Assessment of speech recognition abilities in quiet and in noise: a comparison between self-administered home testing and testing in the clinic for adult cochlear implant users

Abstract

Self speech recognition tests in quiet and noise at home are compared to the standard tests performed in the clinic. Potential effects of stimuli presentation modes (loudspeaker or audio cable) and assessment (clinician or self-assessment at home) on test results were investigated. Speech recognition in quiet was assessed using the standard Dutch test with monosyllabic words. Speech recognition in noise was assessed with the digits-in-noise test. Sixteen experienced CI users (aged between 44 and 83 years) participated. No significant difference was observed in speech recognition in quiet between and presentation modes. Speech recognition in noise was significantly better with the audio cable than with the loudspeaker. There was no significant difference in speech recognition in quiet at 65 dB and in speech recognition in noise between self-assessment at home and testing in the clinic. At 55 dB, speech recognition assessed at home was slightly but significantly better than that assessed in the clinic. The results demonstrate that it is feasible for experienced CI users to perform self-administered speech recognition tests at home. Self-assessment by CI users of speech recognition in quiet and noise within the home environment could serve as an alternative to the tests performed in the clinic.

Reward enhances online participants’ engagement with a demanding auditory task

“…Similar considerations may apply to certain online testing situations. For example, participants in remote clinical assessments are likely to be highly intrinsically motivated to do their best, as revealed by studies reporting similar results between testing in the clinic and at home (de Graaff, Huysmans, Merkus, Theo Goverts, & Smits, 2018; Whitton, Hancock, Shannon, & Polley, 2016). However in many cases, online participants are unsupervised and anonymous, and often mainly motivated by financial incentives (Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011; Litman, Robinson, & Rosenzweig, 2015).…”

Teleaudiologia: a contribuição do acesso remoto nos casos de implante coclear – uma revisão sistemática

“…Ao comparar dados estatísticos dos testes de reconhecimento de fala no silêncio e no ruído em ambiente presencial e remoto, não foi observada diferença entre as condições no silêncio e no ruído. E, ao verificar os resultados de fala no ruído, pontuações melhores foram obtidas via teleconsulta, porém, sem diferença estátistica 25 .…”

“…Quanto às experiências dos usuários, a maioria 16,25,28 referiu bons resultados: facilidade e viabilidade ao ligar e iniciar o aplicativo para execução dos testes, mesmo não sendo proficientes com o uso de computador e/ou tablet, por exemplo. Os pais indicaram que 82% usariam a teleconsulta para programação de IC, se a opção fosse disponível 17 , enquanto 100% dos cuidadores utilizariam 19 .…”

FreeHear: A New Sound-Field Speech-in-Babble Hearing Assessment Tool

“…Other studies have used a free-field DIN to study performance of severe to profoundly hearing impaired users of cochlear implants (de Graaff et al., 2018; Kaandorp et al., 2017). These studies have focused on comparisons between different speech-in-noise testing, but they have validated the reliability of free-field delivery of the DIN.…”

“…A second motivation was that caregivers and other family often gain insight to the plight of their loved ones by seeing and hearing the sort of challenges someone with hearing-impairment experiences. The new test (FreeHear 1 ) uses sound-field presentation of a digits-in-noise (DIN) task requiring the listener to repeat sequences of three digits presented along with multitalker babble masker from loudspeakers around the listener’s head (Figure 1; de Graaff, Huysmans, Merkus, Theo Goverts, & Smits, 2018; Smits, Kapteyn, & Houtgast, 2004). It is designed to be as simple as possible to perform, administer, and interpret.…”