Search

Congenital unilateral hearing loss (UHL) represents a contemporary audiologic challenge. Children with UHL can struggle with understanding speech in noise, localizing sounds, developing language, and maintaining academic performance, leading to low self-esteem, anxiety, and decreased social support. Two specific conditions related to UHL in children are single-sided deafness (SSD) and unilateral auris atresia (UAA). This was a retrospective observational study on a group of children with UHL. The Simplified Italian Matrix Sentence Test was used for the assessment of speech reception threshold (SRT) in different conditions: speech and noise from the front (S0N0), speech at 45° from the side of the better ear and noise at 45° from the opposite side (SbNw), and vice versa (SwNb). Each test was conducted unaided, with a bone-anchored hearing device (BAHD), and with a remote microphone (RM) system. The use of a BAHD and RM led to an improvement in SRT in S0N0 and SwNb conditions. The SSD subgroup demonstrated significant benefits with both devices in SwNb, and the UAA subgroup from the use of BAHD in S0N0. In conclusion, the study underscores the potential benefits of both devices in enhancing speech perception for UHL children, providing insights into effective intervention strategies for these challenging cases.

Introduction: Competing noise in the environment negatively affects speech intelligibility, particularly when listening at a distance. This is especially true for children with hearing loss in classroom environments where the signal-to-noise ratio is often poor. Remote microphone technology has been shown to be highly beneficial at improving the signal-to-noise ratio in hearing device users. Children with bone conduction devices, however, often must rely on indirect transmission of the acoustic signal for commonly used classroom-based remote microphone listening (e.g., digital adaptive microphone) which may negatively affect speech intelligibility. There are no studies on the effectiveness of using a relay method of signal delivery using remote microphone technology to improve speech intelligibility in adverse listening environments in bone conduction device users., Methods: Nine children with irresolvable conductive hearing loss and 12 adult controls with normal hearing were included for study. Controls were bilaterally plugged to simulate conductive hearing loss. All testing was conducted using the Cochlear™ Baha® 5 standard processor coupled with either the Cochlear™ Mini Microphone 2+ digital remote microphone or the Phonak Roger™ adaptive digital remote microphone. Speech intelligibility in noise was evaluated in the (1) bone conduction device processor alone, (2) bone conduction device + personal remote microphone, and (3) bone conduction device + personal remote microphone + adaptive digital remote microphone listening conditions at -10 dB, 0 dB, and +5 dB signal-to-noise ratios., Results and Conclusions: Speech intelligibility in noise improved significantly in the bone conduction device + personal remote microphone condition over the bone conduction device alone, demonstrating significant benefit for listening at poor signal-to-noise ratios in children with conductive hearing loss using bone conduction devices with personal remote microphone use. Experimental findings demonstrate poor signal transparency when using the relay method. Coupling of the adaptive digital remote microphone technology to the personal remote microphone negatively affects signal transparency, and no hearing in noise improvements are observed. Significant gains in speech intelligibility are consistently observed for direct streaming methods and are confirmed in adult controls. Behavioral findings are supported by objective verification of the signal transparency between the remote microphone and the bone conduction device., (© 2023 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Remote microphones (RMs) enable clearer reception of speech than would be normally achievable when relying on the acoustic sound field at the listener's ear (Hawkins, J Sp Hear Disord 49, 409-418, 1984). They are used in a wide range of environments, with one example being for children in educational settings. The international standards defining the assessment methods of the technical performance of RMs rely on free-field (anechoic) delivery, a rarely met acoustic scenario. Although some work has been offered on more real-world testing (Husstedt et al., Int J Audiol 61, 34-45. 2022), the area remains under-investigated. The electroacoustic performance of five RMs in a low-reverberation room was compared in order to assess just the RM link, rather than measurements at the end of the signal chain, for example, speech intelligibility in human observers. It pilots physical- and electro-acoustic measures to characterize the performance of RMs. The measures are based on those found in the IEC 60118 standards relating to hearing aids, but modified for diffuse-field delivery, as well as adaptive signal processing. Speech intelligibility and quality are assessed by computer models. Noise bands were often processed into irrelevance by adaptive systems that could not be deactivated. Speech-related signals were more successful. The five RMs achieved similar levels of good predicted intelligibility, for each of two background noise levels. The main difference observed was in the transmission delay between microphone and ear. This ranged between 40 and 50 ms in two of the systems, on the upper edge of acceptability necessary for audio-visual synchrony.

Objectives: The aim of the study is to explore parents' reasons for not acquiring remote microphones that would compensate for their child's hearing loss and why some children do not use these devices even after they are purchased., Background: The benefit of remote microphones for better understanding speech has been proven by multiple studies. Consistent with the research, there is an official recommendation that all children who are hard of hearing should be considered as potential candidates for remote microphone systems in classrooms in Western countries, but in the Czech Republic, only a relatively small number of children use them. Therefore, it is important to focus on the reasons why parents do not buy such devices for their child and why some children do not use an already acquired device., Methods: Data from 41 semi-structured interviews were collected and analysed using the DIPEx methodology (personal experiences of health and illness), which involves rigorous analysis of narrative interviews of people with particular conditions chosen to represent the widest practicable range of experiences., Results: Parents report multiple barriers to buying remote microphones: insecurity about the right moment, financial reasons, a lack of information and the child's refusal to use them. The reasons why children do not use such devices despite their being purchased are the reluctance of children and teachers and the low perceived benefit of remote microphones., Conclusions: These barriers have to be taken into consideration by audiologists, policymakers and other stakeholders when addressing medical, educational and social systems supporting children who are hard of hearing as well as their families. Socio-political measures, improved systems of support for children who are hard of hearing and direct work with families can reduce these barriers., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

Objective: This work presents the design and verification of a simplified measurement setup for wireless remote microphone systems (WRMSs), which has been incorporated into guidelines of the European Union of Hearing Aid Acousticians (EUHA)., Design: Three studies were conducted. First, speech intelligibility scores within the simplified setup were compared to that in an actual classroom. Second, different WRMSs were compared in the simplified setup, and third, normative data for normal-hearing people with and without WRMS were collected., Study Sample: The first two studies include 40 older hearing impaired and the third study 20 young normal-hearing adults., Results: Speech intelligibility with WRMS was not different across actual classroom and simplified setup. An analog omnidirectional WRMS showed poorer speech intelligibility and poorer quality ratings than digital WMRSs. The usage of a WRMS in the simplified setup resulted in significantly higher speech intelligibility across all tested background noise levels., Conclusions: Despite being a simplified measurement setup, it realistically emulates a situation where people are listening to speech in noise from a distance, such as in a classroom or meeting room. Hence, with standard audiological equipment, the individual benefit of WRMSs can be measured and experienced by the user in clinical practice.

Objectives: For children with hearing loss, remote microphone (RM) technology can significantly improve access to speech in environments with poor signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), such as classrooms. Yet, this has never been studied in bone conduction device (BCD) users, a common treatment for children with irresolvable conductive hearing loss resulting from anatomical malformations of the outer ear. The objective of this study was to investigate the benefits of RM technology on speech perception in noise in pediatric BCD users with Microtia/Atresia. A secondary aim was to assess parent and child perceptions of RM technology before and after exposure to RM technology., Methods: Participants included 10 pediatric bone conduction implant users with unilateral conductive hearing loss ages 7-17 years, and their guardians. Speech perception in noise for soft and moderate inputs was assessed with and without RM technology. Guardians actively observed the child's hearing performance with and without the RM and were asked to complete a questionnaire assessing their perceptions about their child's performance. Children were also administered the questionnaire prior to and immediately following exposure to the RM technology., Results: Participants showed improved speech understanding in noise for both soft and moderate speech inputs when using the RM with their BCD compared to their BCD alone. Questionnaire results indicated good parent-child agreement. Further, significant improvements were reported for child understanding speech, parent hearing domains after exposure to the RM. No significant differences were noted for ease of use/likability., Conclusions: Significant hearing in noise benefits were observed with RM technology for children using BCDs. Consistent with objective findings, children reported improved speech understanding with the RM. Improved parental perceptions of hearing benefit following exposure to the RM suggests that active participation may serve as an effective strategy to help improve parent understanding of the benefits of RM technology for their child., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Hearing aids are often not sufficient for optimal communication between a listener and a talker. Therefore, numerous options for wireless connectivity between the listener and the talker designed to improve communication have become widely available. From the original wireless option of the induction loop system, most of the current solutions involve a digital signal with high quality and limited interference. Many are proprietary and only operate with a given manufacturer's devices, while others are more universal as long as the digital receiver can be connected to the listener's personal device. In addition, connectivity options to assist those with hearing loss are now readily available on the smartphone which can be used as a remote microphone. Therefore, it is paramount that the available wireless protocols be considered relative to the listener's experience with wireless technology so that solutions may be offered that are efficient, economical, and effective., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest The author has received compensation as a consultant for Phonak Hearing Aids., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

School classrooms are noisy and reverberant environments, and the poor acoustics can be a barrier to successful learning in children, particularly those with multiple disabilities, auditory processing issues, and hearing loss. A new set of listening challenges have been imposed by the recent global pandemic and subsequent online learning requirements. The goal of this article is to review the impact of poor acoustics on the performance of children with auditory processing issues, mild hearing loss, and unilateral hearing loss. In addition, we will summarize the evidence in support of remote microphone technology by these populations., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest The first author has received research grant funding from two hearing device manufacturers, Phonak and Oticon., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Remote microphones (RMs) have been developed to support hearing aid (HA) users in understanding distant talkers. In traditional clinical applications, a drawback of these systems is the deteriorated speech intelligibility in the near field. This study investigates advantages and disadvantages of clinical RM usage and the effects of different directionality settings of the HAs in complex listening situations in the laboratory. Speech intelligibility was investigated in 15 experienced severely hearing impaired participants in a noisy environment using a dual-task test paradigm where the tasks were presented from either a near field or a far field loudspeaker. Primary and secondary tasks were presented simultaneously so attention had to be shared on both tasks. In a second experiment, two speech intelligibility tests were presented from either the near field or the far field loudspeaker. The tests were interleaved to simulate a complex listening situation with shifting attention. Directional HA microphones yielded better performance than omnidirectional microphones (both combined with a RM) in near field when analyzing both tasks of the dual-task experiment separately. Furthermore, the integrated dual-task test results showed better performance with directional HA microphones compared with the omnidirectional setting (both cases in combination with a RM). These findings were confirmed by the results of the interleaved speech intelligibility test.