Development of speech intelligibility in geriatric individuals with hearing loss

Background/aim: In our study, we aimed to evaluate the hearing aid benefit and speech intelligibility with hearing aids using objective and subjective measurements, according to the type of hearing loss in elderly individuals who used different types of hearing aids. Materials and methods: The objective and subjective findings from a total of 47 elderly individuals between the ages of 60 and 84, who used regular hearing aids for at least six months, and who were diagnosed with different types and degrees of hearing loss were evaluated by scanning them retrospectively. Results: In our study, the Adaptive Turkish matrix sentence test (ATMST) was carried out with binaural headphones, and a statistically significant difference was observed between the ATMST scores of individuals with symmetrical hearing loss. A significant difference was found between the ATMST score averages for individuals with symmetrical hearing loss $(S^0 N^{90} and S^0N^{270})$ and asymmetric hearing loss $(S^0 N^0and S^0 N^{270})$ in the free area. A significant difference was found between abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit satisfaction questionnaires before and after hearing aid use in all groups. Conclusion: The Turkish matrix sentence test (TMST) in noise can be used routinely in clinics in order to evaluate the possible hearing loss from the daily environment and the hearing aid effectiveness.

PDF

___

1. Dalton DS, Cruickshanks KJ, Klein BE, Klein R, Terry L. Wiley et al. The Impact of Hearing Loss on the Quality of Life in Older Adults. Gerontologist 2003;43(5):661-668. doi: 10.1093/ geront/43.5.661
2. Contrera KJ, Wallhagen MI, Mamo SK, Oh ES, Lin FR. Hearing loss health care for older adults. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine 2016;29(3):394-403. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2016.03.150235
3. Nelson, E. G., & Hinojosa, R. Presbycusis: a human temporal bone study of individuals with downward sloping audiometric patterns of hearing loss and review of the literature. The Laryngoscope, 2006;116(S112): 1-12. doi: 10.1097/01. mlg.0000236089.44566.62
4. Watkinson, J. C., & Clarke, R. W. Scott-Brown’s Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery. 8th ed. Boca Raton, New York, USA: CRC Press; (2018).
5. Dillon H. Binaural and bilateral considerations in hearing aid fitting. Hearing aids. 2 nd ed. Turramurra, Australia: Boomerang Press;2012:430-467
6. Nilsson M, Soli SD, Sullivan JA. Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1994;95(2):1085-1099. doi: 10.1121/1.408469
7. Francart T, Hofmann M, Vanthornhout J, Van Deun L, van Wieringen A, Wouters J. APEX/SPIN: a free test platform to measure speech intelligibility. International journal of audiology 2017;56(2):137-143. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2016.1247215
8. Hochmuth S, Brand T, Zokoll MA, Castro FZ, Wardenga N et al. A Spanish matrix sentence test for assessing speech reception thresholds in noise. International journal of audiology 2012;51(7):536-544. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2012.670731
9. Houben R, Koopman J, Luts H, Wagener KC, Van Wieringen A et al. Development of a Dutch matrix sentence test to assess speech intelligibility in noise. International Journal of Audiology 2014;53(10):760-763. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2014.920111
10. Warzybok A, Zokoll M, Wardenga N, Ozimek E, Boboshko M et al. Development of the Russian matrix sentence test. International Journal of Audiology 2015;54(sup2):35-43. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1020969
11. Zokoll MA, Fidan D, Türkyılmaz D, Hochmuth S, Ergenç İ et al. Development and evaluation of the Turkish matrix sentence test. International Journal of Audiology 2015;54(sup2):51-61. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1074735
12. Akeroyd MA, Arlinger S, Bentler RA, Boothroyd A, Dillier N et al. International Collegium of Rehabilitative Audiology (ICRA) recommendations for the construction of multilingual speech tests: ICRA Working Group on Multilingual Speech Tests. International journal of audiology 2015;54(sup2):17-22. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1030513
13. Kollmeier B, Warzybok A, Hochmuth S, Zokoll MA, Uslar V et al. The multilingual matrix test: Principles, applications, and comparison across languages: A review. International Journal of Audiology 2015;54(sup2):3-16. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1020971
14. Schädler MR, Hülsmeier D, Warzybok A, Hochmuth S, Kollmeier B. Microscopic Multilingual Matrix Test Predictions Using an ASR-Based Speech Recognition Model. Interspeech 2016:610-614. doi: 10.21437/Interspeech.2016-1119
15. Cox RM, Alexander GC. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear and hearing 1995;16(2):176-186. doi: 0196/0202/95/1602-0176$3.0
16. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. The time trade‐off method: results from a general population study. Health economics 1996;5(2):141-154. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099- 1050(199603)5:2<141::AID-HEC189>3.0.CO;2-N
17. Kahyaoğlu Süt H. Akut koroner sendromlu hastalarda yaşam kalitesi: EQ-5D ölçeğinin geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Phd, University of Trakya, Edirne, Turkey 2009 (in Turkish).
18. Brand T, Kollmeier B. Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2002;111(6):2801-2810. doi: 10.1121/1.1479152
19. Wagener K, Brand T, Kollmeier B. Development and evaluation of a German sentence test part III: Evaluation of the Oldenburg sentence test. Zeitschrift Fur Audiologie 1999;38:86-95. doi: 10.1121/1.419624
20. Wardenga N, Batsoulis C, Wagener KC, Brand T, Lenarz T et al. Do you hear the noise? The German matrix sentence test with a fixed noise level in subjects with normal hearing and hearing impairment. International journal of audiology 2015;54(sup2):71-79. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1079929
21. ANSI. Specification for Audiometers. Melville, NY: American National Standard Institute; 2010
22. Shub DE, Carr SP, Kong Y, Colburn HS. Discrimination and identification of azimuth using spectral shape. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2008;124(5):3132-141. doi: 10.1121/1.2981634
23. Kumpik DP, Kacelnik O, King AJ. Adaptive reweighting of auditory localization cues in response to chronic unilateral earplugging in humans. Journal of Neuroscience 2010;30(14):4883-4894. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5488-09.2010
24. Agterberg MJ, Hol MK, Van Wanrooij MM, Van Opstal AJ, Snik AF. Single-sided deafness and directional hearing: contribution of spectral cues and high-frequency hearing loss in the hearing ear. Frontiers in neuroscience 2014;8:188. doi:10.3389/fnins.2014.00188
25. Sargent EW, Herrmann B, Hollenbeak CS, Bankaitis AE. The minimum speech test battery in profound unilateral hearing loss. Otology & neurotology 2001;22(4):480-486. doi: 10.1097/00129492-200107000-00012
26. Silverman CA, Silman S, Emmer MB, Schoepflin JR, Lutolf JJ. Auditory deprivation in adults with asymmetric, sensorineural hearing impairment. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 2006;17(10):747-762. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.17.10.6
27. Augustine AM, Chrysolyte SB, Thenmozhi K, Rupa V. Assessment of auditory and psychosocial handicap associated with unilateral hearing loss among Indian patients. Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery 2013;65(2):120-125. doi: 10.1007/s12070-012-0586-6
28. Finbow J, Bance M, Aiken S, Gulliver M, Verge J et al. A comparison between wireless CROS and bone-anchored hearing devices for single-sided deafness: a pilot study. Otology & Neurotology 2015;36(5):819-825. doi: 10.1097/ MAO.0000000000000762
29. Baguley DM BJ, Humphriss RL, Prevost AT. The evidence base for the application of contralateral bone anchored hearing aids in acquired unilateral sensorineural hearing loss in adults. Clin Otolaryngol 2006;31(1):6–14. doi: 10.1111/j.1749- 4486.2006.01137.x
30. Cekic S, Sennaroglu G. The Turkish hearing in noise test. International journal of audiology 2008;47(6):366-368. doi: 10.1080/14992020802056027
31. Petry T, dos Santos SN, Costa MJ. Speech recognition according to the length of hearing aid use. Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology 2010;76(4):462-468. doi: 10.1590/S1808- 86942010000400010
32. Azevedo MM, Santos SNd, Costa MJ. Performance of elderly adults with binaural vs. monaural fitting in speech tests in silence and in noise. Revista CEFAC 2015;17(2):431-438. doi: 10.1590/1982-021620152514
33. Yund EW, Roup CM, Simon HJ, Bowman GA. Acclimatization in wide dynamic range multichannel compression and linear amplification hearing aids. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 2006;43(4):517. doi: 10.1682/ jrrd.2005.06.0099
34. Gatehouse S, Naylor G, Elberling C. Benefits from hearing aids in relation to the interaction between the user and the environment. International Journal of Audiology 2003;42(sup1):77-85. doi: 10.3109/14992020309074627
35. Dillon H, Keidser G, O’Brien A, Silberstein H. Sound quality comparisons of advanced hearing aids. The hearing journal 2003;56(4):30-32
36. Van den Bogaert T, Klasen TJ, Moonen M, Van Deun L, Wouters J. Horizontal localization with bilateral hearing aids: Without is better than with. The journal of the acoustical society of America 2006;119(1):515-526. doi: 10.1121/1.2139653.
37. Prates L, Iório M. Acclimatization: speech recognition in hearing aid users. Pro-fono: revista de atualizacao cientifica 2006;18(3):259-266. doi: 10.1590/s0104-56872006000300005