Personal Sound Amplification Products Research Articles

A Personal Sound Amplification Product Compared to a Basic Hearing Aid for Speech Intelligibility in Adults with Mild-to-Moderate Sensorineural Hearing Loss.

Background and ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare functional hearing with the use of a personal sound amplification product (PSAP) or a basic hearing aid (HA) among sensorineural hearing impaired listeners.Subjects and MethodsNineteen participants with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) (26-55 dB HL; pure-tone average, 0.5-4 kHz) were prospectively included. No participants had prior experience with HAs or PSAPs. Audiograms, speech intelligibility in both quiet and noisy environments, speech quality, and preference were assessed in three different listening conditions: unaided, with the HA, and with the PSAP.ResultsThe use of PSAP was associated with significant improvement in pure-tone thresholds at 1, 2, and 4 kHz compared to the unaided condition (all p<0.01). In the quiet environment, speech intelligibility was significantly improved after wearing a PSAP compared to the unaided condition (p<0.001), and this improvement was better than the result obtained with the HA. The PSAP also demonstrated similar improvement in the most comfortable levels compared to those obtained with the HA (p<0.05). However, there was no significant improvement of speech intelligibility in a noisy environment when wearing the PSAP (p=0.160). There was no significant difference in the reported speech quality produced by either device or in participant preference for the PSAP or HA.ConclusionsThe current result suggests that PSAPs provide considerable benefits to speech intelligibility in a quiet environment and can be a good alternative to compensate for mild-to-moderate SNHL.

A Machine Learning Based Clustering Protocol for Determining Hearing Aid Initial Configurations from Pure-Tone Audiograms.

Of the nearly 35 million people in the USA who are hearing impaired, only an estimated 25% use hearing aids (HA). A good number of HAs are prescribed but not used partially because of the time to convergence for best operation between the audiologist and user. To improve HA retention, it is suggested that a machine learning (ML) protocol could be established which improves initial HA configurations given a user's pure-tone audiogram. This study examines a ML clustering method to predict the best initial HA fitting from a corpus of over 90,000 audiogram-fitting pairs collected from hearing centers throughout the USA. We first examine the final HA comfort targets to determine a limited number of preset configurations using several multi-dimensional clustering methods (Birch, Ward, and k-means). The goal is to reduce the amount of adjustments between the centroid, selected as a fitting configuration to represent the cluster, and the final HA configurations. This may be used to reduce the adjustment cycles for HAs or as preset starting configurations for personal sound amplification products (PSAPs). Using various classification methods, audiograms are mapped to a limited number of potential preset configurations. Finally, the average adjustment between the preset fitting targets and the final fitting targets is examined.

Consumer Opinion of Personal Sound Amplification Products: A Preliminary Sentiment Analysis.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to preliminarily investigate the sentiments associated with consumer opinions of personal sound amplification products (PSAPs). Method Online reviews of 21 popular PSAPs were collected from the Amazon.com website. The reviews for each product were exported to compile individual product-specific text files. A sentiment mining analysis was completed to aggregate the number of positive and negative comments for each product. In addition, the effect of value for money, available features, perceived benefit, and overall perception of PSAPs was evaluated. A correlational analysis was completed to examine the relationship between different PSAP features and the number of positive and negative comments. Results Mixed-model analysis of variance showed a significantly higher number of positive comments for high- and mid-cost products in terms of overall perception and perceived benefit compared to low-cost products. For feature attribute, high-cost products had significantly higher positive comments compared to mid- and low-cost products. There was a strong correlation between price and positive comments and a moderate correlation between price and negative comments. Also, there was a significant moderate correlation between presence of compression and feedback suppression PSAP features and positive comments. Conclusions Positive sentiments expressed toward PSAPs were found to favor high- and mid-level products. However, there was a considerably high number of negative sentiments reported across all the PSAPs investigated. The noticeable thing is that the negative comments do not change significantly across price ranges. However, the positive comments significantly increase with an increase in product price range. This indicates a possible increase in benefit with high-cost products. However, this claim requires further empirical evidence through controlled studies.

Clinical Performance Evaluation of a Personal Sound Amplification Product vs a Basic Hearing Aid and a Premium Hearing Aid

Hearing loss is a highly prevalent condition with multiple negative associated outcomes, yet few persons with hearing loss have hearing aids (HAs). Personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) could be an alternative low-cost solution to HAs, but data are lacking on the performance of PSAPs. To evaluate the clinical efficacy of a PSAP by comparing its performance with that of a basic HA and a premium HA in participants with mild, moderate, and moderately severe hearing impairment. A prospective, single-institution cohort study was performed with a total of 56 participants, including 19 with mild hearing loss, 20 with moderate hearing loss, and 17 with moderately severe hearing loss. All participants underwent 4 clinical hearing tests with each of the PSAP, basic HA, and premium HA, and all completed an evaluative questionnaire. All hearing devices (PSAP, basic HA, and premium HA) were applied by a clinician to prevent bias and order effects; participants were blinded to the device in use, and sequence of devices was randomized. The study used the Korean version of the hearing in noise test, the speech intelligibility in noise test, listening effort measurement using a dual-task paradigm, pupillometry, and a self-rating questionnaire regarding sound quality and preference. These tests were administered under the following 4 hearing conditions: unaided hearing, use of PSAP, use of basic HA, and use of premium HA. The study included 56 participants with a mean age of 56 years (interquartile range, 48-59 years); 29 (52%) were women. In the mild and moderate hearing loss groups, there was no meaningful difference between PSAP, basic HA, and premium HA for speech perception (Cohen d = 0.06-1.05), sound quality (Cohen d = 0.06-0.71), listening effort (Cohen d = 0.10-0.92), and user preference (PSAP, 41%; basic HA, 28%; premium HA, 31%). However, for the patients with moderately severe hearing loss, the premium HA had better performance across most tests (Cohen d = 0.60-1.59), and 70% of participants preferred to use the premium HA. The results indicate that basic and premium HAs were not superior to the PSAP in patients with mild to moderate hearing impairment, which suggests that PSAPs might be used as an alternative to HAs in these patient populations. However, if hearing loss is more severe, then HAs, especially premium HAs, should be considered as an option to manage hearing loss.

Applying the COM-B Model to Assess the Usability of Smartphone-Connected Listening Devices in Adults with Hearing Loss.

Unlike conventional hearing aids, smartphone-connected listening devices may require limited or no input from a trained audiologist in terms of device programming and adjustment. However, there is a lack of peer-reviewed evidence assessing the real-world perspectives of people living with hearing loss toward such technological innovations. This study assessed the everyday experiences of adults living with hearing loss toward a range of smartphone-connected listening devices using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour (COM-B) model as a theoretical framework. A qualitative study where participants trialed one of the following smartphone-connected listening devices for two weeks in their everyday lives: made-for-smartphone hearing aid, personal sound amplification product, and smartphone "hearing aid" app with wired earphones or wireless hearable. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted. Twenty adults (13 male and 7 female; mean age = 62.25 years, SD = 11.59) with mild-to-moderate hearing loss (mean better ear pure-tone average = 30.49 dB HL, SD = 17.51) were recruited using a convenience sampling strategy. All participants owned conventional hearing aids. The data were analyzed using an established deductive thematic analysis procedure within the context of the COM-B model. The model stipulates that for individuals to engage in a particular behavior (B), they must have sufficient capability (C), opportunity (O), and motivation (M). Capability: One of the key advantages facilitating use and adherence of smartphone-connected listening devices was the ability for participants to make fine-tune adjustments in any listening situation. Opportunity: Participants commented that these devices could address issues surrounding stigma as smartphones are ubiquitous in everyday life. Motivation: Participants consistently reported that the ability to make adjustments via a smartphone provided them with a greater sense of autonomy and empowerment. As a result, they felt more in control of their hearing loss. This study lays the foundation for further high-quality research to explore whether smartphone-connected technologies have the potential to yield optimum benefits for people living with hearing loss.

Pilot Comparison of Adjustment Protocols of Personal Sound Amplification Products.

The Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Act of 2017 was signed into law in August 2017 and facilitates the introduction of direct-to-consumer sales of hearing aids for adults with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. Among many questions surrounding over-the-counter sales is the ability of users to self-fit amplification. Many studies have conducted self-fitting procedures using guidance materials provided by audiologists. In this pilot, we explore the ability of users to self-adjust personal sound amplification devices using only materials provided by the manufacturer and contrast this with models that involve a hearing professional. Outcomes to assess adjustments included clinic-based speech-in-noise measures and ability to approximate NAL-NL2 prescriptive targets. We found that an audiologist-driven model provided the best outcomes. However, it is unknown if the difference is clinically meaningful.

An Application of the Medical Research Council's Guidelines for Evaluating Complex Interventions: A Usability Study Assessing Smartphone-Connected Listening Devices in Adults With Hearing Loss.

The purpose of this study is to provide an example of the Medical Research Council's guidelines for evaluating complex health care interventions in the context of smartphone-connected listening devices in adults with hearing loss. Twenty existing hearing aid users trialed 1 of the following smartphone-connected listening devices: made-for-smartphone hearing aids, a personal sound amplification product, and a smartphone "hearing aid" application used with either wireless or wired earphones. Following 2 weeks of use in their everyday lives, participants completed self-report outcome measures. Relative to conventional hearing aids, self-reported use, benefit, and satisfaction were higher, and residual disability was lower for made-for-smartphone hearing aids. The converse was found for the other smartphone-connected listening devices trialed. Similarly, overall usability was judged to be "above average" for the made-for-smartphone hearing aids, but "below average" for the remaining devices. This developmental work, guided by the Medical Research Council's framework, lays the foundation for feasibility and pilot studies, leading to high-quality research assessing the effectiveness of smartphone-connected listening devices. This future evidence is necessary to guide health care commissioners and policymakers when considering new service delivery models for adults living with hearing loss.

A systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness of alternative listening devices to conventional hearing aids in adults with hearing loss

Recent technological advances have led to a rapid increase in alternative listening devices to conventional hearing aids. The aim was to systematically review the existing evidence to assess the effectiveness of alternative listening devices in adults with mild and moderate hearing loss. A systematic search strategy of the scientific literature was employed, reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Eleven studies met eligibility for inclusion: two studies evaluated personal sound amplification products, and nine studies assessed remote microphone systems (frequency modulation, Bluetooth, wireless). The evidence in this review suggests that alternative listening devices improve behavioural measures of speech intelligibility relative to unaided and/or aided conditions. Evidence for whether alternative listening devices improve self-reported outcomes is inconsistent. The evidence was judged to be of poor to good quality and subject to bias due to limitations in study design. Our overall recommendation is that high-quality evidence (i.e. randomised controlled trials) is required to demonstrate the effectiveness of alternative listening devices. Such evidence is not currently available and is necessary to guide healthcare commissioners and policymakers when considering new service delivery models for adults with hearing loss.Review registration: Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), CRD42015029582

Today's Hearing Technologies: Definitions, Regulations, Overlaps

Today's Hearing Technologies: Definitions, Regulations, Overlaps

Written Instructions vs. Audiology Service for PSAP Use

Written Instructions vs. Audiology Service for PSAP Use

Personal Sound Amplification Products vs a Conventional Hearing Aid for Speech Understanding in Noise

Personal Sound Amplification Products vs a Conventional Hearing Aid for Speech Understanding in Noise

Applications of direct-to-consumer hearing devices for adults with hearing loss: a review.

BackgroundThis systematic literature review is aimed at investigating applications of direct-to-consumer hearing devices for adults with hearing loss. This review discusses three categories of direct-to-consumer hearing devices: 1) personal sound amplification products (PSAPs), 2) direct-mail hearing aids, and 3) over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids.MethodA literature review was conducted using EBSCOhost and included the databases CINAHL, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO. After applying prior agreed inclusion and exclusion criteria, 13 reports were included in the review.ResultsIncluded studies fell into three domains: 1) electroacoustic characteristics, 2) consumer surveys, and 3) outcome evaluations. Electroacoustic characteristics of these devices vary significantly with some meeting the stringent acoustic criteria used for hearing aids, while others producing dangerous output levels (ie, over 120-dB sound pressure level). Low-end (or low-cost) devices were typically poor in acoustic quality and did not meet gain levels necessary for most adult and elderly hearing loss patterns (eg, presbycusis), especially in high frequencies. Despite direct-mail hearing aids and PSAPs being associated with lower satisfaction when compared to hearing aids purchased through hearing health care professionals, consumer surveys suggest that 5%–19% of people with hearing loss purchase hearing aids through direct-mail or online. Studies on outcome evaluation suggest positive outcomes of OTC devices in the elderly population. Of note, OTC outcomes appear better when a hearing health care professional supports these users.ConclusionWhile some direct-to-consumer hearing devices have the capability to produce adverse effects due to production of dangerously high sound levels and internal noise, the existing literature suggests that there are potential benefits of these devices. Research of direct-to-consumer hearing devices is limited, and current published studies are of weak quality. Much effort is needed to understand the benefits and limitations of such devices on people with hearing loss.

Aural Rehabilitation as Comprehensive Hearing Health Care

In a 10-year-old publication, the author defined aural rehabilitation holistically and indicated that the evidence for effectiveness fell as one moved through the areas of function, activity, participation, and quality of life. Several developments since then warrant consideration. One is an increased recognition that hearing is a cognitive process. In this connection, special attention is being paid to listening effort. At the time of writing, this work is already influencing the design and marketing of hearing aids and, along with direct wireless connectivity, may well impact other components of aural rehabilitation. Another development is the increasing availability of low-cost hearing aids and personal sound amplification products for direct purchase. Combined with developments in self-testing and self-fitting, direct-to-consumer and low-cost hearing aids create an opportunity for dispensing audiologists to develop a more holistic approach to meeting the needs of people with hearing loss—as envisaged in the scope of practice outlined by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and as advocated by numerous writers over the past several decades.

Effectiveness of alternative listening devices to conventional hearing aids for adults with hearing loss: a systematic review protocol

IntroductionHearing loss is a major public health concern, affecting over 11 million people in the UK. While hearing aids are the most common clinical intervention for hearing loss, the majority...

Better Together

Better Together

Perfil epidemiológico de uma população com deficiência auditiva

RESUMO: Objetivo: caracterizar o perfil epidemiológico da população com deficiência auditiva, atendida em um serviço público, quanto a aspectos sociodemográficos, clínicos, assistenciais, comunicativos e comportamentais. Métodos: trata-se de estudo observacional descritivo transversal realizado com dados secundários. Foi utilizado o protocolo de avaliação para autorização da concessão de Aparelho de Amplificação Sonora Individual. A amostra foi constituída de 307 usuários atendidos no serviço de saúde no período maio 2009 a maio 2011. Resultados: houve predominância do gênero feminino, idosos acima de 60 anos, ensino fundamental incompleto e aposentados. Maior prevalência de usuários que apresentaram exames auditivos básicos no momento da avaliação, perda auditiva neurossensorial, de grau moderado, com etiologia provável presbiacusia. Nos aspectos comportamentais os usuários declararam apresentar reações auditivas sem o aparelho de amplificação sonora individual e oralidade. Conclusão: os resultados deste estudo possibilitam subsidiar inicialmente o planejamento de estratégias e ações operacionais que possam melhor atender ao usuário, sobretudo com maior atenção aos idosos acima de 60 anos e intensificação de orientações às mães e gestantes quanto à necessidade de realização da Triagem Auditiva Neonatal para detecção precoce da perda auditiva e início do processo de reabilitação.

Add PSAPs to Your Practice?

Like it or not, people with hearing loss are using personal sound amplification products. And while some balk, a cadre of audiologists says the profession needs to embrace the devices as part of patient-centered care.

Impact of Aging and Cognition on Hearing Assistive Technology Use.

Many factors go into appropriate recommendation and use of hearing assistive technology (HAT). The aging auditory system presents with its own complications and intricacies; there are many types of age-related hearing loss, and it is possible that the underlying cause of hearing loss can significantly impact the recommendations and performance with HATs. The audiologist should take into consideration peripheral and central auditory function when selecting HATs for the aging adult population as well as when selecting appropriate types of technology including personal sound amplification products, hearing aids, cochlear implants, and other assistive technology. The cognitive ability of the patient plays a central role in the recommendations of HAT. It is possible that the use of HATs could mitigate some of the effects of cognitive decline and thus should be considered as early as possible. Assessment of ability and appropriate recommendations are crucial to consistent use of HAT devices.

Spotlight on Special Interest Division 7, Aural Rehabilitation and Its Instrumentation

You have accessThe ASHA LeaderSIG Spotlight1 Jul 2014Spotlight on Special Interest Division 7, Aural Rehabilitation and Its Instrumentation Kathleen M. CienkowskiPhD, CCC-A Kathleen M. Cienkowski Google Scholar More articles by this author , PhD, CCC-A https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.SIGS.19072014.np SectionsAbout ToolsAdd to favorites ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In How many affiliates does SIG 7 have? As of June 2014, SIG 7 has 313 affiliates. Why did you originally choose to affiliate with SIG 7? I have been an affiliate of SIG 7 for more than five years, and I have found it to be one of the most rewarding benefits of my ASHA membership. I learned about the SIG through its then-coordinator, J. P. Gagne. I was surprised that I knew so little about what the SIG had to offer—educational opportunities, Perspectives, online resources and more. The SIG has been an incredible resource for professional connections and information. What is the most important issue surrounding SIG 7’s subject matter right now? Access to affordable hearing health care is a hotly debated topic among professionals. Hearing aids and personal sound amplification products are available online through big-box stores and wholesale clubs. The question is, how will access to these lower-cost hearing devices affect the numbers of people with hearing loss seeking treatment and the quality of services they receive? SIG 7 notes that a device is only one part of effective hearing health care management. The provision of a range of services—including communication and auditory training, speechreading, assistive devices and counseling—are critical to successful hearing loss management. Audiologic rehabilitation is about understanding the consequences of hearing loss in our patients’ daily lives and working collaboratively to develop a management plan. SIG 7 is an important resource for clinicians seeking to provide this type of comprehensive care. What upcoming events related to or sponsored by SIG 7 should everyone know about? SIG 7 is sponsoring two events at the upcoming ASHA convention in Orlando. Jaclyn Spitzer from Columbia University, along with René Gifford from Vanderbilt University, will present a short course on new developments in implantable hearing devices. In addition, Michelle Hughes from Boys Town National Research Hospital will present a mini-seminar on “telehabilitation.” Both events promise to provide insightful information in these areas of hearing loss management. Which of your recent Perspectives articles is a must-read for CSD professionals, and why? Perspectives on Aural Rehabilitation and Its Instrumentation offers many excellent papers for SIG 7 affiliates. Our December 2013 issue includes a paper by Nerina Scarinci and colleagues, “Using a Family-Centered Care Approach in Audiologic Rehabilitation for Adults with Hearing Impairment,” that is a must-read. In keeping with SIG 7’s emphasis on patient-centered care, the article describes the crucial role of family in audiologic rehabilitation for older adults with hearing loss. The paper thoughtfully provides strategies for increased inclusion of family members in the rehabilitation process to promote the reduction of “third-party disability”—the impact of a person’s hearing loss on his or her family. Author Notes Kathleen M. Cienkowski, PhD, CCC-A, SIG 7 coordinator, is associate professor and audiology program director in the Department of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences at the University of Connecticut. [email protected] Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Additional Resources FiguresSourcesRelatedDetails Volume 19Issue 7July 2014 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in print: Jul 1, 2014 Metrics Downloaded 76 times Topicsasha-topicsleader_do_tagleader-topicsasha-article-typesCopyright & Permissions© 2014 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationLoading ...

Public Policy Agenda Adapts to Needs

Public Policy Agenda Adapts to Needs