Download PDF
J Am Acad Audiol 1999; 10(10): 535-548
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1748544
Original Article

Use of a Digital Hearing Aid with Directional Microphones in School-aged Children

Francis K. Kuk
Widex Hearing Aid Company, Long Island City, New York
,
Cindy Kollofski
Columbia Regional Program for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Portland, Oregon
,
Sherry Brown
Columbia Regional Program for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Portland, Oregon
,
Arla Melum
Columbia Regional Program for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Portland, Oregon
,
Amy Rosenthal
Columbia Regional Program for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Portland, Oregon
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
  PDF Download  Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The efficacy of a digital hearing aid with a directional microphone was examined in a school-aged population. Twenty children (9 with a mild-to-moderately-severe hearing loss and 11 with a moderate-to-severe hearing loss) between 71/2 and 132/3 years of age wore the study hearing aids binaurally for 30 days prior to the evaluation. The testing protocol included speech recognition tests using the CID W-22 word lists presented at 72 dB SPL, 65 dB SPL, and 52 dB SPL (at 0° azimuth) in the presence of a 65 dB SPL party noise (180° azimuth). Subjective rating of hearing aid efficacy in the classroom was examined using the Listening Inventory For Education (LIFE) questionnaire. Parental impression on hearing aid efficacy was also collected at the end of the study. The results showed improved speech recognition in noise with the digital directional hearing aid at all presentation levels. Preference for the digital directional hearing aids over the subjects' own omnidirectional analog hearing aids was also seen on the LIFE questionnaire and parental impression. The degree of hearing loss did not seem to have affected the benefits offered by the digital directional hearing aids. These results were compared to results from other studies on the use of directional microphones in hearing aids.

Abbreviations: BTE = behind the ear, CT = compression threshold, Dl = directivity index, HINT = Hearing In Noise Test, LIFE = Listening Inventory For Education, SNR = signal-to-noise ratio, WDRC = wide dynamic range compression

Keywords

Children - digital - directional - hearing aid - low compression threshold - omnidirectional


Publication History

Article published online:
09 May 2022

© 1999. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • REFERENCES

  • Agnew J, Block M. (1997). HINT thresholds for dual microphone BTE. Hear Rev 4(9):26, 29.
  • Anderson K, Smaldino J. (1998). The Listening Inventories For Education (LIFE). Florida: Educational Audiology Association.
  • Bess F, Chase P, Gravel J, Tharp A, Seewald R, Stelmachowicz P, Hedley-Williams A. (1996). Amplification for infants and children with hearing loss. Am JAudiol 5(1):53-68.
  • Gravel J, Fausel N, Liskow C, Chobot J. (1999). Children's speech recognition in noise: using omnidirectional and dual microphone hearing aid technology. Ear Hear 20(1):1–11.
  • Hawkins D. (1984). Comparisons of speech recognition in noise by mildly-to-moderately hearing impaired children using hearing aids and FM systems. ASHA 49:409–118.
  • Hawkins D, Yacullo W. (1984). Signal-to-noise advantage of binaural hearing aids and directional microphones under different levels of reverberation. J Speech Hear Disord 49:278–286.
  • Kuk F. (1996). Subjective preference for microphone types in daily listening environments. Hear J 49(4):29–34.
  • Kuk F. (1998). Using the I/O curve to help solve subjective complaints with WDRC hearing instruments. Hear Rev 5(1):8–16, 59.
  • Lee L, Lau C, Sullivan D. (1998). The advantage of a low compression threshold in directional microphones. Hear Rev 5(8):30, 32.
  • Madison T, Hawkins D. (1983). The signal-to-noise ratio advantage of directional microphones. Hear Instr 34(2):18, 49.
  • Mueller G. (1981). Directional microphone hearing aids: a 10 year report. Hear Instr 32(11):18-20, 66.
  • Nielsen H, Ludvigsen C. (1978). Effect of hearing aids with directional microphones in different acoustic environments. Scand Audiol 7:217–224.
  • Preves D. (1997). Directional microphone use in ITE hearing instruments. Hear Rev 4(7):21, 24–27.
  • Ricketts T, Dhar S. (1999). Comparison of performance across three directional hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol 10:180–189.
  • Widex. (1997). Senso Reference Guide to Fitting and Programming. Long Island, NY: Widex.
  • Sommers M. (1979). Directional/non-directional hearing aids: one, the other, or both? Hear Aid J January: 7, 27.
  • Studebaker G, Cox R, Formby C. (1980). The effect of environment on the directional performance of head-worn hearing aids. In: Studebaker G, Hochberg I, eds. Acoustical Factors Affecting Hearing Aid Performance. Baltimore: University Park Press, 81–105.
  • Valente Μ, Fabry D, Potts L. (1995). Recognition of speech in noise with hearing aids using dual microphones. J Am Acad Audiol 6:440–449.
  • Valente Μ, Fabry D, Potts L, Sandlin R. (1998). Comparing the performance of the Widex Senso digital hearing aid with analog hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol 9:342–360.
  • Valente Μ, Sweetow R, Potts L, Bingea B. (1999). Comparing the performance between digital signal processing with omnidirectional and directional microphones with analog signal processing. J Am Acad Audiol 10:133–150.