Project description:IntroductionIn the new revised National Institute for Health & Care Excellence (NICE, TA566, 2019) guidelines for cochlear implantation (CI) have clearly stipulated that the hearing loss must be bilateral. Prior to this revision, children and young people (CYP) with asymmetrical thresholds have been considered for unilateral CI when one ear was in audiological criteria. Children with asymmetrical hearing loss represent an important cohort of potential CI candidates, who will continue to be prevented from benefiting from CI unless evidence is produced to support implantation and maximise subsequent benefit.The aim of this study is to evaluate the 'real-life' hearing performance in a group of children who have received a unilateral CI and who have hearing thresholds in the contralateral ear that are outside the current UK NICE 2019 audiological criteria for CI. The contralateral ear will be aided using a conventional hearing aid (HA). The outcomes from this 'bimodal' group will be compared with a group of children who have received bilateral CI, and a group of children using bilateral HA, to extend the current knowledge about the different performance levels between bilateral CI, bilateral HA and bimodal hearing in CYP.Methods and analysisThirty CYP aged 6-17 years old, 10 bimodal users, 10 bilateral HA users and 10 bilateral cochlear implant users will be subjected to a test battery consisting of: (1) spatial release from masking, (2) complex pitch direction discrimination, (3) melodic identification, (4) perception of prosodic features in speech and (5) TEN test. Subjects will be tested in their optimal device modality. Standard demographic and hearing health information will be collected. In the absence of comparable published data to power the study, sample size was determined on pragmatic grounds. Tests are exploratory and for hypothesis generating purposes. Therefore, the standard criterion of p<0.05 will be used.Ethics and disseminationThis has been approved by the Health Research Authority and NHS REC within the UK (22/EM/0104). Industry funding was secured via a competitive researcher-led grant application process. Trial results will be subject to publication according to the definition of the outcome presented in this protocol.

Project description:ObjectivesUnilateral hearing loss increases the risk of academic and behavioral challenges for school-aged children. Previous research suggests that remote microphone (RM) systems offer the most consistent benefits for children with unilateral hearing loss in classroom environments relative to other nonsurgical interventions. However, generalizability of previous laboratory work is limited because of the specific listening situations evaluated, which often included speech and noise signals originating from the side. In addition, early studies focused on speech recognition tasks requiring limited cognitive engagement. However, those laboratory conditions do not reflect characteristics of contemporary classrooms, which are cognitively demanding and typically include multiple talkers of interest in relatively diffuse background noise. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential effects of rerouting amplification systems, specifically a RM system and a contralateral routing of signal (CROS) system, on speech recognition and comprehension of school-age children in a laboratory environment designed to emulate the dynamic characteristics of contemporary classrooms. It was expected that listeners would benefit from the CROS system when the head shadow limits audibility (e.g., monaural indirect listening). It was also expected that listeners would benefit from the RM system only when the RM was near the talker of interest.DesignTwenty-one children (10 to 14 years, M = 11.86) with normal hearing participated in laboratory tests of speech recognition and comprehension. Unilateral hearing loss was simulated by presenting speech-shaped masking noise to one ear via an insert earphone. Speech stimuli were presented from 1 of 4 loudspeakers located at either 0°, +45°, -90°, and -135° or 0°, -45°, +90°, and +135°. Cafeteria noise was presented from separate loudspeakers surrounding the listener. Participants repeated sentences (sentence recognition) and also answered questions after listening to an unfamiliar story (comprehension). They were tested unaided, with a RM system (microphone near the front loudspeaker), and with a CROS system (ear-level microphone on the ear with simulated hearing loss).ResultsRelative to unaided listening, both rerouting systems reduced sentence recognition performance for most signals originating near the ear with normal hearing (monaural direct loudspeakers). Only the RM system improved speech recognition for midline signals, which were near the RM. Only the CROS system significantly improved speech recognition for signals originating near the ear with simulated hearing loss (monaural indirect loudspeakers). Although the benefits were generally small (approximately 6.5 percentage points), the CROS system also improved comprehension scores, which reflect overall listening across all four loudspeakers. Conversely, the RM system did not improve comprehension scores relative to unaided listening.ConclusionsBenefits of the CROS system in this study were small, specific to situations where speech is directed toward the ear with hearing loss, and relative only to a RM system utilizing one microphone. Although future study is warranted to evaluate the generalizability of the findings, the data demonstrate both CROS and RM systems are nonsurgical interventions that have the potential to improve speech recognition and comprehension for children with limited useable unilateral hearing in dynamic, noisy classroom situations.

Project description:ObjectivesToday, approximately 70 to 80% of hearing aid fittings are made with silicone instant ear tips rather than custom earmolds. Nevertheless, little is known about the impact of instant ear tips on the acoustic coupling between the hearing aid receiver and the individual ear canal, even though it can have a major impact on the overall sound of the hearing aids. This study aimed to investigate the acoustic properties of different instant ear tip types and their across-subject variability, the within-subject reliability of those properties, and the influence of the users' level of experience with ear-tip insertion on the acoustics. Furthermore, subjective ratings of occlusion produced by the ear tips were considered.DesignFive types of instant ear tips (Open, Tulip, Round [2-vent], Round [1-vent], Double Domes) provided by the hearing aid manufacturer Widex were considered in this study. Probe-microphone measurements were performed at the eardrums of 30 participants (60 ears). In the first experiment, the real ear occluded insertion gain and the vent effect (VE) were measured, and the listeners rated the subjective occlusion experienced with each ear tip. In the second experiment, the same measurements were repeated six times per participant. The within-subject variability of the acoustic ear tip properties was investigated as well as the impact of the degree of users' experience with ear tip insertion on the resulting real ear measurements.ResultsAll tested ear tips were, on average, acoustically transparent up to 1 kHz except Double Domes, which were only transparent up to 600 Hz. Distinct VE profiles were found for each ear tip type, but a large across-subject variability was observed for both real ear occluded insertion gain and VE. However, the within-subject reliability was high. The measured VE was highly correlated with the perceived occlusion. Finally, no significant effect of the level of experience in ear tip insertion on the acoustic properties of the ear tips was found, but the within-subject variability was larger in the less experienced group.ConclusionsThese results suggest that the acoustic properties of instant ear tips and their coupling to the individual ear canal impact the resulting hearing aid fitting and should be considered by the hearing care professionals and reflected in the fitting software. The high within-subject reliability indicates that the ear tip acoustics remain stable for the individual in daily use. Finally, real ear measurements should be considered an essential part of the hearing aid fitting process in clinical practice to ensure an optimal fit for the individual hearing aid user.

Project description:IntroductionUsing a probe-tube microphone to measure and adjust the real-ear performance of the hearing aid to match the prescription target is recommended and widely used in clinical practice. Hearing aid fitting software can approximately match the amplification characteristics of the hearing aid to the prescription without real-ear measurements (REMs), but using REM improves the match to the prescribed target. What is unclear is if the improved match results in a better patient-reported outcome. The primary objective of this review is to determine whether the use of REM improves patient-reported outcomes in adult hearing aid users.Methods and analysisThe review's methods are in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science and CENTRAL via Cochrane Library will be searched to identify relevant studies. The review's population of interest will include adults with any degree of sensorineural or mixed hearing loss who have been prescribed with acoustic hearing aids. The included studies should compare REM fitting to the initial fit provided by the manufacturer's fitting software. Hearing-specific health-related quality of life is the primary outcome but secondary outcomes include self-reported listening ability, speech recognition scores, generic health-related quality of life, hours of use, number of required follow-up sessions and adverse events. Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials will be included. The risk of bias in the included studies will be evaluated using Down and Black's checklist. The quality of the overall evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations tool.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval will not be sought because this systematic review will only retrieve and analyse data from published studies. Review results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant scientific conferences.Prospero registration numberCRD42020166074.

Dataset Information

CROS or hearing aid? Selecting the ideal solution for unilateral CI patients with limited aidable hearing in the contralateral ear

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets