Souza Pamela E
Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Washington, 1417 NE 42nd Street, Seattle, WA 98105 email:
Trends Amplif. 2002 Dec;6(4):131-65. doi: 10.1177/108471380200600402.
The topic of compression has been discussed quite extensively in the last 20 years (eg, Braida et al., 1982; Dillon, 1996, 2000; Dreschler, 1992; Hickson, 1994; Kuk, 2000 and 2002; Kuk and Ludvigsen, 1999; Moore, 1990; Van Tasell, 1993; Venema, 2000; Verschuure et al., 1996; Walker and Dillon, 1982). However, the latest comprehensive update by this journal was published in 1996 (Kuk, 1996). Since that time, use of compression hearing aids has increased dramatically, from half of hearing aids dispensed only 5 years ago to four out of five hearing aids dispensed today (Strom, 2002b). Most of today's digital and digitally programmable hearing aids are compression devices (Strom, 2002a). It is probable that within a few years, very few patients will be fit with linear hearing aids. Furthermore, compression has increased in complexity, with greater numbers of parameters under the clinician's control. Ideally, these changes will translate to greater flexibility and precision in fitting and selection. However, they also increase the need for information about the effects of compression amplification on speech perception and speech quality. As evidenced by the large number of sessions at professional conferences on fitting compression hearing aids, clinicians continue to have questions about compression technology and when and how it should be used. How does compression work? Who are the best candidates for this technology? How should adjustable parameters be set to provide optimal speech recognition? What effect will compression have on speech quality? These and other questions continue to drive our interest in this technology. This article reviews the effects of compression on the speech signal and the implications for speech intelligibility, quality, and design of clinical procedures.
在过去20年里,压缩这一主题已得到相当广泛的讨论(例如,布拉伊达等人,1982年;狄龙,1996年、2000年;德雷施勒,1992年;希克森,1994年;库克,2000年和2002年;库克和路德维格森,1999年;摩尔,1990年;范·塔塞尔,1993年;维内马,2000年;韦尔舒尔等人,1996年;沃克和狄龙,1982年)。然而,本期刊最近一次全面更新是在1996年发表的(库克,1996年)。自那时以来,压缩式助听器的使用急剧增加,从仅5年前所配发助听器的一半增至如今所配发助听器的五分之四(斯特罗姆,2002b)。当今大多数数字和数字可编程助听器都是压缩装置(斯特罗姆,2002a)。很可能在几年内,极少有患者会佩戴线性助听器。此外,压缩的复杂性增加了,临床医生可控制的参数数量更多。理想情况下,这些变化将转化为在选配和选择方面更大的灵活性和精确性。然而,它们也增加了对有关压缩放大对言语感知和言语质量影响的信息的需求。专业会议上大量关于选配压缩式助听器的场次证明,临床医生对压缩技术以及何时、如何使用该技术仍有疑问。压缩是如何工作的?谁是这项技术的最佳适用者?可调参数应如何设置以提供最佳言语识别?压缩对言语质量会有什么影响?这些以及其他问题继续激发我们对这项技术的兴趣。本文综述了压缩对言语信号的影响以及对言语可懂度、质量和临床程序设计的影响。