A double-blind, randomized controlled trial exploring the efficacy of frequency lowering hearing aids in patients with high-frequency hearing loss

Yakunina, Natalia; Nam, Eui-Cheol

doi:10.1016/j.anl.2020.08.021

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Cochrane's tools, the risk of bias evaluation of randomized clinical trials indicated that they were at low risk of bias as each domain of Cochrane's tools was at low risk [31] (Figure 2). NHLB assessed the remaining studies' quality assessments [26][27][28][29][30].…”

Section: Results Of Risk Of Bias Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…WRS in noise outcome was reported by four studies [26,27,30,31]. The overall mean difference proves that WRS in noise was higher after the hearing aid than before (MD=18.32 [3.08, 33.55], p=0.02).…”

Section: Word Recognition Score In Noisementioning

confidence: 85%

“…Figure 1 shows PRISMA flow chart of our literature search process. A total of six trials [26][27][28][29][30][31] were involved in our metaanalysis. Our meta-analysis involved 96 hearing-loss patients requiring hearing aid devices.…”

Section: Summary Of Involved Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five studies [27][28][29][30][31] reported SRT outcome. The overall mean difference revealed that SRT after the hearing aid was lower than before (MD=19.15 [12.54, 25.75], p˂0.0001).…”

Section: Speech Recognition Thresholdsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Speech perception and parameters of speech audiometry after hearing aid: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Suatbayeva,

Toguzbayeva,

Taukeleva

et al. 2024

ELECTRON J GEN MED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: One of the greatest difficulties of the hearing impaired is understanding speech, especially in the presence of competitive noise. Speech perception issues are a common difficulty for those who have hearing loss. Poor speech perception is the most frequent cause of seeking hearing treatment. The most extensively used treatment to enhance speech perception is hearing aids or other assistive devices. Aim: To evaluate the effect of hearing aid methods on the speech perception of patients with hearing loss. Methods: We conducted our study based on PRISMA recommendations and guidelines. We searched Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for relevant clinical trials and prospective observational studies. Clinical trials were assessed according to Cochrane’s risk of bias tool, while observational studies were evaluated according to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. We involved the following outcomes: speech recognition thresholds, word recognition score (WRS) in noise, and WRS in quiet. Results: Six studies met the eligibility criteria for our meta-analysis. We found that hearing aids can cause an increase in WRS in noise (mean difference [MD]=18.32 [3.08, 33.55], p=0.02) and WRS in quiet (MD=45.13 [7.79, 82.46], p=0.02). In addition, hearing aids lead to a decrease in speech recognition thresholds (MD=45.13 [7.79, 82.46], p=0.02). Conclusions: Hearing aids are an effective treatment for patients with hearing loss. They can significantly improve speech perception (WRS) in quiet and noisy environments and provide other benefits, such as improved communication, increased safety, and better cognitive function. If you or someone you know has hearing loss, it is essential to speak with a healthcare professional about the benefits of using hearing aids.

show abstract

Section: Results Of Risk Of Bias Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Word Recognition Score In Noisementioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Summary Of Involved Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five studies [27][28][29][30][31] reported SRT outcome. The overall mean difference revealed that SRT after the hearing aid was lower than before (MD=19.15 [12.54, 25.75], p˂0.0001).…”

Section: Speech Recognition Thresholdsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Speech perception and parameters of speech audiometry after hearing aid: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Suatbayeva,

Toguzbayeva,

Taukeleva

et al. 2024

ELECTRON J GEN MED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hearing aid companies started offering frequency lowering in 2006 ( Alexander, 2016 ). Early algorithms caused distortion by overlaying higher frequency spectral bands on lower frequency bands and were relatively ineffective at improving perception of AO sentences in quiet or in noise ( Alexander, 2013 ; Bruno et al, 2021 ; Miller et al, 2016 ; Yakunina & Nam, 2021 ). Some frequency compression algorithms appear to be more effective in quiet ( Alexander & Rallapalli, 2017 ) and others in noise for some users but not everyone ( Bohnert et al, 2010 ; Hopkins et al, 2014 ; Shehorn et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Contributions From Visual Perceptual Learning Research For S...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lipreading: A Review of Its Continuing Importance for Speech Recognition With an Acquired Hearing Loss and Possibilities for Effective Training

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The goal of this review article is to reinvigorate interest in lipreading and lipreading training for adults with acquired hearing loss. Most adults benefit from being able to see the talker when speech is degraded; however, the effect size is related to their lipreading ability, which is typically poor in adults who have experienced normal hearing through most of their lives. Lipreading training has been viewed as a possible avenue for rehabilitation of adults with an acquired hearing loss, but most training approaches have not been particularly successful. Here, we describe lipreading and theoretically motivated approaches to its training, as well as examples of successful training paradigms. We discuss some extensions to auditory-only (AO) and audiovisual (AV) speech recognition. Method: Visual speech perception and word recognition are described. Traditional and contemporary views of training and perceptual learning are outlined. We focus on the roles of external and internal feedback and the training task in perceptual learning, and we describe results of lipreading training experiments. Results: Lipreading is commonly characterized as limited to viseme perception. However, evidence demonstrates subvisemic perception of visual phonetic information. Lipreading words also relies on lexical constraints, not unlike auditory spoken word recognition. Lipreading has been shown to be difficult to improve through training, but under specific feedback and task conditions, training can be successful, and learning can generalize to untrained materials, including AV sentence stimuli in noise. The results on lipreading have implications for AO and AV training and for use of acoustically processed speech in face-to-face communication. Conclusion: Given its importance for speech recognition with a hearing loss, we suggest that the research and clinical communities integrate lipreading in their efforts to improve speech recognition in adults with acquired hearing loss.

show abstract

Factors in the Effective Use of Hearing Aids among Subjects with Age-Related Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review

Morvan,

Buisson-Savin,

Boiteux

et al. 2024

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Investigate factors contributing to the effective management of age-related hearing loss (ARHL) rehabilitation. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022374811). Articles were identified through systematic searches in the Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases in May 2024. Only articles published between January 2005 and May 2024 were included. Studies were assessed for eligibility by two independent researchers and evaluated using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool v1.4 (CCAT). Results: Of the 278 articles identified, 54 were included. Three factors explain effective HA use. First, hearing aid signal processing, with directional microphones and noise reduction, improves user comfort and understanding regarding noise. Second, there is hearing aid fitting, with the NAL prescription rules as the gold standard, and bilateral, high-level HA performance for spatial localization and noise comprehension. Third, there is a patient-centered approach, using patient-related outcome measures (PROMs), questionnaires, counseling, and regular follow-up to involve patients in their therapeutic rehabilitation. Conclusions: Reaching a consensus on acoustic parameters is challenging due to variability in audiological results. Involving patients in their rehabilitation, addressing their needs and expectations, and offering individualized care are crucial.

show abstract

A double-blind, randomized controlled trial exploring the efficacy of frequency lowering hearing aids in patients with high-frequency hearing loss

Cited by 3 publications

References 19 publications

Speech perception and parameters of speech audiometry after hearing aid: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Speech perception and parameters of speech audiometry after hearing aid: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Lipreading: A Review of Its Continuing Importance for Speech Recognition With an Acquired Hearing Loss and Possibilities for Effective Training

Factors in the Effective Use of Hearing Aids among Subjects with Age-Related Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About