Search

To determine the effect of nonlinear frequency compression (NLFC) on children's development of speech and language at three years of age.A randomized controlled trial was conducted as part of the population-based longitudinal study on outcomes of children with hearing impairment (LOCHI). Participants were randomly assigned to fitting with NLFC (Phonak Naida V SP or UP) or with conventional processing in hearing aids, prescribed by using either the NAL or the DSL formula. Standardized tests of speech production, receptive and expressive language were administered, and parent ratings were collected. All assessments were double-blinded.Participants were 44 of the 450 children in the LOCHI cohort.Compared to children using conventional processing, receptive and expressive language was higher but receptive vocabulary and consonant articulation scores were lower for children who use NLFC. There was increased substitution of affricates by fricatives for children using NLFC, compared to children using conventional amplification. After allowing for the effect of multiple demographic variables, the difference in global language scores between groups was not significant (effect: 0.8 [95% confidence interval: - 6.7, 8.3]).There is insufficient evidence to indicate a difference in language ability between children using NLFC and those using conventional amplification.

To examine the impact of prescription on predicted speech intelligibility and loudness for children.A between-group comparison of speech intelligibility index (SII) and loudness, based on hearing aids fitted according to NAL-NL1, DSL v4.1, or DSL m[i/o] prescriptions. A within-group comparison of gains prescribed by DSL m[i/o] and NAL-NL2 for children in terms of SII and loudness.Participants were 200 children, who were randomly assigned to first hearing-aid fitting with either NAL-NL1, DSL v4.1, or DSL m[i/o]. Audiometric data and hearing-aid data at 3 years of age were used.On average, SII calculated on the basis of hearing-aid gains were higher for DSL than for NAL-NL1 at low input level, equivalent at medium input level, and higher for NAL-NL1 than DSL at high input level. Greater loudness was associated with DSL than with NAL-NL1, across a range of input levels. Comparing NAL-NL2 and DSL m[i/o] target gains revealed higher SII for the latter at low input level. SII was higher for NAL-NL2 than for DSL m[i/o] at medium- and high-input levels despite greater loudness for gains prescribed by DSL m[i/o] than by NAL-NL2.The choice of prescription has minimal effects on speech intelligibility predictions but marked effects on loudness predictions.