Department of Hearing and Speech Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
Heuser Hearing Institute, Louisville, KY.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019 Oct 25;62(10):3834-3850. doi: 10.1044/2019_JSLHR-H-19-0013. Epub 2019 Oct 9.
Purpose Previous evidence supports benefits of bilateral hearing aids, relative to unilateral hearing aid use, in laboratory environments using audio-only (AO) stimuli and relatively simple tasks. The purpose of this study was to evaluate bilateral hearing aid benefits in ecologically relevant laboratory settings, with and without visual cues. In addition, we evaluated the relationship between bilateral benefit and clinically viable predictive variables. Method Participants included 32 adult listeners with hearing loss ranging from mild-moderate to severe-profound. Test conditions varied by hearing aid fitting type (unilateral, bilateral) and modality (AO, audiovisual). We tested participants in complex environments that evaluated the following domains: sentence recognition, word recognition, behavioral listening effort, gross localization, and subjective ratings of spatialization. Signal-to-noise ratio was adjusted to provide similar unilateral speech recognition performance in both modalities and across procedures. Results Significant and similar bilateral benefits were measured for both modalities on all tasks except listening effort, where bilateral benefits were not identified in either modality. Predictive variables were related to bilateral benefits in some conditions. With audiovisual stimuli, increasing hearing loss, unaided speech recognition in noise, and unaided subjective spatial ability were significantly correlated with increased benefits for many outcomes. With AO stimuli, these same predictive variables were not significantly correlated with outcomes. No predictive variables were correlated with bilateral benefits for sentence recognition in either modality. Conclusions Hearing aid users can expect significant bilateral hearing aid advantages for ecologically relevant, complex laboratory tests. Although future confirmatory work is necessary, these data indicate the presence of vision strengthens the relationship between bilateral benefits and degree of hearing loss.
目的 先前的证据支持与单侧助听器相比,双侧助听器在使用纯音频(AO)刺激和相对简单任务的实验室环境中具有优势。本研究的目的是在具有和不具有视觉线索的生态相关实验室环境中评估双侧助听器的优势。此外,我们还评估了双侧受益与临床可行的预测变量之间的关系。 方法 参与者包括 32 名听力损失从轻度到重度到重度的成年听众。测试条件因助听器适配类型(单侧、双侧)和模式(AO、视听)而异。我们在复杂环境中对参与者进行测试,评估以下领域:句子识别、单词识别、行为听力努力、粗略定位和空间化的主观评价。信噪比进行了调整,以便在两种模式和两种程序中都提供相似的单侧语音识别性能。 结果 在所有任务中,除了听力努力之外,两种模式都测量到了显著且相似的双侧优势,而在这两种模式中都没有发现听力努力的双侧优势。在某些条件下,预测变量与双侧优势相关。在视听刺激下,听力损失程度增加、未助听噪声中的语音识别能力以及未助听的主观空间能力与许多结果的收益增加显著相关。在 AO 刺激下,这些相同的预测变量与结果没有显著相关。在两种模式中,句子识别的双侧优势都没有与任何预测变量相关。 结论 对于具有生态相关性的复杂实验室测试,助听器使用者可以预期双侧助听器具有显著的优势。尽管需要进一步的确认性工作,但这些数据表明,视觉的存在增强了双侧受益与听力损失程度之间的关系。