Candidacy and Device Options: Personal Amplification Systems for School-Aged Children

ABSTRACT

Over the past 10 to 15 years, advances in personal hearing technology have allowed for a remarkable improvement in speech, language, auditory, and academic outcomes for children with all degrees of hearing loss. With contemporary technology, pediatric and educational audiologists should be able to achieve the stated goal in the American Academy of Audiology Pediatric Amplification Guideline to provide a signal that makes low-, moderate-, and high-level sounds audible and comfortable for the child while also providing a high sound quality across a variety of listening environments. This article discusses various types of personal hearing technology available for school-aged children including digital hearing aids, cochlear implants, bone-anchored hearing aids, and personal frequency-modulated devices. Candidacy guidelines will be discussed for each device, and device-specific features, such as signal-processing characteristics, that are beneficial for school-aged children will be addressed. Finally, case studies will be provided to demonstrate the decision-making process involved in selecting personal hearing technology for children with hearing loss.

KEYWORDS

Digital hearing aids - cochlear implants - bone-anchored hearing aids - personal FM devices

REFERENCES

• 1 Bess F. Unilateral hearing loss in children.  Ear Hear. 1986;  7 14-19
• 2 Bess F, Tharpe A, Gibler A. Children with minimal sensorineural hearing loss: prevalence, educational performance, and functional health status.  Ear Hear. 1998;  17 1-11
• 3 Cheffo S. Educational placement options for school-aged children with hearing loss. In: Madell J, Flexer C Pediatric Audiology: Diagnosis, Technology and Management. New York, NY; Thieme 2008: 168-182
• 4 Geers A. Performance aspects of mainstreaming. In: Ross M Hearing Impaired Children in the Mainstream. Parkton, MD; York Press 1990
• 5 Geers A E. Predictors of reading skill development in children with early cochlear implantation.  Ear Hear. 2003;  24(1 Suppl) 59S-68S
• 6 Robertson L. Literacy and Deafness: Listening and Spoken Language. San Diego, CA; Plural Publishing 2009
• 7 Connor C M, Craig H K, Raudenbush S W, Heavner K, Zwolan T A. The age at which young deaf children receive cochlear implants and their vocabulary and speech-production growth: is there an added value for early implantation?.  Ear Hear. 2006;  27 628-644
• 8 Eisenberg L S. Current state of knowledge: speech recognition and production in children with hearing impairment.  Ear Hear. 2007;  28 766-772
• 9 Hayes H, Geers A E, Treiman R, Moog J S. Receptive vocabulary development in deaf children with cochlear implants: achievement in an intensive auditory-oral educational setting.  Ear Hear. 2009;  30 128-135
• 10 Moeller M P, Hoover B, Putman C et al.. Vocalizations of infants with hearing loss compared with infants with normal hearing: part I—phonetic development.  Ear Hear. 2007;  28 605-627
• 11 Moeller M P, Hoover B, Putman C et al.. Vocalizations of infants with hearing loss compared with infants with normal hearing: part II—transition to words.  Ear Hear. 2007;  28 628-642
• 12 Moeller M P, Tomblin J B, Yoshinaga-Itano C, Connor C M, Jerger S. Current state of knowledge: language and literacy of children with hearing impairment.  Ear Hear. 2007;  28 740-753
• 13 Moog J S, Geers A E. Epilogue: major findings, conclusions and implications for deaf education.  Ear Hear. 2003;  24(1 Supp l) 121S-125S
• 14 Nikolopoulos T P, Dyar D, Archbold S, O'Donoghue G M. Development of spoken language grammar following cochlear implantation in prelingually deaf children.  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;  130 629-633
• 15 Freeman R. Psychosocial problems associated with childhood hearing impairment. In: Bradford L, Hardy W Hearing and Hearing Impairment. New York, NY; Grune and Stratton 2008
• 16 Meadow K, Trybus R. Behavioral and emotional problems of deaf children: an overview. In: Bradford L, Hardy W Hearing and Hearing Impairment. New York, NY; Grune and Stratton 2008
• 17 Nicholas J G, Geers A E. Personal, social, and family adjustment in school-aged children with a cochlear implant.  Ear Hear. 2003;  24(1Supp l) 69S-81S
• 18 Pediatric Amplification Guideline . Position statement of the American Academy of Audiology.  Audiology Today. 2004;  16 46-53
• 19 Shallop J. Management of children with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder: cochlear implants. In: Guidelines for Identification and Management of Infants and Young Children with Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder. Guidelines Development Conference at NHS 2008:33–34
• 20 McKay S. Issues related to amplification for children with mild or unilateral hearing loss.  In: National Workshop on Mild and Unilateral Hearing Loss: Workshop Proceedings. Breckenridge, CO; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2005: 20-21
• 21 Reeve K. Amplification and family factors for children with mild and unilateral hearing impairment.  In: National Workshop on Mild and Unilateral Hearing Loss: Workshop Proceedings. Breckenridge, CO; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2005: 20-21
• 22 Tharpe A. Unilateral hearing loss in children: a mountain or a molehill?.  Hear J. 2007;  60 13-16
• 23 National Workshop on Mild and Unilateral Hearing Loss .Workshop Proceedings. Breckenridge, CO; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2005
• 24 Guidelines for Identification and Management of Infants and Young Children with Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder .Guidelines Development Conference at NHS; 2008. 
• 25 DeJonge R. Selecting and verifying hearing aid fittings for symmetrical hearing loss. In: Valente M Strategies for Selecting and Verifying Hearing Aid Fittings. New York, NY; Thieme 1994: 180-206
• 26 Gelfand S A, Silman S. Apparent auditory deprivation in children: implications of monaural versus binaural amplification.  J Am Acad Audiol. 1993;  4 313-318
• 27 Kuk F K. Maximum usable real-ear insertion gain with ten earmold designs.  J Am Acad Audiol. 1994;  5 44-51
• 28 Kuk F K. Perceptual consequence of vents in hearing aids.  Br J Audiol. 1991;  25 163-169
• 29 Painton S W. Objective measure of low-frequency amplification reduction in canal hearing aids with adaptive circuitry.  J Am Acad Audiol. 1993;  4 152-156
• 30 Keidser G, Dillon H, Dyrlund O, Carter L, Hartley D. Preferred low- and high-frequency compression ratios among hearing aid users with moderately severe to profound hearing loss.  J Am Acad Audiol. 2007;  18 17-33
• 31 Marriage J E, Moore B C, Stone M A, Baer T. Effects of three amplification strategies on speech perception by children with severe and profound hearing loss.  Ear Hear. 2005;  26 35-47
• 32 Palmer C V, Grimes A M. Effectiveness of signal processing strategies for the pediatric population: a systematic review of the evidence.  J Am Acad Audiol. 2005;  16 505-514
• 33 Kuk F. Fitting approaches for hearing aids with linear and nonlinear signal processing. In: Valente M, Hosford-Dun, Roeser R Audiology: Treatment. New York, NY; Thieme 2008: 179-197
• 34 Flynn M C, Davis P B, Pogash R. Multiple-channel non-linear power hearing instruments for children with severe hearing impairment: long-term follow-up.  Int J Audiol. 2004;  43 479-485
• 35 Dillon H. Hearing Aids. New York, NY; Thieme 2001: 118-158
• 36 Banerjee S, Recker K, Paumen A. A tale of two feedback cancellers.  Hearing Review. 2006;  13 40-44
• 37 Kuk F. Changing with the times: additional criteria for a good feedback cancellation algorithm.  Hearing Review. 2006;  13 38-48
• 38 Chung K. Challenges and recent developments in hearing aids. Part II. Feedback and occlusion effect reduction strategies, laser shell manufacturing processes, and other signal processing technologies.  Trends Amplif. 2004;  8 125-164
• 39 Stelmachowicz P G, Pittman A L, Hoover B M, Lewis D E. Effect of stimulus bandwidth on the perception of /s/ in normal- and hearing-impaired children and adults.  J Acoust Soc Am. 2001;  110 2183-2190
• 40 Mahaffey M. Life is on: SoundRecover: who, what, how?. Available at: http://www.audiologyonline.com/ceus/index.asp Accessed July 27, 2009
• 41 Kuk F, Korhonen P, Peters H, Keenan D, Jessen A, Anderson H. Linear frequency transposition: extending the audibility of high-frequency information.  Hear Rev. 2006;  13 42-48
• 42 Auriemmo J, Kuk F, Lau C et al.. Effect of linear frequency transposition on speech recognition and production of school-age children.  J Am Acad Audiol. 2009;  20 289-305
• 43 Glista D, Scollie S, Bagatto M, Seewald R, Parsa V, Johnson A. Evaluation of nonlinear frequency compression: clinical outcomes.  Int J Audiol. 2009;  48 632-644
• 44 Wolfe J, Caraway T, John A, Schafer E, Nyffeler M. Study suggests that non-linear frequency compression helps children with moderate loss.  Hear J. 2010;  , In press
• 45 Nozza R J, Rossman R N, Bond L C, Miller S L. Infant speech-sound discrimination in noise.  J Acoust Soc Am. 1990;  87 339-350
• 46 Gravel J S, Fausel N, Liskow C, Chobot J. Children's speech recognition in noise using omni-directional and dual-microphone hearing aid technology.  Ear Hear. 1999;  20 1-11
• 47 Kuk F K, Kollofski C, Brown S, Melum A, Rosenthal A. Use of a digital hearing aid with directional microphones in school-aged children.  J Am Acad Audiol. 1999;  10 535-548
• 48 Wolfe J. Noise reduction technologies: are they appropriate for children?. Paper presented at: 5th Widex Congress of Pediatric Audiology 2008 Amsterdam, Netherlands;
• 49 Dillon H, Ching T, Golding M. Hearing aids for infants and children. In: Madell J, Flexer C Pediatric Audiology: Diagnosis, Technology and Management. New York, NY; Thieme 2008: 168-182
• 50 Lewis D, Eiten L. Hearing instrument selection and fitting in children. In: Valente M, Hosford-Dun, Roeser R Audiology: Treatment. New York, NY; Thieme 2008: 94-118
• 51 Ricketts T A, Galster J. Head angle and elevation in classroom environments: implications for amplification.  J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008;  51 516-525
• 52 Ricketts T, Galster J, Tharpe A M. Directional benefit in simulated classroom environments.  Am J Audiol. 2007;  16 130-144
• 53 Ricketts T, Dittberner A. Directional amplification for improved signal-to-noise ratio: strategies, measurements, and limitations. In: Valente M Hearing Aids: Standards, Options, and Limitations. 2nd Ed. New York, NY; Thieme 2002: 274-346
• 54 Peeters H, Kuk F, Lau C C, Keenan D. Subjective and objective evaluation of noise management algorithms.  J Am Acad Audiol. 2009;  20 89-98
• 55 Chung K. Challenges and recent developments in hearing aids. Part I. Speech understanding in noise, microphone technologies and noise reduction algorithms.  Trends Amplif. 2004;  8 83-124
• 56 Davidson L S. Effects of stimulus level on the speech perception abilities of children using cochlear implants or digital hearing aids.  Ear Hear. 2006;  27 493-507
• 57 Peters B R, Litovsky R, Parkinson A, Lake J. Importance of age and postimplantation experience on speech perception measures in children with sequential bilateral cochlear implants.  Otol Neurotol. 2007;  28 649-657
• 58 Wolfe J, Baker S, Caraway T et al.. One-year post-activation results for children who underwent sequential bilateral cochlear implantation at varying ages.  Otol Neurotol. 2007;  28 389-396
• 59 Ching T, Incerti P, Hill M, van Wanrooy E. An overview of binaural advantages for children and adults who use binaural/bimodal hearing devices.  Audiol Neurootol. 2006;  11S 6-11
• 60 Litovsky R, Johnstone P, Godar S. Benefits of bilateral cochlear implants and or hearing aids in children.  Int J Audiol. 2006;  45 78S-91S
• 61 Eisenberg L Clinical Management of Children with Cochlear Implants. San Diego, CA; Plural Publishing 2009
• 62 Christensen L, Dornhoffer J L. Bone-anchored hearing aids for unilateral hearing loss in teenagers.  Otol Neurotol. 2008;  29 1120-1122
• 63 Christensen L, Richter G T, Dornhoffer J L. Update on bone-anchored hearing aids in pediatric patients with profound unilateral sensorineural hearing loss.  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;  136 175-177
• 64 Valente M. Fitting options for adults patients with single sided deafness (SSD). Available at: http://www.audiologyonline.com/ceus/textcoursedetails.asp?class_id=6279 Accessed July 24, 2009