The Characteristics of Adults with Severe Hearing Loss

Souza, Pamela E.; Hoover, Eric C.; Blackburn, Michael; Gallun, Frederick J.

doi:10.3766/jaaa.17050

Cited by 14 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mean and standard deviation SRR thresholds for the YNH group were 4.35 (SD=1.35) cycles per octave. Thresholds were consistent with young listeners with normal pure-tone thresholds tested using the same paradigm reported previously (Souza et al, 2014). Thresholds could not be obtained for one listener in the YNH group, reducing the total number of subjects included in YNH group to eight.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

Auditory and Cognitive Factors Associated with Speech-in-Noise Complaints following Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Auditory complaints following mild traumatic brain injury are common, but few studies have addressed the role of auditory temporal processing in speech recognition complaints. Purpose In this study, deficits understanding speech in a background of speech noise following MTBI were evaluated with the goal of comparing the relative contributions of auditory and non-auditory factors. Research Design A matched-groups design was used in which a group of listeners with a history of MTBI were compared to a group matched in age and pure-tone thresholds, as well as a control group of young listeners with normal hearing. Study Sample Thirty-three listeners participated in the study, including thirteen in the MTBI group (mean age 46.7 years), eleven in the Matched group (mean age 49 years), and nine in the YNH group (mean age 20.8 years). Data Collection and Analysis Speech-in-noise deficits were evaluated using subjective measures as well as monaural word (WIN) and sentence (QuickSIN) tasks, and a binaural spatial release task. Performance on these measures was compared to psychophysical tasks evaluating monaural and binaural temporal fine structure tasks and spectral resolution. Cognitive measures of attention, processing speed, and working memory were evaluated as a possible difference between MTBI and Matched groups contributing to speech-in-noise deficits. Results A high proportion of listeners in the MTBI group reported difficulty understanding speech in noise (84%) compared to the Matched group (9.1%), and listeners who reported difficulty were more likely to have abnormal results on objective measures of speech in noise. No significant group differences were found between the MTBI and Matched listeners on any of the measures reported, but the number of abnormal tests differed across groups. Regression analysis revealed that a combination of auditory and auditory processing factors contributed to monaural speech-in-noise scores, but the benefit of spatial separation was related to a combination of working memory and peripheral auditory factors across all listeners in the study. Conclusions The results of this study are consistent with previous findings that a subset of listeners with MTBI have objective auditory deficits. Speech-in-noise performance was related to a combination of auditory and non-auditory factors, confirming the important role of audiology in MTBI rehabilitation. Further research is needed to evaluate the prevalence and causal relationship of auditory deficits following MTBI.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

Auditory and Cognitive Factors Associated with Speech-in-Noise Complaints following Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Spectral ripple assesses the highest spectral modulation rate the listener can use to discriminate a modulation phase reversal, and studies that found a relationship between spectral ripple and speech had many listeners for whom that maximum modulation rate was below 2 rpo. 3,46,48 Studies that directly compared ripple discrimination with detection at 2 rpo showed that 2 rpo thresholds-not spectral ripplepredicted speech understanding in quiet and noise for cochlear implant (CI) listeners. 53,58 Davies-Venn et al 50 evaluated spectral ripple, spectral modulation detection, and frequency selectivity using psychophysical tuning curves.…”

Section: Spectral Ripplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a recent study, 3 frequency selectivity was evaluated in listeners with severe hearing loss using a spectral ripple discrimination task. 46,48 Ripple stimuli were generated from 800 sinusoidal components logarithmically spaced between 100 and 5,000 Hz.…”

Section: Spectral Ripplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Severe hearing loss has been variously defined as loss with hearing thresholds exceeding 60 to 70 dB hearing level (HL), and profound loss as thresholds exceeding 80 to 90 dB HL. [1][2][3][4] For the purposes of this article, the focus will be listeners who have hearing loss greater than 60 dB HL across all or most of the speech frequency range (500 Hz and above), and on the psychoacoustic and perceptual abilities of this group. From an understanding of audibility and the acoustic information contained in conversational speech, it is anticipated that most listeners with severe hearing loss will be unable to carry on a conversation without some amplification, such as hearing aids or assistive devices.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The prevalence of dead regions in severe hearing loss has been variously reported as ranging from to 21 to 76%. 3,[30][31][32][33] Dead regions are expected to cause distortions in sound perception 34 when the signal is transmitted off frequency by adjacent cochlear regions with remaining hair cells. For example, some listeners with severe high-frequency loss report that pure tones at high frequencies sound like a click or buzz.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Physiologic and Psychophysical Consequences of Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss

Souza

Hoover

2018

Semin Hear

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Substantial loss of cochlear function is required to elevate pure-tone thresholds to the severe hearing loss range; yet, individuals with severe or profound hearing loss continue to rely on hearing for communication. Despite the impairment, sufficient information is encoded at the periphery to make acoustic hearing a viable option. However, the probability of significant cochlear and/or neural damage associated with the loss has consequences for sound perception and speech recognition. These consequences include degraded frequency selectivity, which can be assessed with tests including psychoacoustic tuning curves and broadband rippled stimuli. Because speech recognition depends on the ability to resolve frequency detail, a listener with severe hearing loss is likely to have impaired communication in both quiet and noisy environments. However, the extent of the impairment varies widely among individuals. A better understanding of the fundamental abilities of listeners with severe and profound hearing loss and the consequences of those abilities for communication can support directed treatment options in this population.

show abstract

Clinical Ramifications of the Effects of Hearing Impairment and Aging on Spatial and Binaural Hearing

Gallun

Srinivasan

Diedesch

2021

Springer Handbook of Auditory Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Characteristics of Adults with Severe Hearing Loss

Cited by 14 publications

References 59 publications

Auditory and Cognitive Factors Associated with Speech-in-Noise Complaints following Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

Auditory and Cognitive Factors Associated with Speech-in-Noise Complaints following Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

The Physiologic and Psychophysical Consequences of Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss

Clinical Ramifications of the Effects of Hearing Impairment and Aging on Spatial and Binaural Hearing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About