Acceptability of Binaural Hearing Aids: A Cross-Over Study

Stephens, S. D. G.; Callaghan, D. E.; Hogan, Sarah; Meredith, R.; Rayment, A.; Davis, Adrian

doi:10.1177/014107689108400508

Cited by 26 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different methods to quantify use may lead to the different results. Studies with smaller sample sizes and a cross-over design have reported subjective preference of bilateral amplification after subjects had tried both bilateral and unilateral amplification for some time (Erdman and Sedge, 1981;Stephens et al, 1991). The responses to our survey also represent subjective outcome ratings of hearing aid provision.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The possible benefits of bilateral fitting include better speech understanding (Kobler and Rosenhall, 2002;Moore et al, 1992), in particular in noisy environments (Dreschler and Boymans, 1994;Leeuw and Dreschler, 1991;Nabelek and Mason, 1981), better sound quality (Balfour and Hawkins, 1992;Erdman and Sedge, 1981), better sound localization (Byrne et al, 1992;Dreschler and Boymans, 1994;Kobler and Rosenhall, 2002;Punch et al, 1991;Stephens et al, 1991), and improved perception of distance and movement (Noble and Gatehouse, 2006 …”

Section: Bilateral Versus Unilateral Fittingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Survey on hearing aid outcome in Switzerland: Associations with type of fitting (bilateral/unilateral), level of hearing aid signal processing, and hearing loss

Bertoli

Bodmer

Probst

2010

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present investigation further analysed results of a previously reported survey with a large sample of hearing aid owners (Bertoli et al, 2009) to determine the individual and technological factors related to hearing aid outcome. In particular the associations of hearing loss, level of signal processing, and fitting type (bilateral versus unilateral fitting) with hearing aid use, satisfaction with and management of the aid were evaluated. A sub-group with symmetrical hearing loss was analysed (n = 6027). Regular use was more frequent in bilateral users and in owners of devices with more complex signal processing, but the strongest determinant of regular use was severity of hearing loss. Satisfaction was higher in the group wearing simple devices, while fitting type and degree of hearing loss had no influence on satisfaction rates. Moderate and severe hearing loss was associated more frequently with poor management of the aid than mild hearing loss. It was concluded that bilateral amplification and advanced signal processing features may contribute to successful hearing aid fitting, but the resulting differences must be considered to be relatively small. AbstractThe present investigation further analyzed results of a previously reported survey with a large sample of hearing aid owners (Bertoli et al, 2009) to determine the individual and technological factors related to hearing aid outcome. In particular the associations of hearing loss, level of signal processing, and fitting type (bilateral versus unilateral fitting) with hearing aid use, satisfaction with and management of the aid were evaluated. A sub-group with symmetrical hearing loss was analyzed (n=6027). Regular use was more frequent in bilateral users and in owners of devices with more complex signal processing, but the strongest determinant of regular use was severity of hearing loss. Satisfaction was higher in the group wearing simple devices, while fitting type and degree of hearing loss had no influence on satisfaction rates. Moderate and severe hearing loss was associated more frequently with poor management of the aid than mild hearing loss. It was concluded that bilateral amplification and advanced signal processing features may contribute to successful hearing aid fitting, but the resulting differences must be considered to be relatively small.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Bilateral Versus Unilateral Fittingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey on hearing aid outcome in Switzerland: Associations with type of fitting (bilateral/unilateral), level of hearing aid signal processing, and hearing loss

Bertoli

Bodmer

Probst

2010

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In one study, only frequent users of HAs experienced better localization ability with two HAs (Chung & Stephens, 1986). Another study, comparing users of bilateral ampli cation with users of unilateral ampli cation, reported improved localization ability only for the bilateral group (Stephens et al, 1991). In connection with a study on strategies for tting bilateral HAs, this nding was supported (Puch et al 1991).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Bilateral hearing aids - effects and consequences from a user perspective

Köjbler¹,

Rosenhall

Hansson

2001

Scandinavian Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study assesses the experiences with bilateral amplification in a group of 144 people provided with two hearing aids between May 1994 and July 1997. Two-thirds of the participants preferred to use both prescribed hearing aids. The participants reported that they used their hearing aids frequently. Bilateral amplification was appreciated especially for recognizing speech, for sound localization and for superior sound quality. Situations in which the subjects showed the highest appreciation of two hearing aids were when attending lectures and theatre performances and for communication in noisy background situations. There were statistically significant differences between users of bilateral and unilateral hearing aids regarding judgement of sound quality of hearing aid processed signals and localization ability in favour of bilateral hearing aid amplification. The self-assessed advantages of bilateral amplification demonstrated in this study should motivate a generous prescription strategy of two hearing aids.

show abstract

“…Although their research is focused on bilateral fitting strategies, they found that localization with bilateral hearing aids was significantly superior to localization with unilateral hearing aids. Besides this objective advantage, Stephens et al (1991) found that an improvement of localization was one of the reasons for people to choose for two hearing aids. Dreschler and Boymans (1994) tested localization ability with one and two hearing aids in the same subjects.…”

Section: Horizontal Localizationmentioning

confidence: 99%