scholarly journals Analysis of the results of hearing aids fitting using the questionnaire «Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile»

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-33
Author(s):  
L. E. Golooanooa ◽  
E. V. Zhiunskaya ◽  
M. . Yu
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Hearing Aid Fitting ◽  
Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

164 patients with moderate to severe ehronie bilateral sensorineural hearing loss were asked to fill in the Glasgow hearing aid benefit profile. Its usefulness was showed in eases of diffieult hearing aid fitting.

scholarly journals Investigating the Impact of Hearing Aid Use and Auditory Training on Cognition, Depressive Symptoms, and Social Interaction in Adults With Hearing Loss: Protocol for a Crossover Trial (Preprint)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Nkyekyer ◽  
Denny Meyer ◽  
Peter J Blamey ◽  
Andrew Pipingas ◽  
Sunil Bhar
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Social Interaction ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Hearing Aid Use

BACKGROUND Sensorineural hearing loss is the most common sensory deficit among older adults. Some of the psychosocial consequences of this condition include difficulty in understanding speech, depression, and social isolation. Studies have shown that older adults with hearing loss show some age-related cognitive decline. Hearing aids have been proven as successful interventions to alleviate sensorineural hearing loss. In addition to hearing aid use, the positive effects of auditory training—formal listening activities designed to optimize speech perception—are now being documented among adults with hearing loss who use hearing aids, especially new hearing aid users. Auditory training has also been shown to produce prolonged cognitive performance improvements. However, there is still little evidence to support the benefits of simultaneous hearing aid use and individualized face-to-face auditory training on cognitive performance in adults with hearing loss. OBJECTIVE This study will investigate whether using hearing aids for the first time will improve the impact of individualized face-to-face auditory training on cognition, depression, and social interaction for adults with sensorineural hearing loss. The rationale for this study is based on the hypothesis that, in adults with sensorineural hearing loss, using hearing aids for the first time in combination with individualized face-to-face auditory training will be more effective for improving cognition, depressive symptoms, and social interaction rather than auditory training on its own. METHODS This is a crossover trial targeting 40 men and women between 50 and 90 years of age with either mild or moderate symmetric sensorineural hearing loss. Consented, willing participants will be recruited from either an independent living accommodation or via a community database to undergo a 6-month intensive face-to-face auditory training program (active control). Participants will be assigned in random order to receive hearing aid (intervention) for either the first 3 or last 3 months of the 6-month auditory training program. Each participant will be tested at baseline, 3, and 6 months using a neuropsychological battery of computer-based cognitive assessments, together with a depression symptom instrument and a social interaction measure. The primary outcome will be cognitive performance with regard to spatial working memory. Secondary outcome measures include other cognition performance measures, depressive symptoms, social interaction, and hearing satisfaction. RESULTS Data analysis is currently under way and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in June 2018. CONCLUSIONS Results from the study will inform strategies for aural rehabilitation, hearing aid delivery, and future hearing loss intervention trials. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03112850; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03112850 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6xz12fD0B).

scholarly journals The use of speech sentence audiometry in a free sound field

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-39
Author(s):  
Mariya Yu. Boboshko ◽  
Irina P. Berdnikova ◽  
Natalya V. Maltzeva
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Normative Data ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Field ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Objectives -to determine the normative data of sentence speech intelligibility in a free sound field and to estimate the applicability of the Russian Matrix Sentence test (RuMatrix) for assessment of the hearing aid fitting benefit. Material and methods. 10 people with normal hearing and 28 users of hearing aids with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing loss were involved in the study. RuMatrix test both in quiet and in noise was performed in a free sound field. All patients filled in the COSI questionnaire. Results. The hearing impaired patients were divided into two subgroups: the 1st with high and the 2nd with low hearing aid benefit, according to the COSI questionnaire. In the 1st subgroup, the threshold for the sentence intelligibility in quiet was 34.9 ± 6.4 dB SPL, and in noise -3.3 ± 1.4 dB SNR, in the 2nd subgroup 41.7 ± 11.5 dB SPL and 0.15 ± 3.45 dB SNR, respectively. The significant difference between the data of both subgroups and the norm was registered (p

Evaluation of Hardwire Personal Assistive Listening Devices

1994 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
James J. Dempsey ◽  
Mark Ross
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Frequency Responses ◽  
Subjective Evaluations ◽  
Potential Benefits

A large number of personal amplifiers have recently become available commercially. These devices have not been classified as hearing aids by the FDA and are therefore not subject to the FDA rules and regulations governing the sales of hearing aid devices. In this investigation, several of these personal amplifiers were evaluated to determine potential benefits and problems for each device. The devices were evaluated electroacoustically and, also, subjectively by a group of adults with sensorineural hearing loss. The results of the electroacoustic evaluation revealed very sharply peaked frequency responses. The subjective evaluations revealed tremendous variability, with some preferences for power and low-frequency amplification. Clinical implications of these results and suggestions for further research are provided.

Current indications for cochlear implantation in adults and children

2019 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Witold Szyfter ◽  
Michał Karlik ◽  
Alicja Sekula ◽  
Simon Harris ◽  
Wojciech Gawęcki
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Pure Tone Audiometry ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Unilateral Deafness ◽  
Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Asymmetric Hearing Loss

Introduction: Surgical treatment of deafness by cochlear implants is used for more than 40 years, and during this period permanently, gradual and significant expansion of indications for this surgery has been observed. Material and methods: In our Department in the years 1994-2018 1480 cochlear implantations were performed, both in adults (647) and in children (883). In this study current indications and the rules for eligibility of patients based on 25 years of experience are presented. Results: Indications for cochlear implantation in adults are: 1) bilateral postlingual deafness, 2) bilateral sensorineural hearing loss - in pure tone audiometry > 70 dB HL (average 500-4000 Hz) and in speech audiometry in hearing aids understanding < 50% of words for the intensity of the stimulus 65 dB, in the absence of the benefits of hearing aids, 3) bilateral profound hearing loss for high frequency with good hearing for low frequency, in the absence of the benefits of hearing aids, 4) some cases of asymmetric hearing loss with intensive tinnitus in the deaf ear. An indication in children is bilateral sensorineural hearing loss > 80dB HL confirmed by hearing tests, after about 6 months of rehabilitation with the use of hearing aids. Discussion: Although cochlear implantation is used for more than 40 years, the indications for this treatment underlies constant modifications. They concern the age of eligible patients, implantation in patients with partially preserved hearing, as well as treatment for patients with difficult anatomical conditions. In many countries, bilateral implantations are commonly performed, and more and more centers recommend this treatment in the case of unilateral deafness or asymmetric hearing loss, especially with the accompanying tinnitus in the deaf ear.

Bone-anchored hearing aids and unilateral sensorineural hearing loss: why do patients reject them?

2015 ◽  
Vol 129 (4) ◽  
pp. 321-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
D Siau ◽  
B Dhillon ◽  
R Andrews ◽  
K M J Green
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Uptake Rate ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Sensorineural Deafness ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Device Implantation ◽  
Bone Anchored Hearing Aid

AbstractObjectives:This study aimed to report the bone-anchored hearing aid uptake and the reasons for their rejection by unilateral sensorineural deafness patients.Methods:A retrospective review of 90 consecutive unilateral sensorineural deafness patients referred to the Greater Manchester Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid Programme between September 2008 and August 2011 was performed.Results:In all, 79 (87.8 per cent) were deemed audiologically suitable: 24 (30.3 per cent) eventually had a bone-anchored hearing aid implanted and 55 (69.6 per cent) patients declined. Of those who declined, 26 (47.3 per cent) cited perceived limited benefits, 18 (32.7 per cent) cited reservations regarding surgery, 13 (23.6 per cent) preferred a wireless contralateral routing of sound device and 12 (21.8 per cent) cited cosmetic reasons. In all, 32 (40.5 per cent) suitable patients eventually chose the wireless contralateral routing of sound device.Conclusion:The uptake rate was 30 per cent for audiologically suitable patients. Almost half of suitable patients did not perceive a sufficient benefit to proceed to device implantation and a significant proportion rejected it. It is therefore important that clinicians do not to rush to implant all unilateral sensorineural hearing loss patients with a bone-anchored hearing aid.

Pediatric Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss: Minimum Test Battery and Referral Criteria for Cochlear Implant Candidacy Evaluation

2021 ◽  
pp. 019459982110273
Author(s):  
Samantha Anne ◽  
Kevin D. Brown ◽  
Donald M. Goldberg ◽  
Oliver F. Adunka ◽  
Margaret Kenna ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Speech And Language ◽  
Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Speech And Language Development

Among the various cochlear implant systems approved by the Food and Drug Administration, current labeling for pediatric usage encompasses (1) bilateral profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss in children aged 9 to 24 months and bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss in children older than 2 years; (2) use of appropriately fitted hearing aids for 3 months (this can be waived if there is evidence of ossification); and (3) demonstration of limited progress with auditory, speech, and language development. Pediatric guidelines require children to have significantly worse speech understanding before qualifying for cochlear implantation. The early years of life have been shown to be critical for speech and language development, and auditory deprivation is especially detrimental during this crucial time. Level of evidence: 2.

Prescriptive Amplification Recommendations for Hearing Losses with a Conductive Component and Their Impact on the Required Maximum Power Output: An Update with Accompanying Clinical Explanation

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (06) ◽  
pp. 452-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Earl E. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Compression Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Power Output ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Maximum Power Output ◽  
Conductive Component

Background: Hearing aid prescriptive recommendations for hearing losses having a conductive component have received less clinical and research interest than for losses of a sensorineural nature; as a result, much variation remains among current prescriptive methods in their recommendations for conductive and mixed hearing losses (Johnson and Dillon, 2011). Purpose: The primary intent of this brief clinical note is to demonstrate differences between two algebraically equivalent expressions of hearing loss, which have been approaches used historically to generate a prescription for hearing losses with a conductive component. When air and bone conduction thresholds are entered into hearing aid prescriptions designed for nonlinear hearing aids, it was hypothesized that that two expressions would not yield equivalent amounts of prescribed insertion gain and output. These differences are examined for their impact on the maximum power output (MPO) requirements of the hearing aid. Subsequently, the MPO capabilities of two common behind-the-ear (BTE) receiver placement alternatives, receiver-in-aid (RIA) and receiver-in-canal (RIC), are examined. Study Samples: The two expressions of hearing losses examined were the 25% ABG + AC approach and the 75% ABG + BC approach, where ABG refers to air-bone gap, AC refers to air-conduction threshold, and BC refers to bone-conduction threshold. Example hearing loss cases with a conductive component are sampled for calculations. The MPO capabilities of the BTE receiver placements in commercially-available products were obtained from hearing aids on the U.S. federal purchasing contract. Results: Prescribed gain and the required MPO differs markedly between the two approaches. The 75% ABG + BC approach prescribes a compression ratio that is reflective of the amount of sensorineural hearing loss. Not all hearing aids will have the MPO capabilities to support the output requirements for fitting hearing losses with a large conductive component particularly when combined with significant sensorineural hearing loss. Generally, current RIA BTE products have greater output capabilities than RIC BTE products. Conclusions: The 75% ABG + BC approach is more appropriate than the 25% ABG + AC approach because the latter approach inappropriately uses AC thresholds as the basis for determining the compression ratio. That is, for hearing losses with a conductive component, the AC thresholds are not a measure of sensorineural hearing loss and cannot serve as the basis for determining the amount of desired compression. The Australian National Acoustic Laboratories has been using the 75% ABG + BC approach in lieu of the 25% ABG + AC approach since its release of the National Acoustic Laboratories—Non-linear 1 (NAL-NL1) prescriptive method in 1999. Future research may examine whether individuals with conductive hearing loss benefit or prefer more than 75% restoration of the conductive component provided adequate MPO capabilities to support such restoration.

scholarly journals Hearing Aids as a Treatment for Tinnitus Patients with Slight to Mild Sensorineural Hearing Loss

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (02) ◽  
pp. 123-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carole Johnson ◽  
Johnathan Baldwin ◽  
Kristen Barton ◽  
Caitlyn Mathews ◽  
Jeffrey Danhauer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing Loss ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Sensorineural Hearing ◽  
Stepwise Logistic Regression ◽  
Tinnitus Severity ◽  
Point Increase

AbstractPersons with clinically significant tinnitus also may have mild sensorineural hearing loss (MSNHL). The purpose of this study was to describe patients with tinnitus and MSNHL and factors predicting hearing-aid uptake (HAU). We conducted a retrospective chart review with regression modeling of patients presenting to a specialty tinnitus clinic over a 2.5-year period. Stepwise logistic regression on data from patient charts was conducted. Of 133 patients seen, two-thirds had MSNHL (95% confidence interval [CI]: 58.9–75.0; mean age = 53.4 years; standard deviation = 14.5); approximately 50% had severe-to-catastrophic tinnitus. Logistic regression indicated that four-frequency pure-tone average (FFPTA; left) (β = 0.3899, χ 2 = 10.96, degrees of freedom [DF] = 1, p = 0.0009) and age (β = 0.1273, χ 2 = 4.86, DF = 1, p = 0.0274) were positively associated with HAU; tinnitus severity was inversely related (β = − 1.0533, χ 2 = 4.24, DF = 1, p = 0.0395). Adjusting for key variables, odds of receiving hearing aids was 1.14 (95% CI: 1.01–1.27) times higher with every year increase in age, 1.48 (95% CI: 1.17–1.86) times higher per one point increase in FFPTA (left), and 0.35 (95% CI: 0.13–0.95) times less per one point increase in tinnitus severity score. Reasons why HAU was not high for this special sample of young adults with severe tinnitus and MSNHL are discussed; hearing aid treatment requires extensive counseling and follow-up for this population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document