Transducer Variability in Speech-in-Noise Testing: Considerations Related to Stimulus Bandwidth.

PURPOSE: Clinical audiologists typically assume that headphones and insert phones will produce comparable results when they are used to conduct speech-in-noise or other audiological tests; however, this may not always be the case. Here, we show that there are significant differences in the scores that previous studies have reported for headphone and insert-phone transducers on the Words-in-Noise (WIN) Test, and discuss the possibility that the variations in high-frequency output that are allowable under the speech source specifications of American National Standards Institute S3.6 might be contributing to transducer-dependent differences in performance for the WIN and other tests that are presented through the auxiliary input channels of clinical audiometers. METHOD: A literature review was conducted to identify articles that reported WIN Test results for both listeners with normal hearing and with hearing impairment and specified the type of transducer (insert or TDH-50) used for the data collection. RESULTS: Among the 19 included studies, participants with normal hearing using inserts exhibited systematically worse WIN Test scores compared to those using TDH-50 headphones, while participants with hearing loss showed comparable average scores across transducer types. CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the importance of considering transducer type when interpreting WIN Test outcomes, particularly when comparing to normative scores obtained from individuals with normal hearing. Although further research is needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms driving differences in test performance across transducer types, these findings underscore the need for standardized test administration protocols and careful documentation of transducer type when administering speech-in-noise tests for clinical or research applications.

Evaluating the Clinical Reliability and Reference Values of the International Outcome Inventory for Cochlear Implants in a DOD Population.

BACKGROUND: Hearing loss significantly affects an individual's well-being, communication, social interaction, and quality of life. Cochlear implants serve as a viable management option. Given the variability in the impact of impairment, self-report measures are crucial for evaluating the perceived benefits of management options. PURPOSE: The study aims to assess the reliability of the International Outcome Inventory for Cochlear Implants (IOI-CI) and establish normative cutoffs. This questionnaire evaluates patient's satisfaction with cochlear implants and contributes to the understanding of their experiences, addressing the increasing interest among cochlear implant clinicians. RESEARCH DESIGN: The design relies on electronic medical databases within the Veterans Affairs (VA) and Department of Defense (DOD) systems. After identification of eligibility, recruitment was based on participants responding to mailed study documents. This research adopts a descriptive approach of the analysis of questionnaire responses as well as quantitatively evaluating the reliability. STUDY SAMPLE: Forty-nine service members, Veterans, and their dependents, including 32 men and 17 women, participated in the study. The participants had a mean age of 68.0 years, with cochlear implants ranging from 6 months to 2 years post-initial stimulation. The majority had a unilateral cochlear implant with a hearing aid on the contralateral ear. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data collected involved mailing baseline study packets, including the IOI-CI questionnaire, to potential participants identified through medical databases. Participants indicated consent by returning the study packet. Follow-up packets were sent at a later time. Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC) were utilized for test-retest reliability and Generalized Linear Models (GLM) for exploring the impact of clinical and demographic factors. Data were analyzed using R. RESULTS: The ICC revealed a good level of agreement (ICC=0.84) between baseline and follow-up assessments for the IOI-CI total score. The GLM did not identify significant factors influencing IOI-CI scores. Normative values were established, indicating total scores between 18 and 35 as within the normal range for this questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The study contributes valuable insights into the reliability of the IOI-CI and establishes normative cutoffs, aiding clinicians in assessing cochlear implant users' experiences and satisfaction.

Rapid Assessment of Tinnitus Complaints with a Modified Version of the Tinnitus and Hearing Survey.

The objective of this project was to establish cutoff scores on the tinnitus subscale of the Tinnitus and Hearing Survey (THS) using a large sample of United States service members (SM) with the end goal of guiding clinical referrals for tinnitus evaluation. A total of 4,589 SM undergoing annual audiometric surveillance were prospectively recruited to complete the THS tinnitus subscale (THS-T). A subset of 1,304 participants also completed the Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI). The original 5-point response scale of the THS (THS-T16) was modified to an 11-point scale (THS-T40) for some participants, to align with the response scale of the TFI. Age, sex, hearing loss, and self-reported tinnitus bother were also recorded. The THS-T was relatively insensitive to hearing, but self-reported bothersome tinnitus was significantly associated with the THS-T40 score. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine cutoff scores on the THS-T that aligned with recommended cutoff values for clinical intervention on the TFI. A cutoff of 9 on the THS-T40 aligns with a TFI cutoff of 25, indicating a patient may need intervention for tinnitus. A cutoff of 15 aligns with a TFI cutoff of 50, indicating that more aggressive intervention for tinnitus is warranted. The THS-T is a viable tool to identify patients with tinnitus complaints warranting clinical evaluation for use by hearing conservation programs and primary care clinics. The THS-T40 cutoff scores of 9 and 15 provide clinical reference points to guide referrals to audiology.

Examining the Use and Benefits of Low-/Mild-Gain Hearing Aids in Service Members with Normal Hearing Thresholds and Self-Reported Hearing Difficulties.

Low- (or mild-) gain hearing aids (LGHAs) are increasingly considered for individuals with normal peripheral hearing but significant self-reported hearing difficulties (SHDs). This study assesses the benefits of LGHAs as a management option for individuals with normal hearing thresholds (NHTs) and SHDs, comparing LGHA use and benefit to individuals with non-significant hearing difficulties (NHDs) and those with peripheral hearing loss. Questionnaires addressing hearing aid usage, benefit, hearing difficulties, and tinnitus were administered to 186 individuals who self-identified as hearing aid users in a sample of 6652 service members who were receiving their annual hearing tests. Participants were divided into SHD and NHD groups based on the normative cutoff of the Tinnitus and Hearing Survey-Hearing Subscale (THS-H), and into hearing impairment (HI) and NHT based on their audiometric air-conduction thresholds. Individuals with SHDs and NHTs reported higher LGHA usage and benefit than individuals with NHDs and NHTs. Comparable use and benefit were noted between groups with SHDs regardless of peripheral hearing loss status. The findings support LGHAs as a suitable management option for individuals with NHTs and SHDs, as indicated by hearing aid use and benefit. Quantifying the level of perceived auditory processing deficits (i.e., SHDs), notably with the THS-H, enhances sensitivity in identifying those who may benefit the most from this treatment option.

Relationships Between Auditory Processing and Cognitive Abilities in Adults: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: The contributions from the central auditory and cognitive systems play a major role in communication. Understanding the relationship between auditory and cognitive abilities has implications for auditory rehabilitation for clinical patients. The purpose of this systematic review is to address the question, "In adults, what is the relationship between central auditory processing abilities and cognitive abilities?" METHOD: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed to identify, screen, and determine eligibility for articles that addressed the research question of interest. Medical librarians and subject matter experts assisted in search strategy, keyword review, and structuring the systematic review process. To be included, articles needed to have an auditory measure (either behavioral or electrophysiologic), a cognitive measure that assessed individual ability, and the measures needed to be compared to one another. RESULTS: Following two rounds of identification and screening, 126 articles were included for full analysis. Central auditory processing (CAP) measures were grouped into categories (behavioral: speech in noise, altered speech, temporal processing, binaural processing; electrophysiologic: mismatch negativity, P50, N200, P200, and P300). The most common CAP measures were sentence recognition in speech-shaped noise and the P300. Cognitive abilities were grouped into constructs, and the most common construct was working memory. The findings were mixed, encompassing both significant and nonsignificant relationships; therefore, the results do not conclusively establish a direct link between CAP and cognitive abilities. Nonetheless, several consistent relationships emerged across different domains. Distorted or noisy speech was related to working memory or processing speed. Auditory temporal order tasks showed significant relationships with working memory, fluid intelligence, or multidomain cognitive measures. For electrophysiology, relationships were observed between some cortical evoked potentials and working memory or executive/inhibitory processes. Significant results were consistent with the hypothesis that assessments of CAP and cognitive processing would be positively correlated. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this systematic review summarize relationships between CAP and cognitive processing, but also underscore the complexity of these constructs, the importance of study design, and the need to select an appropriate measure. The relationship between auditory and cognitive abilities is complex but can provide informative context when creating clinical management plans. This review supports a need to develop guidelines and training for audiologists who wish to consider individual central auditory and cognitive abilities in patient care. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24855174.

Rapid Assessment of Subjective Hearing Complaints With a Modified Version of the Tinnitus and Hearing Survey.

Hearing difficulties are frequently reported by patients in audiology clinics, including patients with normal audiometric thresholds. However, because all individuals experience some difficulty understanding speech in noisy environments, it can be difficult to assess hearing complaints objectively across patients. Normative values help address this issue by providing an objective cutoff score for determining what is or is not clinically significant. The goal of this study was to establish normative values for the four-item hearing subscale of the Tinnitus and Hearing Survey (THS-H). Respondents completing the THS-H rate the level of difficulty understanding speech in the situations most commonly reported as being difficult: in the presence of noise, on TV or in movies, soft voices and group conversations. In this study, 22,583 US Service Members (SMs) completed the THS-H using an 11-point scale ranging from 0 (not a problem) to 10 (a very big problem). Responses to the four items were summed to produce values between 0 and 40. The distribution of the final scores was analyzed based on severity of hearing loss, age, and sex. Only 5% of SMs with clinically normal hearing scored above 27, so this score was selected as a cutoff for "clinically significant hearing problems." Due to its ease of administration and interpretation, the THS-H could be a useful tool for identifying patients with subjective hearing difficulty warranting audiological evaluation and management.

Effects of Adding Monaural and Binaural Noise to a Dichotic Listening Task.

BACKGROUND: The Dichotic Digits Test (DDT) evaluates central auditory nervous system (CANS) dysfunction. The DDT is widely used in audiology clinics worldwide because it is clinically efficient and has good sensitivity and specificity for CANS lesions. However, the DDT shows a strong ceiling effect, which can mitigate its ability to detect subtle CANS dysfunction. PURPOSE: This study examines the effects of adding monaural and binaural speech-spectrum noise to the DDT in an effort to make the test more taxing to the CANS and thereby reduce the observed ceiling effect. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was an experimental repeated measures study. STUDY SAMPLE: The participants were 20 adults aged 18-50 years with normal, bilaterally symmetric peripheral hearing sensitivity. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Each participant was administered one standard DDT test list (no noise added) and DDT test lists with binaural, monaural right, and monaural left noise added. For each of the noise-added conditions, lists were administered at two different signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), for a grand total of seven DDT test lists per participant, presented in randomized order. Monaural and binaural noise effects on DDT scoring indices (Right and Left Ear Percent Correct Scores, Combined Total Percent Correct Scores, and Dichotic Difference Scores), as well as noise effects on the Right Ear Advantage (REA) for speech, were examined. Mixed model analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were used to examine fixed effects and interactions of Noise Condition and Ear. RESULTS: Adding noise to the standard DDT systematically reduced Right and Left Ear Percent Correct Scores and Combined Total Percent Correct Scores. Statistically significant differences on all indices were found between monaural and binaural noise-added conditions, suggesting a possible advantage for binaural listening in noise. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that adding noise to tests of dichotic listening increases the difficulty of the task, and that further investigation of dichotic listening patterns in noise could potentially lead to more sensitive clinical evaluations of CANS integrity and function.

Efficient Estimation of the Binaural Masking Level Difference Using a Technique Based on Manual Audiometry.

PURPOSE: The Masking Level Difference (MLD) has been used for decades to evaluate the binaural listening advantage. Although originally measured using Bekesy audiometry, the most common clinical use of the MLD is the CD-based Wilson 500-Hz technique with interleaved N0S0 and N0Sπ components. Here, we propose an alternative technique based on manual audiometry as a faster way of measuring the MLD. The article describes the advantages to this administration technique and evaluates if it is a viable alternative for the Wilson technique. METHOD: Data were retrospectively analyzed on 264 service members (SMs). All SMs completed both the Wilson and Manual MLDs. Descriptive and correlational statistics were applied to evaluate the comparisons between the two techniques and highlight the differences. Equivalence measures were also completed to compare the tests using a standardized cutoff score. Analyses were also made to compare both techniques to subjective and objective measures of hearing performance. RESULTS: Moderate to high positive correlations were determined between Wilson and Manual measures of each threshold (N0Sπ and N0S0). Although the Manual and Wilson MLD techniques produced significantly different thresholds, simple linear transformations can be used to obtain approximately equivalent scores on the two tests, and agreement was high for using these transformed scores to identify individuals with substantial MLD deficits. Both techniques had moderate test-retest reliability. The Manual MLD and components had stronger correlations to the subjective and objective hearing measures than the Wilson. CONCLUSIONS: The Manual technique is a faster method for obtaining MLD scores that is just as reliable as the CD-based Wilson test. With the significant reduction in assessment time and comparable results, the Manual MLD is a viable alternative for direct use in the clinic.

Hearing Aid Technology Settings and Speech-in-Noise Difficulties.

PURPOSE: Hearing aids are the primary method to manage hearing loss. However, there are limited recommendations for when and how to set advanced hearing aid features. The purpose of this study is to describe how hearing aid features are utilized in clinically fit devices and to evaluate the relationship between the fitted hearing aid feature and the Quick Speech-in-Noise Test (QuickSIN). METHOD: Data from two laboratories were evaluated retrospectively, resulting in 107 bilateral hearing aid participants who obtained their hearing aids at clinics in their communities. Ages ranged from 60 to 93 years. Degree of speech-in-noise difficulty was evaluated using the QuickSIN (mild, moderate, or severe). Settings for directionality, digital noise reduction (DNR), and hearing assistive technology (HAT) use were documented. Directionality was categorized as omnidirectional, fixed (full-time directional), or adaptive (adjusts automatically based on noise source). DNR was recorded as either on or off. HAT use was recorded as either yes or no. RESULTS: QuickSIN scores ranged from -1.5 to 25 dB SNR loss (M = 7). A moderate correlation was determined for QuickSIN scores and pure-tone averages. Adaptive directionality was used most often, most participants had DNR turned on, and HAT use was low. The biggest contributions to the Chi-square test for directionality and degrees of speech-in-noise difficulty together were fixed/severe, fixed/moderate, and adaptive/mild. CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical sample, there was limited HAT use and advanced features are not set in a way that is consistent with speech-in-noise abilities. It is likely that patients fit with noise management that is not suited to their listening abilities are experiencing increased difficulties in challenging listening environments that could potentially be mitigated with alternative management. Evidence-based research on prefitting measures of speech in noise to help inform patient-centered clinical decisions is needed.

Investigating the Role of Auditory Processing Abilities in Long-Term Self-Reported Hearing Aid Outcomes among Adults Age 60+ Years.

BACKGROUND: Self-reported hearing aid outcomes among older adults are variable and important to improve. The extent of the role of auditory processing in long-term hearing aid outcomes is not well understood. PURPOSE: To determine how auditory processing abilities are related to self-reported hearing aid satisfaction and benefit along with either aided audibility alone or exploratory factors suggested by previous literature. RESEARCH DESIGN: Descriptive analyses and multiple regression analyses of cross-sectional self-reported outcomes. STUDY SAMPLE: Adult participants, >60 years (n = 78), fitted with bilateral hearing aids to treat symmetric, mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Participants were recruited from a single audiology clinic to complete a series of questionnaires, behavioral assessments, and obtain data from their hearing aids, including real ear measures and data logging of hearing aid use. Multiple linear regressions were used to determine the amount of variance explained by predictive factors in self-reported hearing aid satisfaction and benefit. The primary predictive factors included gap detection threshold, spatial advantage score, dichotic difference score, and aided audibility. Exploratory factors included personality, self-efficacy, self-report of disability, and hearing aid use. All interpretations of statistical significance used p < 0.05. Effect sizes were determined using Cohen's f 2 with a medium effect suggesting clinical relevance. RESULTS: Gap detection threshold was a statistically significant predictor in both primary regression models with a medium effect size for satisfaction and a small effect size for benefit. When additional exploratory factors were included in the regression models with auditory processing abilities, gap detection and self-efficacy were both significant predictors of hearing aid satisfaction with medium effect sizes, explaining 10 and 17% of the variance, respectively. There were no medium effect sizes found for other predictor variables in either the primary or exploratory hearing aid benefit models. Additional factors were statistically significant in the models, explaining a small amount of variance, but did not meet the medium effect size criterion. CONCLUSION: This study provides initial evidence supporting the incorporation of measures of gap detection ability and hearing aid self-efficacy into clinical practice for the interpretation of postfitting long-term hearing aid satisfaction.

Auditory Hallucinations: An Audiological Horizon?

BACKGROUND: Interesting data and theories have emerged regarding auditory hallucinations (AHs) in patients with schizophrenia. The possibility that these patients may have changes in the anatomy of the auditory cortex and/or subcortical structures of the central auditory nervous system and present with deficits on audiological tests is important information to the audiology community. However, it seems clear that, in general, audiologists are not sufficiently aware of these findings. PURPOSE: There are two main purposes of this article: (1) to educate audiologists about AHs related to schizophrenia and related issues, and (2) to encourage audiologists and hearing scientists to become involved in the evaluation and research of AHs. This fascinating disorder is one in which audiologists/hearing scientists are well suited to make a significant contribution. RESEARCH DESIGN: A review and synthesis of the literature was conducted. Relevant literature was identified through PubMed, Google Scholar, as well as independent book chapters and article searches. Keywords driving the searches were AHs, auditory illusions, verbal and musical hallucinations, schizophrenia, and central auditory disorders. Given the currency of the topic, the information collected was primarily between 1990 and 2020. STUDY SAMPLE: The review is organized around categorization, prevalence, models, mechanisms, anatomy, pathophysiology, and audiological correlates related to AHs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Searches were conducted using well-known search engines and manual searches by each author. This information on AHs was then analyzed collectively by the authors for useful background and relevance, as well as important for the field of audiology. RESULTS: Several anatomical, physiological, and functional imaging studies have shown compromise of the auditory cortex in those with schizophrenia and AHs. Potentially related to this, are studies that demonstrated sub-par performance on behavioral audiologic measures for this unique clinical population. These findings align well with the kind of hearing disorder for which audiologists are well-trained to make significant contributions. CONCLUSION: Neurobiological and audiological evidence is accumulating on patients with schizophrenia and AH potentially rendering it as both an auditory and psychiatric disorder. Audiologists should consider expanding their horizon and playing a role in the clinical investigation of this disorder.

Predicting Hearing Aid Satisfaction in Adults: A Systematic Review of Speech-in-noise Tests and Other Behavioral Measures.

OBJECTIVES: Adults with hearing loss report a wide range of hearing aid satisfaction that does not significantly correlate to degree of hearing loss. It is not clear which auditory behavioral factors do contribute to hearing aid satisfaction. While poor speech understanding in noise is known to contribute to dissatisfaction, there are many categories of this type of assessment. The purpose of this systematic review is to answer the question, "Are behavioral pre-fitting measures using speech and nonspeech materials related to hearing aid satisfaction among adults?" DESIGN: Six electronic databases were searched to find peer-reviewed studies published before June 2020. The included studies reported on the relationship between auditory behavioral measures and hearing aid satisfaction alone or globally with other outcome domains among adults with hearing loss. Six types of behavioral prefitting measures were evaluated: speech recognition in quiet (% correct), speech recognition in noise (% correct), reception thresholds for speech-in-noise, speech-based subjective ratings, dichotic speech tests, and tests using nonspeech material. Each relevant study was independently reviewed by two reviewers. Methodological quality was evaluated in each included study using the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's level of evidence ratings. RESULTS: There were 1342 articles identified in the systematic review process. After duplicates were removed and specific inclusion criteria were applied, 21 studies were included. All studies included had a 0 to 4 methodological quality rating indicating weak to moderate internal validity. The tests that showed potential for clinical application due to significant correlations with satisfaction were the QuickSIN, the synthetic sentence identification, the hearing in noise test, and the acceptable noise level test. Audibility, as measured by degree of hearing loss, was not significantly correlated to hearing aid satisfaction in the 13 studies that reported on this measure. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this review, results indicated that speech-in-noise tests had the highest associations to hearing aid satisfaction, suggesting a greater role for assessment of speech-in-noise perception in auditory rehabilitation. This is an important finding for clinical practice, given that audibility was not a significant factor in predicting satisfaction. Overall, the results from this review show a need for well-designed, high-quality, prospective studies assessing the predictive value of prefitting measures on hearing aid satisfaction with current hearing aid models.

The Role of Patient-Site Facilitators in Teleaudiology: A Scoping Review.

Purpose Teleaudiology helps improve access to hearing health care by overcoming the geographic gap between providers and patients. In many teleaudiology encounters, a facilitator is needed at the patient site to help with hands-on aspects of procedures. The aim of this study was to review the scope and nature of research around patient-site facilitators in teleaudiology. We focused on identifying the facilitators' background, training, and responsibilities. Method To conduct this scoping review, we searched PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase. To be included, studies needed to address teleaudiology; be experimental/quasi-experimental, correlational/predictive, or descriptive; be published in English; and include the use of a facilitator at the patient location. Results A total of 82 studies met the inclusion criteria. The available literature described a number of different individuals in the role of the patient-site facilitator, including audiologists, students, and local aides. Fifty-seven unique tasks were identified, including orienting the client to the space, assisting with technology, and assisting with audiology procedures. The largest number of studies (n = 42) did not describe the facilitators' training. When reported, the facilitators' training was heterogenous in terms of who delivered the training, the length of the training, and the training content. Conclusions Across studies, the range of duties performed by patient-site facilitators indicates they may have an important role in teleaudiology. However, details are still needed surrounding their background, responsibilities, and training. Future research is warranted exploring the role of the patient-site facilitator, including their impact on teleaudiology service delivery. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12475796.