, 230-238. (Pubitemid 30333644)
37. Scollie S.D. 2008. Children's speech recognition scores: The speech recognition scores: The speech intelligibility index and proficiency factors for age and hearing level. Ear Hear, 29, 4, 543-556.
38. Scollie S.D., Seewald R.C., Cornelisse L., Moodie S., Bagatto M. et al. 2005. The desired sensation level multistage input/output algorithm. Trends Amplif, 9, 159-197. (Pubitemid 43130929)
39. Scollie S.D., Ching T.Y.C., Seewald R.C., Dillon H., Britton L. et al. 2010a. Children's speech perception and loudness ratings when fitted with hearing aids using the DSL v.4.1 and the NAL-NL1 prescriptions. Int J Audiol, 49, S26-S34.
40. Scollie S.D., Ching T.Y.C., Seewald R.C., Dillon H., Britton L. et al. 2010b. Evaluation of the NAL-NL1 and DSL v4.1 prescriptions for children: Preference in real world use. Int J Audiol, 49, S49-S63.
41. Serpanos Y.C. & Gravel J.S. 2004. Revisiting loudness measures in children using a computer method of cross-modality matching (CMM). J Am Acad Audiol, 15, 486-497.
42. Seewald R.C., Moodie S.T. & Scollie S.D. 2005. The DSL method for pediatric hearing instrument fitting: Historical perspective and current issues. Trends Amplif, 9, 145-157.
43. Seewald R.C., Cornelisse L.E., Ramji K.V., Sinclair S., Moodie K. et al. 1997. DSL v4.1 for Windows: A software implementation of the desired sensation level (DSL[i/o]) method for fitting linear gain and wide-dynamic-range compression hearing instruments. Users' manual. London, Ontario: Hearing Health Care Research Unit.
44. Stelmachowicz P.G. 1999. Hearing-aid outcome measures for children. J Am Acad Audiol, 10, 14-25.
45. Stelmachowicz P., Lewis D., Kalberer A. & Creutz T. 1994. Situational hearing- aid response profile (SHARP, Version 2.0). User's manual. Boys Town National Research Hospital, Omaha, USA.
46. Studebaker G.A., Sherbecoe R.L., McDaniel D.M. & Gray G.A. 1997. Age- related changes in monosyllabic word recognition performance when audibility is held constant. J Am Acad Audiol, 8, 150-162.