Effect of Maximum Power Output and Noise Reduction on Speech Recognition in Noise

Kuk, Francis; Peeters, Heidi; Lau, Chi; Korhonen, Petri

doi:10.3766/jaaa.22.5.3

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among the features were adaptive multichannel directional microphone, adaptive noise reduction, active feedback cancellation, and data logging. The HA also had inter-ear features (Kuk, Peeters, Korhonen, & Lau, 2011b). In addition, the participants got a remote control (RC-DEX) to adjust volume or to change HA programs.…”

Section: Visit 1b: Instructional Counselingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effectiveness of the Progression of Widex Zen Tinnitus Therapy: A Pilot Study

Tyler

Deshpande

Lau³

et al. 2017

Am J Audiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Visit 1b: Instructional Counselingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effectiveness of the Progression of Widex Zen Tinnitus Therapy: A Pilot Study

Tyler

Deshpande

Lau³

et al. 2017

Am J Audiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The risks of permanent threshold changes due to amplification among children with mild to severe hearing losses appear to be small (McCreery et al, 2016). The perceptual effects of setting the MPO below prescribed levels have not been directly studied in children, but evidence from adults with hearing loss suggests that setting the MPO below prescribed levels may limit aided speech recognition in noise and reduce sound quality (Kuk et al, 2011). An MPO that is below prescribed levels may reduce audibility or increase the amount of compression that is applied to speech at lower input levels, causing reduced speech recognition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptual Implications of Level- and Frequency-Specific Deviations from Hearing Aid Prescription in Children

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The purpose of providing amplification for children with hearing loss is to make speech audible across a range of frequencies and intensities. Children with hearing aids (HAs) that closely approximate prescriptive targets have better audibility than peers with HA output below prescriptive targets. Poor aided audibility puts children with hearing loss at risk for delays in communication, social, and academic development. Purpose The goals of this study were to determine how well HAs match prescriptive targets across ranges of frequency and intensity of speech and to determine how level- and frequency-dependent deviations from prescriptive target affect speech recognition in quiet and in background noise. Study Sample One-hundred sixty-six children with permanent mild to severe hearing loss who were between 6 months and 8 years of age and who wore HAs participated in the study. Data Collection and Analysis Hearing aid verification and speech recognition data were collected as part of a longitudinal study of communication development in children with HAs. Hearing aid output at levels of soft and average speech and maximum power output were compared with each child’s prescriptive targets. The deviations from prescriptive target were quantified based on the root-mean-square (RMS) error and absolute deviation from target for octave frequencies. Children were classified into groups based on the number of level-dependent deviations from prescriptive target. Frequency-specific deviations from prescriptive target and sensation levels (SLs) were used to estimate the proximity of fittings across the frequency range. Lexical Neighborhood Test (LNT) word recognition in quiet and Computer-Assisted Speech Perception Assessment (CASPA) phoneme recognition in noise were compared across level-dependent error groups and as a function of SL at 4 kHz. Results Children who had deviations from prescriptive target at all three input levels had poorer LNT word recognition in quiet than children who had fittings that matched prescriptive target within 5 dB RMS at all three input levels. Children with lower 4 kHz SLs through their HAs had poorer LNT recognition in quiet and CASPA phoneme recognition in noise than children with higher aided SLs. Conclusions Children with HAs fitted to provide audibility for speech across a range of inputs and frequencies had better speech recognition outcomes than peers with HAs that were not optimally fitted to prescriptive targets.

show abstract

“…Amplitude compression settings were left on the Siemens default base. In addition, to control the probable effects of maximum pressure output (MPO) settings on the results [ 17 ], short, pure tones with a level of 90 dB SPL were used for both measuring and adjusting the hearing aid MPO. During all testing conditions, the other DSP algorithms such as SoundSmoothing, eWindScreen, and Feedback Stopper were inactivated.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Hearing Aid Digital Noise Reduction and Directionality on Acceptable Noise Level

Ahmadi

Jalilvand

Mahdavi

et al. 2018

Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Two main digital signal processing technologies inside the modern hearing aid to provide the best conditions for hearing aid users are directionality (DIR) and digital noise reduction (DNR) algorithms. There are various possible settings for these algorithms. The present study evaluates the effects of various DIR and DNR conditions (both separately and in combination) on listening comfort among hearing aid users.Methods In 18 participants who received hearing aid fitting services from the Rehabilitation School of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences regularly, we applied acceptable noise level (ANL) as our subjective measure of listening comfort. We evaluated both of these under six different hearing aid conditions: omnidirectional-baseline, omnidirectional-broadband DNR, omnidirectional-multichannel DNR, directional, directional-broadband DNR, and directional-multichannel DNR.Results The ANL results ranged from −3 dB to 14 dB in all conditions. The results show, among all conditions, both the omnidirectional-baseline condition and the omnidirectional-broadband DNR condition are the worst conditions for listening in noise. The DIR always reduces the amount of noise that patients received during testing. The DNR algorithm does not improve listening in noise significantly when compared with the DIR algorithms. Although both DNR and DIR algorithms yielded a lower ANL, the DIR algorithm was more effective than the DNR.Conclusion The DIR and DNR technologies provide listening comfort in the presence of noise. Thus, user benefit depends on how the digital signal processing settings inside the hearing aid are adjusted.

show abstract

Effect of Maximum Power Output and Noise Reduction on Speech Recognition in Noise

Abstract: An MPO that was 10 dB lower than the default could negatively affect the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the listening environment. However, NR could compensate for the degradation in SNR.

Cited by 14 publications

References 14 publications

The Effectiveness of the Progression of Widex Zen Tinnitus Therapy: A Pilot Study

The Effectiveness of the Progression of Widex Zen Tinnitus Therapy: A Pilot Study

Perceptual Implications of Level- and Frequency-Specific Deviations from Hearing Aid Prescription in Children

The Effects of Hearing Aid Digital Noise Reduction and Directionality on Acceptable Noise Level

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About