Influence of Age on Speech Recognition in Noise and Hearing Effort in Listeners with Age-Related Hearing Loss

Abstract

The aim of this study was to measure how age affects the speech recognition threshold (SRT50) of the Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA) and the listening effort at the corresponding signal-to-noise ratio (SNRcut). The study also investigated the effect of the spatial configuration of sound sources and noise signals on SRT50 and SNRcut. To achieve this goal, the study used olnoise and icra5 noise presented from one or more spatial locations from the front and back. Ninety-nine participants with age-related hearing loss in the 18–80 years age range, specifically in the 18–30, 31–40, 41–50, 51–60, 61–70, and 71–80 age groups, participated in this study. Speech recognition and listening effort in noise were measured and compared between the different age groups, different spatial sound configurations and noise signals. Speech recognition in noise decreased with age and became significant from the age group of 50–51. The decrease in SRT50 with age was greater for icra5 noise than for olnoise. For all age groups, SRT50 and SNRcut were better for icra5 noise than for olnoise. The measured age-related reference data for SRT50 and SNRcut can be used in further studies in listeners with age-related hearing loss and hearing aid or implant users.

Enhancing Cochlear Implant Outcomes across Age Groups: The Interplay of Forward Focus and Advanced Combination Encoder Coding Strategies in Noisy Conditions

“…The increased number of ACE maxima improved the SRT50 in the S0N0 condition from −1.6 dB SNR (SD: 8.1) to −2.7 dB SNR (SD: 7.4) (p = 0.033), but not in the other spatial conditions. The effect of FF on the SRT 50 is shown in Figure 3, together with reference data of normal-hearing listeners [32]. FF improved the SRT 50 in the S 0 N rear condition from −4.0 dB SNR (SD: 5.5) to −9.1 dB SNR (SD: 3.4) (p < 0.001), but not in the other spatial conditions.…”

“…The effect of FF on the SRT 50 is shown in Figure 3 , together with reference data of normal-hearing listeners [ 32 ]. FF improved the SRT 50 in the S 0 N rear condition from −4.0 dB SNR (SD: 5.5) to −9.1 dB SNR (SD: 3.4) ( p < 0.001), but not in the other spatial conditions.…”

“…Hey et al [ 41 ] recently revealed that a stationary noise cannot replace interfering signals if used in speech audiometry. The results of our study are based on the recommended icra5 noise [ 22 , 47 ] and can thus contribute to the standardization of clinical measurements, especially in comparison with the recently published data of normal-hearing subjects [ 32 ].…”

“…Our groups, however, were not matched with respect to these factors. Age-dependent listening effort based on cognitive changes should also have affected the normal-hearing reference group of Rahne et al [ 32 ]. However, these data show an age effect only on speech recognition in noise but not on listening effort.…”

“…This study aimed to evaluate the effects of FF and number of ACE maxima on speech recognition and listening effort in spatial conditions when fluctuating noise is presented from the front or the back. A younger group and an older group of CI users were included and compared to age-matched reference data of normal-hearing listeners [ 32 ]. We hypothesized that an increased number of ACE maxima would increase the spectral information of the CIs and therefore could reduce listening effort in noise and that the increased SNR by using FF would reduce listening effort in noise as well.…”