nach oben

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

Erschienen in:

26.08.2023 | Otology

Listening to speech-in-noise with hearing aids: Do the self-reported outcomes reflect the behavioral speech perception task performance?

verfasst von: Pınar Ertürk, Filiz Aslan, Meral Didem Türkyılmaz

Erschienen in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology | Ausgabe 3/2024

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between behavioral speech-in-noise listening tasks and self-reported speech-in-noise outcomes of hearing aid user adult listeners.

Method

To measure the self-reported outcomes of hearing, the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults [HHI-A], Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) and Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap were employed. To screen the cognitive abilities, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) tool was used. Turkish matrix sentence test (TMST) was used for speech-in-noise test. Eighteen adult hearing aid users (mean age of 36.6 years) were participated.

Conclusions

Results showed that some self-reported listening-in-noise outcomes are correlated with lab-based measurements of speech-in-noise test scores but not with the aided speech intelligibility thresholds. Given the present limitations of relying solely on self-report measures, it is important to complement them with objective measures to ensure a comprehensive evaluation.

Moore BCJ (1996) Perceptual consequences of cochlear hearing loss and their implications for the design of hearing aids. Ear Hear 17(2):133–161PubMed

Kollmeier B, Wesselkamp M (1997) Development and evaluation of a German sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment. J Acoust Soc Am 102(4):2412–2421ADSPubMed

Killion MC (2002) New thinking on hearing in noise: a generalized articulation index. Semin Hear 23:057–076

Wilson RH, McArdle R (2005) Speech signals used to evaluate the functional status of the auditory system. J Rehabil Res Dev 42(4s):79PubMed

Plomp R, Duquesnoy AJ (1982) A model for the speech-reception threshold in noise without and with a hearing aid. Scand Audiol. 15:95–111

Hagerman B (1982) Sentences for Testing Speech Intelligibility in Noise. Scand Audiol 11(2):79–82PubMed

Schädler MR, Warzybok A, Hochmuth S, Kollmeier B (2015) Matrix sentence intelligibility prediction using an automatic speech recognition system. Int J Audiol 54(sup2):100–107PubMed

Wagener K, Kühnel V, Kollmeier B (1999) Development and evaluation of a German sentence test I: Design of the Oldenburg sentence test. Z Audiol 38:4–15

Ozimek E, Warzybok A, Kutzner D (2010) Polish sentence matrix test for speech intelligibility measurement in noise. Int J Audiol 49(6):444–454PubMed

10.

Jansen S, Luts H, Wagener KC, Kollmeier B, Del Rio M, Dauman R et al (2012) Comparison of three types of French speech-in-noise tests: a multi-center study. Int J Audiol 51(3):164–173PubMed

11.

Houben R, Koopman J, Luts H, Wagener KC, van Wieringen A, Verschuure H et al (2014) Development of a Dutch matrix sentence test to assess speech intelligibility in noise. Int J Audiol 53(10):760–763PubMed

12.

Hochmuth S, Brand T, Zokoll MA, Castro FZ, Wardenga N, Kollmeier B (2012) A Spanish matrix sentence test for assessing speech reception thresholds in noise. Int J Audiol 51(7):536–544PubMed

13.

Zokoll MA, Fidan D, Türkyılmaz D, Hochmuth S, Ergenç İ, Sennaroğlu G et al (2015) Development and evaluation of the Turkish matrix sentence test. Int J Audiol 54(sup2):51–61PubMed

14.

Wardenga N, Batsoulis C, Wagener KC, Brand T, Lenarz T, Maier H (2015) Do you hear the noise? The German matrix sentence test with a fixed noise level in subjects with normal hearing and hearing impairment. Int J Audiol 54(sup2):71–79PubMed

15.

Carhart R, Tillman TW (1970) Interaction of Competing Speech Signals With Hearing Losses. Arch Otolaryngol - Head Neck Surg 91(3):273–279

16.

Mauger SJ, Dawson PW, Hersbach AA (2012) Perceptually optimized gain function for cochlear implant signal-to-noise ratio-based noise reduction. J Acoust Soc Am 131(1):327–336ADSPubMed

17.

Schlueter A, Brand T, Lemke U, Nitzschner S, Kollmeier B, Holube I (2015) Speech perception at positive signal-to-noise ratios using adaptive adjustment of time compression. J Acoust Soc Am 138(5):3320–3331ADSPubMed

18.

Smits C, Theo Goverts S, Festen JM (2013) The digits-in-noise test: Assessing auditory speech recognition abilities in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 133(3):1693–1706ADSPubMed

19.

Heinrich A, Henshaw H, Ferguson MA (2015) The relationship of speech intelligibility with hearing sensitivity, cognition, and perceived hearing difficulties varies for different speech perception tests. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00782/abstractCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Wilson RH, Carnell CS, Cleghorn AL (2007) The Words-in-Noise [WIN] Test with Multitalker Babble and Speech-Spectrum Noise Maskers. J Am Acad Audiol 18(06):522–529PubMed

21.

Nabelek AK, Tucker FM, Letowski TR (1991) Toleration of Background Noises Relationship With Patterns of Hearing Aid Use by Elderly Persons. J Speech Hear Res 34(3):679–685PubMed

22.

Ahn J, Lim J, Kang M, Cho YS (2022) Associations between aided speech audiometry and subjective assessment of hearing aid outcomes. Int J Audiol 15:1–9

23.

Alhanbali S, Dawes P, Lloyd S, Munro KJ (2018) Hearing Handicap and Speech Recognition Correlate With Self-Reported Listening Effort and Fatigue. Ear Hear 39(3):470–474PubMed

24.

Kwak MY, Choi WR, Park JW, Hwang EJ, Ha YR, Chung JW et al (2020) Assessment of Objective Audiometry to Predict Subjective Satisfaction in Patients With Hearing Aids. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 13(2):141–147PubMed

25.

Ventry IM, Weinstein BE (1982) The Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly: a New Tool. Ear Hear 3:128PubMed

26.

Gatehouse S, Noble W (2004) The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale [SSQ]. Int J Audiol 43(2):85–99PubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bedirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead V, Collin I et al (2005) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A Brief Screening Tool For Mild Cognitive Impairment: MOCA: A BRIEF SCREENING TOOL FOR MCI. J Am Geriatr Soc 53(4):695–699PubMed

28.

Hanzevacki M, Ozegovic G, Simovic I, Bajic Z (2011) Proactive Approach in Detecting Elderly Subjects with Cognitive Decline in General Practitioners’ Practices. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Extra 1(1):93–102

29.

Pinto TCC, Machado L, Bulgacov TM, Rodrigues-Júnior AL, Costa MLG, Ximenes RCC et al (2019) Is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA] screening superior to the Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] in the detection of mild cognitive impairment [MCI] and Alzheimer’s Disease [AD] in the elderly? Int Psychogeriatr 31(04):491–504PubMed

30.

Kaya Y, Can UA, Derle E, Kibaroğlu S, Barak A (2014) Validation of Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Discriminant Power of Montreal Cognitive Assessment Subtests in Patients With Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer Dementia in Turkish Population. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 27(2):103–109PubMed

31.

Carrillo A, Medina M del M, Ruben P, Alonso D, Vaca M, Alfonso M, et al (2019) Validation of the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults Scale for Spanish-Speaking Patients. Otol Neurotol 40(10):947–54

32.

De Paiva SMM, Simões J, Paiva A, Newman C, Castro E Sousa F, Bébéar JP (2016) Validity and reliability of the hearing handicap inventory for elderly: version adapted for use on the Portuguese population. J Am Acad Audiol 27(08):677–82

33.

Sato M, Ogawa K, Inoue Y, Masuda M (2004) Adaptation of Japanese version of the hearing handicap inventory for adults [HHIA]. Nippon Jibiinkoka Gakkai Kaiho 107(5):489–493PubMed

34.

Songül Aksoy, Aslan F, Köse A. İŞİTME ENGELİ ÖLÇEĞİ – ERİŞKİN: UZUN VE TARAMA FORMLARININ TÜRKÇE SÜRÜMÜNÜN GEÇERLİĞİNİN VE GÜVENİRLİĞİNİN İNCELENMESİ. KBB Forum. 2020;19[2]:170–81.

35.

Akeroyd MA, Guy FH, Harrison DL, Suller SL (2014) A factor analysis of the SSQ [Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale]. Int J Audiol 53(2):101–114PubMed

36.

Ahlstrom JB, Horwitz AR, Dubno JR (2009) Spatial Benefit of Bilateral Hearing Aids. Ear Hear 30(2):203–218PubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Köbler S, Lindblad AC, Olofsson Å, Hagerman B (2010) Successful and unsuccessful users of bilateral amplification: Differences and similarities in binaural performance. Int J Audiol 49(9):613–627PubMed

38.

Most T, Adi-Bensaid L, Shpak T, Sharkiya S, Luntz M (2012) Everyday hearing functioning in unilateral versus bilateral hearing aid users. Am J Otolaryngol 33(2):205–211PubMed

39.

Gonsalez EC de M, Almeida K de. Adaptação cultural do questionário Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale [SSQ] para o Português Brasileiro. Audiol - Commun Res. 2015 Sep;20[3]:215–24.

40.

Moulin A, Pauzie A, Richard C (2015) Validation of a French translation of the speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale [SSQ] and comparison with other language versions. Int J Audiol 54(12):889–898PubMed

41.

Kılıç N, Şahin Kamışlı Gİ, Gündüz B, Bayramoğlu İ, Kemaloğlu YK (2021) Turkish Validity and Reliability Study of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale. Turk Arch Otorhinolaryngol 59(3):172–187PubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Sánchez DCC, Cañas FA, de Azevedo YJ, Bahmad JF (2022) Cultural adaptation of the speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale to Colombian Spanish. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 88(1):4–8PubMed

43.

Kramer SE, Kapteyn TS, Festen JM, Tobi H (1995) Factors in Subjective Hearing Disability. Int J Audiol 34(6):311–320

44.

Boeschen Hospers JM, Smits N, Smits C, Stam M, Terwee CB, Kramer SE (2016) Reevaluation of the Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap Using Item Response Theory. J Speech Lang Hear Res 59(2):373–383PubMed

45.

Mujdeci B, Inal O, Turkyilmaz Md, Kose K (2016) Turkish translation, reliability and validity of the Amsterdam inventory for auditory disability and handicap. J Indian Speech Lang Hear Assoc. 30(2):40

46.

Zokoll MA, Hochmuth S, Warzybok A, Wagener KC, Buschermöhle M, Kollmeier B (2013) Speech-in-Noise Tests for Multilingual Hearing Screening and Diagnostics1. Am J Audiol 22(1):175–178PubMed

47.

Dietz A, Buschermöhle M, Sivonen V, Willberg T, Aarnisalo AA, Lenarz T et al (2015) Characteristics and international comparability of the Finnish matrix sentence test in cochlear implant recipients. Int J Audiol 54(sup2):80–87PubMed

48.

Ng EHN, Rudner M, Lunner T, Rönnberg J (2013) Relationships between self-report and cognitive measures of hearing aid outcome. Speech Lang Hear 16(4):197–207PubMedPubMedCentral

49.

Noble W, Gatehouse S (2006) Effects of bilateral versus unilateral hearing aid fitting on abilities measured by the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing scale [SSQ]: Efectos de la adaptación uni o bilateral de auxiliares auditivos en las habilidades medidas la escala de cualidades auditiva, espacial y del lenguaje [SSQ]. Int J Audiol 45(3):172–181PubMed

Titel: Listening to speech-in-noise with hearing aids: Do the self-reported outcomes reflect the behavioral speech perception task performance?
verfasst von: Pınar Ertürk
Filiz Aslan
Meral Didem Türkyılmaz
Publikationsdatum: 26.08.2023
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology / Ausgabe 3/2024
Print ISSN: 0937-4477
Elektronische ISSN: 1434-4726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-023-08193-5

Neu im Fachgebiet HNO

Betalaktam-Allergie: praxisnahes Vorgehen beim Delabeling

16.05.2024 Pädiatrische Allergologie Nachrichten

Die große Mehrheit der vermeintlichen Penicillinallergien sind keine. Da das „Etikett“ Betalaktam-Allergie oft schon in der Kindheit erworben wird, kann ein frühzeitiges Delabeling lebenslange Vorteile bringen. Ein Team von Pädiaterinnen und Pädiatern aus Kanada stellt vor, wie sie dabei vorgehen.

Eingreifen von Umstehenden rettet vor Erstickungstod

15.05.2024 Fremdkörperaspiration Nachrichten

Wer sich an einem Essensrest verschluckt und um Luft ringt, benötigt vor allem rasche Hilfe. Dass Umstehende nur in jedem zweiten Erstickungsnotfall bereit waren, diese zu leisten, ist das ernüchternde Ergebnis einer Beobachtungsstudie aus Japan. Doch es gibt auch eine gute Nachricht.

Real-World-Daten sprechen eher für Dupilumab als für Op.

14.05.2024 Rhinosinusitis Nachrichten

Zur Behandlung schwerer Formen der chronischen Rhinosinusitis mit Nasenpolypen (CRSwNP) stehen seit Kurzem verschiedene Behandlungsmethoden zur Verfügung, darunter Biologika, wie Dupilumab, und die endoskopische Sinuschirurgie (ESS). Beim Vergleich der beiden Therapieoptionen war Dupilumab leicht im Vorteil.

Schwindelursache: Massagepistole lässt Otholiten tanzen

14.05.2024 Benigner Lagerungsschwindel Nachrichten

Wenn jüngere Menschen über ständig rezidivierenden Lagerungsschwindel klagen, könnte eine Massagepistole der Auslöser sein. In JAMA Otolaryngology warnt ein Team vor der Anwendung hochpotenter Geräte im Bereich des Nackens.

Update HNO

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Background

Method

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2024

Predictive role of facial nerve palsy improvement in malignant external otitis

Chemoradiotherapy vs radiotherapy for non-surgical locally advanced laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma patients: a propensity score-matched study and practical nomogram construction

Acquired cholesteatoma after cochlear implants: case series and literature review

I-scan combined with laryngovideostroboscopy for predicting malignancy in vocal fold leukoplakia