Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.
Ear Hear. 2014 Jan-Feb;35(1):126-36. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182a3648b.
To evaluate effects of hearing mode (normal hearing, cochlear implant, or hearing aid) on everyday communication among adult unilateral listeners using the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Individuals with one good, naturally hearing ear were expected to have higher overall ratings than unilateral listeners dependent on a cochlear implant or hearing aid. The authors anticipated that listening environments reliant on binaural processing for successful communication would be rated most disabling by all unilateral listeners. Regardless of hearing mode, all hearing-impaired participants were expected to have lower ratings than individuals with normal hearing bilaterally. A secondary objective was to compare post-treatment SSQ results of participants who subsequently obtained a cochlear implant for the poorer hearing ear with those of participants with a single normal-hearing ear.
Participants were 87 adults recruited as part of ongoing research investigating asymmetric hearing effects. Sixty-six participants were unilateral listeners who had one unaided/nonimplanted severe to profound hearing-loss ear and were grouped based on hearing mode of the better ear: 30 had one normal-hearing ear (i.e., unilateral hearing-loss participants); 20 had a unilateral cochlear implant; and 16 had a unilateral hearing aid. Data were also collected from 21 normal-hearing individuals, as well as a subset of participants who subsequently received a cochlear implant in the poorer ear and thus became bilateral listeners. Data analysis was completed at the domain and subscale levels.
A significant mode-of-hearing group effect for the hearing-impaired participants (i.e., with unilateral hearing loss, unilateral cochlear implant, or unilateral hearing aid) was identified for two domains (Speech and Qualities) and six subscales (Speech in Quiet, Speech in Noise, Speech in Speech Contexts, Multiple Speech Stream Processing and Switching, Identification of Sound and Objects, and Sound Quality and Naturalness). There was no significant mode-of-hearing group effect for the Spatial domain or the other four subscales (Localization, Distance and Movement, Segregation of Sounds, and Listening Effort). Follow-up analysis indicated the unilateral normal-hearing ear group had significantly higher ratings than the unilateral cochlear implant or hearing aid groups for the Speech domain and four of the ten subscales; neither the cochlear implant nor hearing aid group had subscale ratings significantly higher than each other or the unilateral hearing loss group. Audibility and sound quality imparted by hearing mode were identified as factors related to subjective listening experience. After cochlear implantation to restore bilateral hearing, SSQ ratings for bilateral cochlear implant or cochlear implant plus hearing aid participants were significantly higher than those of the unilateral hearing-loss group for Speech in Quiet, Speech in Noise, Localization, Distance and Movement, Listening Effort, and the Spatial domain. Hearing-impaired individuals had significantly poorer ratings in all areas compared with those with bilateral normal hearing.
Adults reliant on a single ear, irrespective of better ear hearing mode, including those with one normal hearing ear, are at a disadvantage in all aspects of everyday listening and communication. Audibility and hearing mode were shown to differentially contribute to listening experience.
使用言语、空间和听觉质量量表(SSQ)评估成人单侧听力患者的听力模式(正常听力、人工耳蜗或助听器)对日常交流的影响。预计单侧听力患者中,一只耳朵听力良好的患者整体评分会高于依赖人工耳蜗或助听器的单侧听力患者。作者预计,所有单侧听力患者都会认为依赖双耳处理的听力环境最具障碍性。无论听力模式如何,所有听力受损患者的评分都预计会低于双侧听力正常的患者。次要目标是比较单侧听力患者中随后接受较差耳人工耳蜗植入治疗的患者与单侧听力正常患者的治疗后 SSQ 结果。
参与者为正在进行的不对称听力影响研究的一部分,共招募了 87 名成年人。66 名参与者为单侧听力患者,他们有一只未经过助听/植入的重度至极重度听力损失耳,并根据较好耳的听力模式进行分组:30 名患者有一只正常听力耳(即单侧听力损失患者);20 名患者单侧植入人工耳蜗;16 名患者单侧佩戴助听器。此外,还收集了 21 名听力正常个体以及部分在较差耳接受人工耳蜗植入并成为双侧听力患者的参与者的数据。数据分析在域和子量表水平进行。
对于听力受损患者(单侧听力损失、单侧人工耳蜗或单侧助听器),发现听力模式组在两个域(言语和听觉质量)和六个子量表(安静环境下言语、噪声环境下言语、言语语境下言语、多言语流处理和切换、声源和物体识别、声音质量和自然度)存在显著的听力模式组间效应。在空间域和其他四个子量表(定位、距离和运动、声音分离、聆听努力)中,没有发现显著的听力模式组间效应。进一步的分析表明,单侧正常听力耳组在言语域和十个子量表中的四个子量表上的评分显著高于单侧人工耳蜗或助听器组;人工耳蜗组和助听器组在任何一个子量表上的评分均未显著高于彼此或单侧听力损失组。听力模式的可听度和声音质量被确定为与主观聆听体验相关的因素。在单侧听力损失患者接受人工耳蜗植入恢复双侧听力后,双侧人工耳蜗或人工耳蜗加助听器患者在安静环境下言语、噪声环境下言语、定位、距离和运动、聆听努力以及空间域的 SSQ 评分显著高于单侧听力损失组。与双侧听力正常的患者相比,听力受损患者在所有方面的评分均明显较差。
无论较好耳的听力模式如何,单侧依赖一只耳朵的成年人,包括单侧听力正常的成年人,在日常生活中的聆听和交流的各个方面都处于劣势。可听度和听力模式被证明对聆听体验有不同的影响。