Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Target-matched insertion gain derived from three different hearing aid selection procedures

J L Punch1, A H Shovels, W W Dickinson

  • 1Department of Audiology and Speech Services, Michigan State University, East Lansing 48824, USA.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology
|November 1, 1995
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Response to Podwall.

American journal of audiology·2015
Same author

Regulation of asthmatic airway relaxation by estrogen and heat shock protein 90.

Journal of cellular physiology·2011
Same author

Paired-comparison hearing aid preferences: evaluation of an unforced-choice paradigm.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2001
Same author

Nitric oxide differentially regulates induction of type II nitric oxide synthase in rat vascular smooth muscle cells versus macrophages.

Arteriosclerosis, thrombosis, and vascular biology·2001
Same author

Acquired bilateral peripheral vestibular system impairment: rehabilitative options and potential outcomes.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2000
Same author

Non-NF-kappaB elements are required for full induction of the rat type II nitric oxide synthase in vascular smooth muscle cells.

British journal of pharmacology·2000
Same journal

Psychometric Rigor Before Clinical or Research Implementation.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026
Same journal

American Academy of Audiology Health-Related Quality of Life Benefits of Amplification for Adults with Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review Protocol.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026
Same journal

Evidence Synthesis and Open Science: A Tutorial for Systematic Reviews and Beyond in Audiology Research.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026
Same journal

State and Trait Anxiety Alter Postural Control in Healthy Adults.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026
Same journal

Differentiating Superior and Inferior Vestibular Neuritis: Insights from an Integrated VEMP and vHIT Assessment.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026
Same journal

Test-Retest Reliability of the Triangle Completion Test.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·2026
See all related articles

Comparing three hearing aid selection methods, this study found no significant differences in achieving prescribed real-ear insertion gain. All tested procedures effectively produced acceptable hearing aid gain values for users.

Area of Science:

  • Audiology
  • Hearing Science
  • Medical Devices

Background:

  • Accurate hearing aid fitting is crucial for effective amplification.
  • Real-ear insertion gain is a key metric for assessing hearing aid performance.
  • Standardized selection procedures aim to optimize hearing aid outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the efficacy of three distinct hearing aid selection procedures.
  • To determine if any single method superiorly yields prescribed real-ear insertion gain.
  • To evaluate the impact of different ordering information on hearing aid fitting accuracy.

Main Methods:

  • Three groups of subjects received in-the-ear hearing aids from different manufacturers.
  • Hearing aid orders were based on: audiogram, a gain/output/slope matrix, or 2-cc coupler gain with RECD.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Electroacoustic adjustments targeted a standard insertion gain formula.

    • Main Results:

    • No statistically significant differences were found between the three selection procedures.
    • All methods resulted in acceptable real-ear insertion gain values.
    • Hearing aid selection based on audiogram, matrix, or coupler gain showed comparable outcomes.

    Conclusions:

    • Current hearing aid selection procedures demonstrate similar effectiveness in achieving target insertion gain.
    • The choice of selection method does not appear to significantly impact initial fitting accuracy.
    • Further research may explore long-term user satisfaction and functional benefit across methods.