Cover Image
QR Code

A daily alternating method for comparing different signal-processing strategies in hearing aids and in cochlear implants.

Background: Although we always want to select the best signal-processing strategy for our hearing aid and cochlear-implant patients, no efficient and valid procedure is available. Comparisons in the office are without listening experience, and short-term take-home trials are likely influenced by the...

Full description

Published in:Journal of the American Academy of Audiology Vol. 19; no. 5; pp. 443 - 455
Main Authors: Tyler RS, Witt SA, Dunn CC, Perreau AE
Format: questionnaire/scale research tables/charts Journal Article
Published: Thieme Medical Publishing Inc. May2008
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=105615953&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 105615953
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        10500545
        9OC
      jtl: Journal of the American Academy of Audiology
      issn: 10500545
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: May2008
      vid: 19
      iid: 5
      pid: 2811
      pub: Thieme Medical Publishing Inc.
      place: New York, New York
    artinfo:
      ui:
        105615953
        35966102
        2010155558
        10.3766/jaaa.19.5.7
        NLM19253815
        105615953
      ppf: 443
      ppct: 12
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
      tig:
        atl: A daily alternating method for comparing different signal-processing strategies in hearing aids and in cochlear implants.
      aug:
        au:
          Tyler RS
          Witt SA
          Dunn CC
          Perreau AE
        affil: Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Iowa, 200 Hawkins Drive, PFP 21167, Iowa City, IA 52242-1078; rich-tyler@uiowa.edu
      sug:
        subj:
          Cochlear Implant
          Hearing Aid Fitting Methods
          Rehabilitation of Persons with Hearing Loss
          Signal Processing, Computer Assisted
          Adult
          Aged
          Aged, 80 and Over
          Algorithms
          Comparative Studies
          Daily Logs
          Female
          Funding Source
          Male
          Middle Age
          Paired T-Tests
          Pretest-Posttest Design
          Questionnaires
          Scales
          Sound Localization Evaluation
          Speech Discrimination Tests
          Task Performance and Analysis
          Human
          Adult: 19-44 years
          Aged: 65+ years
          Aged, 80 & over
          Middle Aged: 45-64 years
          Female
          Male
      ab: Background: Although we always want to select the best signal-processing strategy for our hearing aid and cochlear-implant patients, no efficient and valid procedure is available. Comparisons in the office are without listening experience, and short-term take-home trials are likely influenced by the order of strategies tried. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate a new procedure for comparing signal-processing strategies whereby patients listen with one strategy one day and another strategy the next day. They continue this daily comparison for several weeks. We determined (1) if differences existed between strategies without prior listening experience and (2) if performance differences (or lack there of) obtained at the first listening experience are consistent with performance after two to three months of alternating between strategies on a daily basis (equal listening experience). Research Design: Eight subjects were tested pretrial with a vowel, sentence, and spondee recognition test, a localization task, and a quality rating test. They were required to listen to one of two different signal processing strategies alternating between strategies on a daily basis. After one to three months of listening, subjects returned for follow-up testing. Additionally, subjects were asked to make daily ratings and comments in a diary. Results: Pre-trial (no previous listening experience), a clear trend favoring one strategy was observed in four subjects. Four other subjects showed no clear advantage. Post-trial (after alternating daily between strategies), of the four subjects who showed a clear advantage for one signal processing strategy, only one subject showed that same advantage. One subject ended up with an advantage for the other strategy. Post-trial, of the four subjects who showed no advantage for a particular signal processing strategy, three did show an advantage for one strategy over the other. Conclusion: Patients are willing to alternate between signal processing strategies on a daily basis for up to three months in an attempt to determine their optimal strategy. Although some patients showed superior performance with initial fittings (and some did not), the results of pre-trial comparison did not always persist after having equal listening experience. We recommend this daily alternating listening technique when there is interest in determining optimal performance among different signal processing strategies when fitting hearing aids or cochlear implants.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        questionnaire/scale
        research
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N