Consideration of Auditory Acclimatization in the Prescriptive Fitting of Hearing Aids

ABSTRACT

Many hearing aid users require a period of time to adjust to new amplification or to changes in amplification; a process often termed auditory adaptation or acclimatization. This adjustment process can be related to the loudness levels of speech, changes in the spectrum of speech, environmental sounds, or other acoustic events. In many instances, a careful balance must be maintained between providing the patient with the appropriate gain and frequency response that will allow acclimatization to occur and at the same time avoiding hearing aid settings that will discourage the patient from using amplification. In this article we review several factors related to auditory acclimatization, illustrate how these factors relate to the features of today's hearing aids, and describe a software-based acclimatization procedure that can be easily implemented by dispensers in conjunction with popular prescriptive fitting procedures.

Hearing aids - acclimatization - adaption - prescriptive fittings

REFERENCES

• 1 Lindley G, Palmer C V, Durrant J, Pratt S. Audiologist versus patient-driven hearing and fitting protocols.  . 2001;  22 139-160
• 2 Gatehouse S. Apparent auditory deprivation effects of late onset: the role of presentation level.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1989;  86(5) 2103-2106
• 3 Palmer C V. Deprivation, acclimatization, adaptation: what do they mean for your hearing aid fittings.  Hear J . 1995;  48(5) 10,41-45
• 4 Robinson K, Summerfield Q. Adult auditory learning and training.  Ear Hear . 1996;  51S-65S (51S-65S)
• 5 Willott J F. Physiological plasticity in the auditory system and its possible relevance to hearing aid use, deprivation effects and acclimatization.  Ear Hear . 1996;  66S-77S (66S-77S)
• 6 Killion M C. The K-amp hearing aid: an attempt to present high fidelity for persons with impaired hearing.  Am J Audio . 1993;  2(2) 52-74
• 7 Walden B, Schwartz D, Williams D, Holum-Hardegen L, Crowley J. Test of the assumptions underlying comparative hearing aid evaluations.  J Speech Hear Disord . 1993;  48 264-273
• 8 Mueller H G. Just make it audible, comfortable and loud but okay.  Hear J . 1999;  52(1) 10-17
• 9 Cox R M. Using loudness data for hearing aid selection: the IHAFF approach.  Hear J . 1995;  48(2) 10,39-44
• 10 Palmer C V, Valente M, Powers T A, Mueller H G. The impact of restoring normal loudness growth on speech understanding as a function of signal-to-noise ratio and input level. Paper presented at NIH/VA Hearing Aid Research and Development Conference, Bethesda, MD, September 1997
• 11 Seewald R C, Cornelisse L E, Ramji K V, Sinclair S T, Moodie K S, Jamieson D G. A software implementation of the Desired Sensation Level (DSL[i/o]) method for fitting linear gain and wide dynamic range compression hearing instruments: version 4.1a.  User's Manual. London: The University of Western Ontario; 1997
• 12 Mueller H G. Siemens Signia: preliminary finding of clinical trial studies. Paper presented at the Siemens International Symposium, Paris, July 2000
• 13 Mueller H G, Palmer C V. The profile of aided loudness: a new ``PAL'' for '98.  Hear J . 1998;  51(1) 10-17
• 14 Palmer C V, Mueller H G, Moriarty M. Profile of aided loudness: a validation procedure.  Hear J . 1999;  52(6) 34-42
• 15 Smith N E. Loudness acclimatization to amplification. Unpublished Au.D. Capstone, Central Michigan University, 2001
• 16 Dillon H, Byrne D, Brewer S, Katch R, Ching T, Keidser G. NAL non-linear, version 1.1  User Manual. Sydney: Australian Hearing; 1999
• 17 Byrne D, Dirks D. Effects of acclimatization and deprivation on non-speech auditory abilities.  Ear Hear (Suppl) . 1996;  17(3) 29S-37S
• 18 Lindley G. Adaptation to loudness: implications for hearing aid fittings.  Hear J . 1999;  52(11) 50-57
• 19 Mueller H G, Bryant M P, Brown W D, Budinger A C. Hearing aid selection for high-frequency hearing loss. In: Studebaker G, Bess F, Beck L, eds. Vanderbilt Hearing Aid Report II Parkton, MD: York Press 1991: 269-286
• 20 Watson N A, Knudsen V O. Selective amplification in hearing aids.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1940;  2 406-419
• 21 Cox R M, Alexander G C. Maturation of hearing aid benefit: objective and subjective measurements.  Ear Hear . 1992;  13 131-141
• 22 Gatehouse S. The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids.  J Acoust Soc Am . 1992;  92 1258-1268
• 23 Turner C W, Humes L E, Bentler R A, Cox R M. A review of past research on changes in hearing aid benefit over time.  Ear Hear (Suppl) . 1996;  17(3) 14S-28S
• 24 Bentler R A, Holte L, Turner C. An update on the acclimatization issue.  Hear J . 1999;  52(11) 44-49
• 25 Mueller H G, Bright K E. Selection and verification of maximum output. In: Valente M, ed. Strategies for Selecting and Verifying Hearing Aid Fittings New York: Thieme Medical Publishers 1994: 38-63
• 26 Bentler R A, Niebuhr D P, Getta J P, Anderson C V. Longitudinal study of hearing aid effectiveness: objective measures.  J Speech Hear Res . 1993;  36 820-831
• 27 Barker C, Dillon H. Client preferences for compression threshold in single-channel wide dynamic range compression hearing aids.  Ear Hear . 1999;  20(2) 127-139
• 28 Mueller H G. What's the digital difference when it comes to patient benefit?.  Hear J . 2000;  53(3) 23-32
• 29 Powers T, Burton P. DSP benefits: moving beyond traditional analog capabilities.  Hear Rev . 2000;  7(10) 62-67
• 30 Powers T, Burton P. Combining 4-channel WDRC with 4-channel AGC-O: a new solution to an old problem. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Audiology, Chicago, March, 2000
• 31 Mergell P. Patient preference for acclimatization levels of the DSL4.1 Unpublished internal research. Siemens Hearing Instruments, 1999
• 32 Mueller H G. Probe-mic assessment of digital hearing aids?.  <~>Yes you can. Hear J . 2001;  51(1) 10-17