Speech-in-Noise Assessment in the Routine Audiologic Test Battery: Relationship to Perceived Auditory Disability.

OBJECTIVES: Self-assessment of perceived communication difficulty has been used in clinical and research practices for decades. Such questionnaires routinely assess the perceived ability of an individual to understand speech, particularly in background noise. Despite the emphasis on perceived performance in noise, speech recognition in routine audiologic practice is measured by word recognition in quiet (WRQ). Moreover, surprisingly little data exist that compare speech understanding in noise (SIN) abilities to perceived communication difficulty. Here, we address these issues by examining audiometric thresholds, WRQ scores, QuickSIN signal to noise ratio (SNR) loss, and perceived auditory disability as measured by the five questions on the Speech Spatial Questionnaire-12 (SSQ12) devoted to speech understanding (SSQ12-Speech5). DESIGN: We examined data from 1633 patients who underwent audiometric assessment at the Stanford Ear Institute. All individuals completed the SSQ12 questionnaire, pure-tone audiometry, and speech assessment consisting of ear-specific WRQ, and ear-specific QuickSIN. Only individuals with hearing threshold asymmetries ≤10 dB HL in their high-frequency pure-tone average (HFPTA) were included. Our primary objectives were to (1) examine the relationship between audiometric variables and the SSQ12-Speech5 scores, (2) determine the amount of variance in the SSQ12-Speech5 scores which could be predicted from audiometric variables, and (3) predict which patients were likely to report greater perceived auditory disability according to the SSQ12-Speech5. RESULTS: Performance on the SSQ12-Speech5 indicated greater perceived auditory disability with more severe degrees of hearing loss and greater QuickSIN SNR loss. Degree of hearing loss and QuickSIN SNR loss were found to account for modest but significant variance in SSQ12-Speech5 scores after accounting for age. In contrast, WRQ scores did not significantly contribute to the predictive power of the model. Degree of hearing loss and QuickSIN SNR loss were also found to have moderate diagnostic accuracy for determining which patients were likely to report SSQ12-Speech5 scores indicating greater perceived auditory disability. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, these data indicate that audiometric factors including degree of hearing loss (i.e., HFPTA) and QuickSIN SNR loss are predictive of SSQ12-Speech5 scores, though notable variance remains unaccounted for after considering these factors. HFPTA and QuickSIN SNR loss-but not WRQ scores-accounted for a significant amount of variance in SSQ12-Speech5 scores and were largely effective at predicting which patients are likely to report greater perceived auditory disability on the SSQ12-Speech5. This provides further evidence for the notion that speech-in-noise measures have greater clinical utility than WRQ in most instances as they relate more closely to measures of perceived auditory disability.

Microstructural Changes in the Brainstem Auditory Pathway in Children With Hearing Loss.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of diffusion tensor imaging of the auditory pathway in children with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A single academic tertiary children's hospital. PATIENTS: Sixteen pediatric patients with bilateral SNHL of at least moderate severity in the poorer ear (eight male; mean age, 5.3 ± 4.9 yrs). Controls consisted of age- and sex-matched children with normal hearing who were imaged for nonotologic, non-neurologic medical concerns and found to have normal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). INTERVENTIONS: Three Tesla MRI scanners were used for diffusion tensor imaging. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quantitative diffusion tensor metrics were extracted from the superior olivary nucleus (SON), inferior colliculus (IC), and ipsilateral fiber tracts between the SON and IC delineated by tractography. RESULTS: We identified differences in fractional anisotropy of the SON between the SNHL cohort and controls (0.377 ± 0.056 vs. 0.422 ± 0.052; p = 0.009), but not in the IC. There were no differences in the mean diffusivity (MD) values in the IC and SON. Among younger children (≤5 yrs), MD was decreased in the SNHL cohort compared with controls in the IC (0.918 ± 0.051 vs. 1.120 ± 0.142; p < 0.001). However, among older children (>5 yrs), there were no differences in MD (1.124 ± 0.198 vs. 0.997 ± 0.103; p = 0.119). There were no differences in MD or fractional anisotropy in the white matter fibers of the IC-SON tract. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest abnormal neural tracts along the central auditory pathway among children with SNHL. Longitudinal studies should assess the prognostic value of these MRI-based findings for assessing long-term outcomes and determining intervention efficacy.

Prevalence of Cochlear Nerve Deficiency and Hearing Device Use in Children With Single-Sided Deafness.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the prevalence of cochlear nerve deficiency (CND) in a cohort of pediatric patients with single-sided deafness (SSD). A secondary objective was to investigate trends in intervention and hearing device use in these children. STUDY DESIGN: Case series with chart review. SETTING: Pediatric tertiary care center. METHODS: Children ages 0 to 21 years with SSD (N = 190) who underwent computerized tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were included. Diagnostic criteria for SSD included unilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss with normal hearing sensitivity in the contralateral ear. Diagnostic criteria for CND included neuroradiologist report of an "aplastic or hypoplastic nerve" on MRI or a "stenotic cochlear aperture" on CT. RESULTS: The prevalence of CND was 42% for children with CT only, 76% for children with MRI only, and 63% for children with both MRI and CT. Of the children with MRI and CT, there was a 90% concordance across imaging modalities. About 36% of children with SSD had hearing devices that routed sound to the normal hearing ear (ie, bone conduction hearing device/contralateral routing of signal), while only 3% received a cochlear implant. Approximately 40% did not have a hearing device. Hearing device wear time averaged 2.9 hours per day and did not differ based on cochlear nerve status. CONCLUSION: There is a high prevalence of CND in children with SSD. Cochlear nerve status should be confirmed via MRI in children with SSD. The limited implementation and use of hearing devices observed for children with SSD reinforce the need for increased support for early and continuous intervention.

Age and Hearing Ability Influence Selective Attention During Childhood.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present study was to determine whether age and hearing ability influence selective attention during childhood. Specifically, we hypothesized that immaturity and disrupted auditory experience impede selective attention during childhood. DESIGN: Seventy-seven school-age children (5 to 12 years of age) participated in this study: 61 children with normal hearing and 16 children with bilateral hearing loss who use hearing aids and/or cochlear implants. Children performed selective attention-based behavioral change detection tasks comprised of target and distractor streams in the auditory and visual modalities. In the auditory modality, children were presented with two streams of single-syllable words spoken by a male and female talker. In the visual modality, children were presented with two streams of grayscale images. In each task, children were instructed to selectively attend to the target stream, inhibit attention to the distractor stream, and press a key as quickly as possible when they detected a frequency (auditory modality) or color (visual modality) deviant stimulus in the target, but not distractor, stream. Performance on the auditory and visual change detection tasks was quantified by response sensitivity, which reflects children's ability to selectively attend to deviants in the target stream and inhibit attention to those in the distractor stream. Children also completed a standardized measure of attention and inhibitory control. RESULTS: Younger children and children with hearing loss demonstrated lower response sensitivity, and therefore poorer selective attention, than older children and children with normal hearing, respectively. The effect of hearing ability on selective attention was observed across the auditory and visual modalities, although the extent of this group difference was greater in the auditory modality than the visual modality due to differences in children's response patterns. Additionally, children's performance on a standardized measure of attention and inhibitory control related to their performance during the auditory and visual change detection tasks. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the findings from the present study suggest that age and hearing ability influence children's ability to selectively attend to a target stream in both the auditory and visual modalities. The observed differences in response patterns across modalities, however, reveal a complex interplay between hearing ability, task modality, and selective attention during childhood. While the effect of age on selective attention is expected to reflect the immaturity of cognitive and linguistic processes, the effect of hearing ability may reflect altered development of selective attention due to disrupted auditory experience early in life and/or a differential allocation of attentional resources to meet task demands.

Background Speech Disrupts Working Memory Span in 5-Year-Old Children.

OBJECTIVES: The present study tested the effects of background speech and nonspeech noise on 5-year-old children's working memory span. DESIGN: Five-year-old typically developing children (range = 58.6 to 67.6 months; n = 94) completed a modified version of the Missing Scan Task, a missing-item working memory task, in quiet and in the presence of two types of background noise: male two-talker speech and speech-shaped noise. The two types of background noise had similar spectral composition and overall intensity characteristics but differed in whether they contained verbal content. In Experiments 1 and 2, children's memory span (i.e., the largest set size of items children successfully recalled) was subjected to analyses of variance designed to look for an effect of listening condition (within-subjects factor: quiet, background noise) and an effect of background noise type (between-subjects factor: two-talker speech, speech-shaped noise). RESULTS: In Experiment 1, children's memory span declined in the presence of two-talker speech but not in the presence of speech-shaped noise. This result was replicated in Experiment 2 after accounting for a potential effect of proactive interference due to repeated administration of the Missing Scan Task. CONCLUSIONS: Background speech, but not speech-shaped noise, disrupted working memory span in 5-year-old children. These results support the idea that background speech engages domain-general cognitive processes used during the recall of known objects in a way that speech-shaped noise does not.

Multitasking During Degraded Speech Recognition in School-Age Children.

Multitasking requires individuals to allocate their cognitive resources across different tasks. The purpose of the current study was to assess school-age children's multitasking abilities during degraded speech recognition. Children (8 to 12 years old) completed a dual-task paradigm including a sentence recognition (primary) task containing speech that was either unprocessed or noise-band vocoded with 8, 6, or 4 spectral channels and a visual monitoring (secondary) task. Children's accuracy and reaction time on the visual monitoring task was quantified during the dual-task paradigm in each condition of the primary task and compared with single-task performance. Children experienced dual-task costs in the 6- and 4-channel conditions of the primary speech recognition task with decreased accuracy on the visual monitoring task relative to baseline performance. In all conditions, children's dual-task performance on the visual monitoring task was strongly predicted by their single-task (baseline) performance on the task. Results suggest that children's proficiency with the secondary task contributes to the magnitude of dual-task costs while multitasking during degraded speech recognition.

Age-Related Differences in Listening Effort During Degraded Speech Recognition.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present study was to quantify age-related differences in executive control as it relates to dual-task performance, which is thought to represent listening effort, during degraded speech recognition. DESIGN: Twenty-five younger adults (YA; 18-24 years) and 21 older adults (OA; 56-82 years) completed a dual-task paradigm that consisted of a primary speech recognition task and a secondary visual monitoring task. Sentence material in the primary task was either unprocessed or spectrally degraded into 8, 6, or 4 spectral channels using noise-band vocoding. Performance on the visual monitoring task was assessed by the accuracy and reaction time of participants' responses. Performance on the primary and secondary task was quantified in isolation (i.e., single task) and during the dual-task paradigm. Participants also completed a standardized psychometric measure of executive control, including attention and inhibition. Statistical analyses were implemented to evaluate changes in listeners' performance on the primary and secondary tasks (1) per condition (unprocessed vs. vocoded conditions); (2) per task (single task vs. dual task); and (3) per group (YA vs. OA). RESULTS: Speech recognition declined with increasing spectral degradation for both YA and OA when they performed the task in isolation or concurrently with the visual monitoring task. OA were slower and less accurate than YA on the visual monitoring task when performed in isolation, which paralleled age-related differences in standardized scores of executive control. When compared with single-task performance, OA experienced greater declines in secondary-task accuracy, but not reaction time, than YA. Furthermore, results revealed that age-related differences in executive control significantly contributed to age-related differences on the visual monitoring task during the dual-task paradigm. CONCLUSIONS: OA experienced significantly greater declines in secondary-task accuracy during degraded speech recognition than YA. These findings are interpreted as suggesting that OA expended greater listening effort than YA, which may be partially attributed to age-related differences in executive control.