Related Experiment Videos
Comparison of frequency response and aided speech-recognition performance for hearing aids selected by three
1Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington 47405.
Journal of the American Academy of Audiology
|April 1, 1990
Summary
Different hearing aid fitting methods yield similar speech recognition results. Despite variations in prescribed gain, behind-the-ear hearing aids adjusted by NAL-revised, COX, and POGO-II methods showed comparable performance in quiet and noisy environments.
Area of Science:
- Audiology
- Hearing Aid Technology
- Speech Perception
Background:
- Hearing aid selection involves various prescriptive methods.
- Comparing these methods is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes.
- Behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids are commonly used.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare speech recognition performance and gain achieved with BTE hearing aids fitted using three distinct prescriptive methods.
- To evaluate the impact of different prescriptive approaches on audibility and intelligibility.
Main Methods:
- Three prescriptive methods were evaluated: NAL-revised, Memphis State (COX), and POGO-II.
- Twelve subjects received BTE hearing aids fitted according to each method.
- Speech recognition was assessed using the CUNY Nonsense Syllable Test (NST) in quiet and noise.
Main Results:
- Prescribed frequency responses varied significantly across the three methods.
- No significant differences were found in the obtained frequency responses among the methods.
- Aided speech-recognition performance was comparable regardless of the prescriptive method used.
Conclusions:
- The choice of prescriptive method (NAL-revised, COX, POGO-II) did not impact speech recognition outcomes for BTE hearing aids.
- Fine-tuning to match prescribed gain is essential for consistent performance.
- Further research may explore other audiological parameters beyond speech recognition.