Knebel S B, Bentler R A
Department of Otolaryngology, The University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242, USA.
Ear Hear. 1998 Aug;19(4):280-9. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199808000-00003.
The objective of this investigation was to compare real and perceived benefit for two currently marketed digital hearing aids, the Oticon DigiFocus and the Widex Senso. The hearing aids have different philosophies of design and fitting strategies; as a result, it was hypothesized that there would be performance differences.
Twenty subjects with documented sensorineural hearing losses were fit with each of the two digital hearing aids. After 4 wk of use with each hearing aid, a battery of objective and subjective tests was completed to assess hearing aid benefit.
No significant differences were found between the hearing aids as revealed by the objective testing of speech recognition and self-report inventories of hearing aid benefit. The DigiFocus was shown by real ear measurements to provide more high-frequency gain than the Senso. The Widex Senso was preferred by 13 of the 20 subjects (seven of 10 of the new hearing aid users). This may be explained, in part, by the increased high-frequency gain provided by the Oticon DigiFocus, which was perceived as having greater "harshness."
Based on the results of this investigation, neither hearing aid processor was shown to be superior to the other. In addition, the least amount of objective benefit was shown in the presence of background noise.
本研究的目的是比较两种目前市场上销售的数字助听器——奥迪康DigiFocus和唯听Senso的实际益处和感知益处。这两种助听器在设计理念和验配策略上有所不同;因此,推测它们在性能上会存在差异。
20名有记录的感音神经性听力损失患者分别佩戴这两种数字助听器。在每种助听器使用4周后,完成一系列客观和主观测试以评估助听器的益处。
语音识别的客观测试和助听器益处的自我报告清单显示,两种助听器之间未发现显著差异。真耳测量显示,DigiFocus比Senso提供更多的高频增益。20名受试者中有13名(10名新助听器使用者中的7名)更喜欢唯听Senso。这在一定程度上可能是由于奥迪康DigiFocus提供了更高的高频增益,而这种增益被认为具有更大的“刺耳感”。
基于本研究结果,未显示出哪种助听器处理器优于另一种。此外,在存在背景噪声的情况下,客观益处最少。