Influence of Loudness Compression on Hearing with Bone Anchored Hearing Implants

Authors: Anja Kurz, Marc Flynn, Tobias Good, Marco Caversaccio, Martin Kompis

Abstract:

Bone Anchored Hearing Implants (BAHI) are  routinely used in patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss, e.g.  if conventional air conduction hearing aids cannot be used. New  sound processors and new fitting software now allow the adjustment  of parameters such as loudness compression ratios or maximum  power output separately. Today it is unclear, how the choice of these  parameters influences aided speech understanding in BAHI users.  In this prospective experimental study, the effect of varying the  compression ratio and lowering the maximum power output in a  BAHI were investigated.  Twelve experienced adult subjects with a mixed hearing loss  participated in this study. Four different compression ratios (1.0; 1.3;  1.6; 2.0) were tested along with two different maximum power output  settings, resulting in a total of eight different programs. Each  participant tested each program during two weeks. A blinded Latin  square design was used to minimize bias.  For each of the eight programs, speech understanding in quiet and  in noise was assessed. For speech in quiet, the Freiburg number test  and the Freiburg monosyllabic word test at 50, 65, and 80 dB SPL  were used. For speech in noise, the Oldenburg sentence test was  administered.  Speech understanding in quiet and in noise was improved  significantly in the aided condition in any program, when compared  to the unaided condition. However, no significant differences were  found between any of the eight programs. In contrast, on a subjective  level there was a significant preference for medium compression  ratios of 1.3 to 1.6 and higher maximum power output.

 

Keywords: Bone Anchored Hearing Implant, Compression, Maximum Power Output, Speech understanding.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1336164

References:

[1] T. N. Roth, D. Hanebuth, and R. Probst, "Prevalence of age-related hearing loss in Europe: a review,” Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol., vol. 268, pp. 1101–1107, 2011.
[2] World Health Organization (WHO), "Deafness and Hearing loss,” Fact sheet No.300, 2013.
[3] M. K. S. Hol, A. F. M. Snik, E. a M. Mylanus, and C. W. R. J. Cremers, "Long-term results of bone-anchored hearing aid recipients who had previously used air-conduction hearing aids,” Arch. Otolaryngol. Head. Neck Surg., vol. 131, no. 4, pp. 321–5, Apr. 2005.
[4] A. J. Bosman, A. F. M. Snik, E. a M. Mylanus, and C. W. R. J. Cremers, "Fitting range of the BAHA Cordelle.,” Int. J. Audiol., vol. 45, no. 8, pp. 429–37, Aug. 2006.
[5] A. J. Bosman, F. M. Snik, E. a M. Mylanus, and W. R. J. Cremers, "Fitting range of the BAHA Intenso.,” Int. J. Audiol., vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 346–52, Jan. 2009.
[6] F. Pfiffner, M. D. Caversaccio, and M. Kompis, "Comparisons of sound processors based on osseointegrated implants in patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss.,” Otol. Neurotol., vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 728–35, Jul. 2011.
[7] A. Kurz, M. Caversaccio, and M. Kompis, "Hearing performance with 2 different high-power sound processors for osseointegrated auditory implants,” Otol. Neurotol., no. 34, pp. 604–610, 2013.
[8] M. Kompis, M. Krebs, and R. Häusler, "Speech understanding in quiet and in noise with the bone-anchored hearing aids Baha Compact and Baha Divino.,” Acta Otolaryngol., vol. 127, no. 8, pp. 829–35, Aug. 2007.
[9] H. Dillon, Hearing Aids, 1st ed. Stuttgart: Thieme, 2001, p. 169.
[10] S. Stenfelt and M. Zeitooni, "Loudness functions with air and bone conduction stimulation in normal-hearing subjects using a categorical loudness scaling procedure,” Hear. Res., vol. 301, pp. 85–92, Jul. 2013.
[11] S. Stenfelt and B. Håkansson, "Air versus bone conduction: an equal loudness investigation,” Hear. Res., vol. 167, no. 1–2, pp. 1–12, May 2002.
[12] M. Kompis, M. Krebs, and H. R, "Ueberprüfung der Bezugskurven der Schweizer Version des Freiburger Zahlen- und Einsilbertests,” HNO, no. 454, pp. 445–50, 2005.
[13] K. B. Wagener K, Brand T, "Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztestes für die deutsche Sprache Teil III: Evaluation des Oldenburger Satztestes,” Audiol. Acoust, vol. 38:86Y95, 1999.
[14] R. S. Tyler, S. A. Witt, C. C. Dunn, and A. E. Perreau, "A daily alternating method for comparing different signal- processing strategies in hearing aids and in cochlear implants,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 443–454, 2008.
[15] A. Gabrielsson, B. N. Schenkman, and B. Hagerman, "The effects of different frequency responses on sound quality judgments and speech intelligibility,” J. Speech Hear. Res., vol. 31, pp. 166–177, 1988.