Andersen Pernilla K, Jürgensen Lukas, Denk Florian, Husstedt Hendrik, Jürgens Tim, Neher Tobias
Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Technical Audiology Section, Research Unit for ORL - Head & Neck Surgery and Audiology, Odense University Hospital & University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Int J Audiol. 2025 Jun;64(6):599-608. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2024.2431830. Epub 2024 Nov 26.
Open-source hearing aid (HA) research tools provide avenues for testing new audiological concepts. This study compared a wearable research HA (RHA) - the "Portable Hearing Laboratory" - to a high-end commercial HA (CHA) in terms of aided outcome. Using this RHA, it also evaluated a fitting approach based on non-individualised gain presets.
Using a randomised repeated-measures design, participants completed speech recognition and speech quality assessments under unaided and several aided (RHA and CHA with omnidirectional and directional microphone settings) conditions. Furthermore, two approaches for prescribing amplification were evaluated with the RHA: (1) a preset approach based on non-verified clinical gain targets calculated for three standard audiograms, and (2) a best-practice approach based on individually prescribed and verified clinical gain targets.
Fifteen adults aged 50-78 years with symmetrical, mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing losses.
The RHA and CHA gave similar audibility, speech recognition in quiet and in noise, and speech quality ratings in quiet and in noise. Relative to the best-practice approach, the preset approach resulted in less audibility but similar speech recognition in quiet and in noise.
The RHA appears suited for testing new audiological concepts such as preset-based approaches to HA fitting.
开源助听器（HA）研究工具为测试新的听力学概念提供了途径。本研究在助听效果方面，将一种可穿戴研究型助听器（RHA）——“便携式听力实验室”——与一款高端商用助听器（CHA）进行了比较。使用这款RHA，还评估了一种基于非个性化增益预设的验配方法。
采用随机重复测量设计，参与者在未佩戴助听器以及几种佩戴助听设备（RHA和具有全向和定向麦克风设置的CHA）的条件下完成语音识别和语音质量评估。此外，还使用RHA评估了两种放大处方方法：（1）基于为三种标准听力图计算的未经验证的临床增益目标的预设方法，以及（2）基于个体处方和验证的临床增益目标的最佳实践方法。
15名年龄在50 - 78岁之间、患有对称性轻至中度感音神经性听力损失的成年人。
RHA和CHA在可听度、安静和噪声环境下的语音识别以及安静和噪声环境下的语音质量评分方面表现相似。相对于最佳实践方法，预设方法导致可听度降低，但在安静和噪声环境下的语音识别相似。
RHA似乎适合测试新的听力学概念，如基于预设的助听器验配方法。
