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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the evolution of hearing aids and cochlear implants, noisy environments are reportedly still an important hurdle for persons with hearing loss, especially in the process of speech recognition. The development of pre-processing algorithms and the pairing with a wireless device can bring relief to this situation, but it is still under scrutiny whether one or the other is more effective. The purpose of this study was to compare the benefits of speech recognition in a noisy environment by recipients of cochlear implants when using the pre-processing automatic algorithms or when using a wireless microphone. Twenty-nine participants were selected, aged 14 to 83, suffering from sensorineural hearing loss and recipients of cochlear implants for at least 6 months. The proprietary Cochlear Limited SCAN technology uses pre-processing algorithms to attenuate various noises; the wireless device MiniMic2 uses a 2.4 GHz connection to facilitate communications between the recipient and the signal source. Participants were asked to repeat 20 sentences randomly generated by the adaptive Italian Matrix Sentence Test, first while using the SCAN technology and then with the wireless MiniMic2. Both signal and noise were administered through a single loudspeaker set 1 m away from the subject. Significantly better results in speech recognition of noise were achieved with the wireless MiniMic2 when compared to the SCAN technology.

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.

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]