Masked speech recognition by 6-13-year-olds with early-childhood otitis media: effects of acoustic condition and otologic history.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate speech recognition in school-age children with early-childhood otitis media (OM) in conditions with noise or speech maskers with or without interaural differences. To also investigate the effects of three otologic history factors. DESIGN: Using headphone presentation, speech recognition thresholds (SRTs) were measured with simple sentences. As maskers, stationary speech-shaped noise (SSN) or two-talker running speech (TTS) were used. The stimuli were presented in a monaural and binaural condition (SSN) or a co-located and spatially separated condition (TTS). Based on the available medical records, overall OM duration, OM onset age, and time since the last OM episode were estimated. STUDY SAMPLE: 6-13-year-olds with a history of recurrent OM (N = 42) or without any ear diseases (N = 20) with normal tympanograms and audiograms at the time of testing. RESULTS: Mixed-model regression analyses that controlled for age showed poorer SRTs for the OM group (Δ-value = 0.84 dB, p = 0.009). These appeared driven by the spatially separated, binaural, and monaural conditions. The OM group showed large inter-individual differences, which were unrelated to the otologic history factors. CONCLUSIONS: Early-childhood OM can affect speech recognition in different acoustic conditions. The effects of the otologic history warrant further investigation.

Focusing on Positive Listening Experiences Improves Speech Intelligibility in Experienced Hearing Aid Users.

Negativity bias is a cognitive bias that results in negative events being perceptually more salient than positive ones. For hearing care, this means that hearing aid benefits can potentially be overshadowed by adverse experiences. Research has shown that sustaining focus on positive experiences has the potential to mitigate negativity bias. The purpose of the current study was to investigate whether a positive focus (PF) intervention can improve speech-in-noise abilities for experienced hearing aid users. Thirty participants were randomly allocated to a control or PF group (N = 2 × 15). Prior to hearing aid fitting, all participants filled out the short form of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale (SSQ12) based on their own hearing aids. At the first visit, they were fitted with study hearing aids, and speech-in-noise testing was performed. Both groups then wore the study hearing aids for two weeks and sent daily text messages reporting hours of hearing aid use to an experimenter. In addition, the PF group was instructed to focus on positive listening experiences and to also report them in the daily text messages. After the 2-week trial, all participants filled out the SSQ12 questionnaire based on the study hearing aids and completed the speech-in-noise testing again. Speech-in-noise performance and SSQ12 Qualities score were improved for the PF group but not for the control group. This finding indicates that the PF intervention can improve subjective and objective hearing aid benefits.

Speech Comprehension by Cochlear Implant Users Assessed with Evoked Potentials and Response Times.

INTRODUCTION: Cochlear implant (CI) users differ greatly in their rehabilitation outcomes, including speech understanding in noise. This variability may be related to brain changes associated with intact senses recruiting cortical areas from stimulation-deprived senses. Numerous studies have demonstrated such cross-modal reorganization in individuals with untreated hearing loss. How it is affected by regular use of hearing devices remains unclear, however. To shed light on this, the current study measured cortical responses reflecting comprehension abilities in experienced CI users and normal-hearing controls. METHODS: Using multichannel electroencephalography, we tested CI users who had used their devices for at least 12 months and closely matched controls (N = 2 × 13). Cortical responses reflecting comprehension abilities - the N400 and late positive complex (LPC) components - were evoked using congruent and incongruent digit-triplet stimuli. The participants' task was to assess digit-triplet congruency by means of timed button presses. All measurements were performed in speech-shaped noise 15 dB above individually measured speech recognition thresholds. Three stimulus presentation modes were used: auditory-only, visual-only, and visual-then-auditory. RESULTS: The analyses revealed no group differences in the N400 and LPC responses. In terms of response times, the CI users were slower and differentially affected by the three stimulus presentation modes relative to the controls. CONCLUSION: Compared to normal-hearing controls, experienced CI users may need more time to comprehend speech in noise. Response times can serve as a proxy for speech comprehension by CI users.

Auditory Profile-Based Hearing Aid Fitting: Self-Reported Benefit for First-Time Hearing Aid Users.

Background: Although hearing aids (HAs) can compensate for reduced audibility, functional outcomes and benefits vary widely across individuals. As part of the Danish 'Better hEAring Rehabilitation' (BEAR) project, four distinct auditory profiles differing in terms of audiometric thresholds and supra-threshold hearing abilities were recently identified. Additionally, profile-specific HA-fitting strategies were proposed. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the self-reported benefit of these profile-based HA fittings in a group of new HA users. Methods: A total of 205 hearing-impaired older adults were recruited from two Danish university hospitals. Participants were randomly allocated to one of two treatment groups: (1) NAL-NL2 gain prescription combined with default advanced feature settings ('reference fitting') or (2) auditory profile-based fitting with tailored gain prescription and advanced feature settings ('BEAR fitting'). Two months after treatment, the participants completed the benefit version of the short form of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12-B) and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) questionnaire. Results: Overall, participants reported a clear benefit from HA treatment. However, no significant differences in the SSQ12-B or IOI-HA scores between the reference and BEAR fittings were found. Conclusion: First-time users experience clear benefits from HA treatment. Auditory profile-based HA fitting warrants further investigation.

Amplitude Compression for Preventing Rollover at Above-Conversational Speech Levels.

Hearing aids provide nonlinear amplification to improve speech audibility and loudness perception. While more audibility typically increases speech intelligibility at low levels, the same is not true for above-conversational levels, where decreases in intelligibility ("rollover") can occur. In a previous study, we found rollover in speech intelligibility measurements made in quiet for 35 out of 74 test ears with a hearing loss. Furthermore, we found rollover occurrence in quiet to be associated with poorer speech intelligibility in noise as measured with linear amplification. Here, we retested 16 participants with rollover with three amplitude-compression settings. Two were designed to prevent rollover by applying slow- or fast-acting compression with a 5:1 compression ratio around the "sweet spot," that is, the area in an individual performance-intensity function with high intelligibility and listening comfort. The third, reference setting used gains and compression ratios prescribed by the "National Acoustic Laboratories Non-Linear 1" rule. Speech intelligibility was assessed in quiet and in noise. Pairwise preference judgments were also collected. For speech levels of 70 dB SPL and above, slow-acting sweet-spot compression gave better intelligibility in quiet and noise than the reference setting. Additionally, the participants clearly preferred slow-acting sweet-spot compression over the other settings. At lower levels, the three settings gave comparable speech intelligibility, and the participants preferred the reference setting over both sweet-spot settings. Overall, these results suggest that, for listeners with rollover, slow-acting sweet-spot compression is beneficial at 70 dB SPL and above, while at lower levels clinically established gain targets are more suited.

A history of occupational noise exposure is associated with steep-slope audiograms and poorer self-reported hearing-aid outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of previous occupational noise exposure in older adults with hearing loss on (1) audiometric configuration and acoustic reflex (AR) thresholds and (2) self-reported hearing abilities and hearing aid (HA) effectiveness. DESIGN: A prospective observational study. STUDY SAMPLE: The study included 1176 adults (≥60 years) with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Pure-tone audiometry, AR thresholds, and responses to the abbreviated version of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12) and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) questionnaire were obtained, along with information about previous occupational noise exposure. RESULTS: Greater occupational noise exposure was associated with a higher prevalence of steeply sloping audiograms in men and women and a 0.32 (95% CI: -0.57; -0.06) scale points lower mean SSQ12 total score among noise-exposed men. AR thresholds did not show a significant relation to noise-exposure status, but hearing thresholds at a given frequency were related to elevated AR thresholds at the same frequency. CONCLUSIONS: A noise exposure history is linked to steeper audiograms in older adults with hearing loss as well as to poorer self-reported hearing abilities in noise-exposed men. More attention to older adults with previous noise exposure is warranted in hearing rehabilitation.

Does experience with hearing aid amplification influence electrophysiological measures of speech comprehension?

OBJECTIVE: To explore if experience with hearing aid (HA) amplification affects speech-evoked cortical potentials reflecting comprehension abilities. DESIGN: N400 and late positive complex (LPC) responses as well as behavioural response times to congruent and incongruent digit triplets were measured. The digits were presented against stationary speech-shaped noise 10 dB above individually measured speech recognition thresholds. Stimulus presentation was either acoustic (digits 1-3) or first visual (digits 1-2) and then acoustic (digit 3). STUDY SAMPLE: Three groups of older participants (N = 3 × 15) with (1) pure-tone average hearing thresholds <25 dB HL from 500-4000 Hz, (2) mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) but no prior HA experience, and (3) mild-to-moderate SNHL and >2 years of HA experience. Groups 2-3 were fitted with test devices in accordance with clinical gain targets. RESULTS: No group differences were found in the electrophysiological data. N400 amplitudes were larger and LPC latencies shorter with acoustic presentation. For group 1, behavioural response times were shorter with visual-then-acoustic presentation. CONCLUSION: When speech audibility is ensured, comprehension-related electrophysiological responses appear intact in individuals with mild-to-moderate SNHL, regardless of prior experience with amplified sound. Further research into the effects of audibility versus acclimatisation-related neurophysiological changes is warranted.

Impact of hearing aid technology level at first-fit on self-reported outcomes in patients with presbycusis: a randomized controlled trial.

To provide clinical guidance in hearing aid prescription for older adults with presbycusis, we investigated differences in self-reported hearing abilities and hearing aid effectiveness for premium or basic hearing aid users. Secondly, as an explorative analysis, we investigated if differences in gain prescription verified with real-ear measurements explain differences in self-reported outcomes. The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial in which the patients were blinded towards the purpose of the study. In total, 190 first-time hearing aid users (>60 years of age) with symmetric bilateral presbycusis were fitted with either a premium or basic hearing aid. The randomization was stratified on age, sex, and word recognition score. Two outcome questionnaires were distributed: the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) and the short form of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ-12). In addition, insertion gains were calculated from real-ear measurements at first-fit for all fitted hearing aids. Premium hearing aid users reported 0.7 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.1) scale points higher total SSQ-12 score per item and 0.8 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.4) scale points higher speech score per item, as well as 0.6 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.1) scale points higher qualities score compared to basic-feature hearing aid users. No significant differences in reported hearing aid effectiveness were found using the IOI-HA. Differences in the prescribed gain at 1 and 2 kHz were observed between premium and basic hearing aids within each company. Premium-feature devices yielded slightly better self-reported hearing abilities than basic-feature devices, but a statistically significant difference was only found in three out of seven outcome variables, and the effect was small. The generalizability of the study is limited to community-dwelling older adults with presbycusis. Thus, further research is needed for understanding the potential effects of hearing aid technology for other populations. Hearing care providers should continue to insist on research to support the choice of more costly premium technologies when prescribing hearing aids for older adults with presbycusis. Clinical Trial Registration: https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT04539847.

Semantic Context Can Mask Intelligibility Declines at Above-Conversational Speech Levels in Normal-Hearing Listeners.

PURPOSE: While speech audibility generally improves with increasing level, declines in intelligibility are inconsistently observed at above-conversational levels, even in listeners with normal audiograms (NAs). The inconsistent findings could be due to different types of speech materials, ranging from monosyllabic words to everyday sentences, used across studies. Here, we hypothesized that semantic context can "mask" intelligibility declines at high levels by constraining plausible response options. METHOD: Intelligibility was assessed in speech-shaped noise with monosyllabic words, sentences without semantic context, and sentences with semantic context. Two presentation levels were used: 80 and 95 dB SPL broadband. Bandpass filtering was applied to minimize upward spread of masking. Twenty-two young adults with NAs were tested. RESULTS: Poorer performance at the higher level was found with the monosyllabic words and context-free sentences but not with the context-rich sentences. The scores obtained at the higher level with the two context-free materials were strongly correlated. The correlation was independent of the lower-level scores, suggesting that the high-level performance declines reflect "normal" auditory functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Young adults with NAs show intelligibility decreases at above-conversational levels when tested with speech materials without semantic context. Top-down processing as facilitated by context information can mask such declines.

Predicting Aided Outcome With Aided Word Recognition Scores Measured With Linear Amplification at Above-conversational Levels.

OBJECTIVES: Many hearing aid (HA) users receive limited benefit from amplification, especially when trying to understand speech in noise, and they often report hearing-related residual activity limitations. Current HA fitting strategies are typically based on pure-tone hearing thresholds only, even though suprathreshold factors have been linked to aided outcomes. Furthermore, clinical measures of speech perception such as word recognition scores (WRSs) are performed without frequency-specific amplification, likely resulting in suboptimal speech audibility and thus inaccurate estimates of suprathreshold hearing abilities. Corresponding measures with frequency-specific amplification ("aided") would likely improve such estimates and enable more accurate aided outcome prediction. Here, we investigated potential links between either unaided WRSs or aided WRSs measured at several above-conversational levels and two established HA outcome measures: The Hearing-In-Noise Test (HINT) and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA). DESIGN: Thirty-seven older individuals with bilateral hearing impairments participated. Two conditions were tested: unaided and aided, with all stimuli presented over headphones. In the unaided condition, the most comfortable level (MCL) for the presented speech stimuli, WRS at MCL+10 dB as well as uncomfortable levels (UCLs) for narrowband noise stimuli were measured. In the aided condition, all stimuli were individually amplified according to the "National Acoustic Laboratories-Revised, Profound" fitting rule. Aided WRSs were then measured using an Interacoustics Affinity system at three above-conversational levels, allowing for the maximum aided WRS as well as the presence of "rollover" in the performance-intensity function to be estimated. Multivariate data analyses were performed to examine the relations between the HINT (measured using a simulated HA with the NAL-RP amplification) or IOI-HA scores (for the participants' own HAs) and various potential predictors (age, pure-tone average hearing loss, unaided WRS, aided WRS, rollover presence [ROp], and UCL). RESULTS: Aided WRSs predicted the HINT scores better than any other predictor and were also the only significant predictor of the IOI-HA scores. In addition, UCL and ROp in the aided WRSs were significant predictors of the HINT scores and competed for variance in the statistical models. Neither age nor pure-tone average hearing loss could predict the two aided outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Aided WRSs can predict HA outcome more effectively than unaided WRSs, age or pure-tone audiometry and could be relatively easily implemented in clinical settings. More research is necessary to better understand the relations between ROp, UCL and speech recognition at above-conversational levels.