首页 > 最新文献

Trends in Amplification最新文献

英文 中文
Hearing for the masses. 为大众而听。
Pub Date : 2010-06-01 DOI: 10.1177/1084713810381273
Charles J Limb
One of the many strange ironies of medicine in the United States today is that an individual with profound hearing loss can receive a cochlear implant fully covered by medical insurance, whereas an individual with moderate to severe hearing loss will rarely receive insurance coverage for a hearing aid. This frustrating scenario is carried out in different forms throughout various fields of medicine, leaving patients to ponder why it is that they can qualify for an expensive surgically implanted hearing device but not a simple hearing aid. When one considers the clear fact that many more patients in the world would benefit from conventional amplification rather than surgical implantation, an obvious question presents itself—why is it so? And immediately thereafter, the next question arises—how can we change this? It is hard to ignore the realities that although the dollar may be the bottom line, it does not appear that all the dollars being spent are necessarily distributed in the most reasonable way. There are numerous patients that I see from inner-city neighborhoods in Baltimore who require hearing aids. When I suggest that this is the best option for them and that insurance is not likely to cover it, I am usually met with a wry, sad laugh. There is simply no way for so many patients to even consider obtaining a hearing aid without the assistance of medical insurance. When they learn the out-of-pocket prices for even a relatively feature-less device, the conversation usually ends right there. Although I can direct them to some helpful resources, we simply do not have hearing aids to give to patients. Nine times out of 10 (at least), these patients come back the following year with slightly worse hearing, but no hearing aids. The visit is much the same, with the same diagnosis (hearing loss), the same recommendation (amplification), and the same outcome (nothing). Although I can make little claim to understand the politics and economics that dictate medical decisions in this country, it is jarring to me that I feel this way as a practicing physician fully ensconced in the medical establishment. From the perspective of somebody outside the field of medicine, I can only imagine how they fill in the blanks in the great mysteries of how insurance companies decide who to cover, what to cover, and what to reimburse. There are few other issues of such central social importance where urgent matters are handled with a complete and intentional lack of clarity or transparency. Unfortunately, with the lack of consensus that defines the healthcare debate, rational strategies for improvement seem to disappear powerlessly in a sea of rhetoric. Health care providers and their patients—the essential core unit on which medicine is based—remain somehow a marginal part of the decision-making process that determines how effective their interaction will ultimately be. Of course, we need to accept responsibility for our cultural sensibilities. The U.S. medica
{"title":"Hearing for the masses.","authors":"Charles J Limb","doi":"10.1177/1084713810381273","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713810381273","url":null,"abstract":"One of the many strange ironies of medicine in the United States today is that an individual with profound hearing loss can receive a cochlear implant fully covered by medical insurance, whereas an individual with moderate to severe hearing loss will rarely receive insurance coverage for a hearing aid. This frustrating scenario is carried out in different forms throughout various fields of medicine, leaving patients to ponder why it is that they can qualify for an expensive surgically implanted hearing device but not a simple hearing aid. When one considers the clear fact that many more patients in the world would benefit from conventional amplification rather than surgical implantation, an obvious question presents itself—why is it so? And immediately thereafter, the next question arises—how can we change this? It is hard to ignore the realities that although the dollar may be the bottom line, it does not appear that all the dollars being spent are necessarily distributed in the most reasonable way. \u0000 \u0000There are numerous patients that I see from inner-city neighborhoods in Baltimore who require hearing aids. When I suggest that this is the best option for them and that insurance is not likely to cover it, I am usually met with a wry, sad laugh. There is simply no way for so many patients to even consider obtaining a hearing aid without the assistance of medical insurance. When they learn the out-of-pocket prices for even a relatively feature-less device, the conversation usually ends right there. Although I can direct them to some helpful resources, we simply do not have hearing aids to give to patients. Nine times out of 10 (at least), these patients come back the following year with slightly worse hearing, but no hearing aids. The visit is much the same, with the same diagnosis (hearing loss), the same recommendation (amplification), and the same outcome (nothing). \u0000 \u0000Although I can make little claim to understand the politics and economics that dictate medical decisions in this country, it is jarring to me that I feel this way as a practicing physician fully ensconced in the medical establishment. From the perspective of somebody outside the field of medicine, I can only imagine how they fill in the blanks in the great mysteries of how insurance companies decide who to cover, what to cover, and what to reimburse. There are few other issues of such central social importance where urgent matters are handled with a complete and intentional lack of clarity or transparency. Unfortunately, with the lack of consensus that defines the healthcare debate, rational strategies for improvement seem to disappear powerlessly in a sea of rhetoric. Health care providers and their patients—the essential core unit on which medicine is based—remain somehow a marginal part of the decision-making process that determines how effective their interaction will ultimately be. \u0000 \u0000Of course, we need to accept responsibility for our cultural sensibilities. The U.S. medica","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"14 2","pages":"63"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1084713810381273","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"29200166","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Dispensing rates of four common hearing aid product features: associations with variations in practice among audiologists. 四种常见助听器产品特征的配药率:与听力学家实践变化的关联。
Pub Date : 2010-03-01 Epub Date: 2010-05-10 DOI: 10.1177/1084713810362988
Earl E Johnson, Todd A Ricketts

The purpose of the study was to develop and examine a list of potential variables that may account for variability in the dispensing rates of four common hearing aid features. A total of 29 potential variables were identified and placed into the following categories: (1) characteristics of the audiologist, (2) characteristics of the hearing aids dispensed by the audiologist, (3) characteristics of the audiologist's patient population, and (4) evidence-based practice grades of recommendation for each feature. The potentially associative variables then were examined using regression analyses from the responses of 257 audiologists to a dispensing practice survey. There was a direct relation between price and level of hearing aid technology with the frequency of dispensing product features. There was also a direct relation between the belief by the audiologist that a feature might benefit patients and the frequency of dispensing that feature. In general, the results suggested that personal differences among audiologists and the hearing aids audiologists choose to dispense are related more strongly to dispensing rates of product features than to differences in characteristics of the patient population served by audiologists. An additional finding indicated that evidence-based practice recommendations were inversely related to dispensing rates of product features. This finding, however, may not be the result of dispensing trends as much as hearing aid manufacturing trends.

该研究的目的是开发和检查一个潜在的变量列表,这些变量可能会解释四种常见助听器功能配药率的变化。总共确定了29个潜在变量,并将其分为以下类别:(1)听力学家的特征,(2)听力学家配发的助听器的特征,(3)听力学家的患者群体特征,以及(4)每个特征的循证实践推荐等级。然后使用回归分析从257听力学家对配药实践调查的反应来检查潜在的关联变量。助听器技术的价格和水平与配药产品特征的频率有直接关系。听力学家认为某种特征可能对患者有益的信念与分配该特征的频率之间也存在直接关系。总的来说,结果表明听力学家和助听器选择配发的听力学家之间的个人差异与产品功能的配发率的关系比听力学家所服务的患者群体特征的差异更强。另一项发现表明,循证实践建议与产品功能的分配率呈负相关。然而,这一发现可能不是配药趋势的结果,而是助听器制造趋势的结果。
{"title":"Dispensing rates of four common hearing aid product features: associations with variations in practice among audiologists.","authors":"Earl E Johnson,&nbsp;Todd A Ricketts","doi":"10.1177/1084713810362988","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713810362988","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of the study was to develop and examine a list of potential variables that may account for variability in the dispensing rates of four common hearing aid features. A total of 29 potential variables were identified and placed into the following categories: (1) characteristics of the audiologist, (2) characteristics of the hearing aids dispensed by the audiologist, (3) characteristics of the audiologist's patient population, and (4) evidence-based practice grades of recommendation for each feature. The potentially associative variables then were examined using regression analyses from the responses of 257 audiologists to a dispensing practice survey. There was a direct relation between price and level of hearing aid technology with the frequency of dispensing product features. There was also a direct relation between the belief by the audiologist that a feature might benefit patients and the frequency of dispensing that feature. In general, the results suggested that personal differences among audiologists and the hearing aids audiologists choose to dispense are related more strongly to dispensing rates of product features than to differences in characteristics of the patient population served by audiologists. An additional finding indicated that evidence-based practice recommendations were inversely related to dispensing rates of product features. This finding, however, may not be the result of dispensing trends as much as hearing aid manufacturing trends.</p>","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"14 1","pages":"12-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1084713810362988","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"28977598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Improvements in speech understanding with wireless binaural broadband digital hearing instruments in adults with sensorineural hearing loss. 无线双耳宽带数字助听器对成人感音神经性听力损失患者言语理解能力的改善。
Pub Date : 2010-03-01 Epub Date: 2010-05-10 DOI: 10.1177/1084713810364396
Brian M Kreisman, Annette G Mazevski, Donald J Schum, Ravichandran Sockalingam

This investigation examined whether speech intelligibility in noise can be improved using a new, binaural broadband hearing instrument system. Participants were 36 adults with symmetrical, sensorineural hearing loss (18 experienced hearing instrument users and 18 without prior experience). Participants were fit binaurally in a planned comparison, randomized crossover design study with binaural broadband hearing instruments and advanced digital hearing instruments. Following an adjustment period with each device, participants underwent two speech-in-noise tests: the QuickSIN and the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT). Results suggested significantly better performance on the QuickSIN and the HINT measures with the binaural broadband hearing instruments, when compared with the advanced digital hearing instruments and unaided, across and within all noise conditions.

本研究考察了一种新的双耳宽带助听器系统是否能提高噪声环境下的语音清晰度。参与者是36名对称性感音神经性听力损失的成年人(18名有经验的助听器使用者和18名没有经验的人)。参与者采用双耳宽带助听器和先进的数字助听器进行计划比较、随机交叉设计研究。在对每个设备进行一段调整期后,参与者进行了两次噪音中的语音测试:QuickSIN和噪音中的听力测试(HINT)。结果表明,在所有噪声条件下,与先进的数字助听器相比,双耳宽带助听器在QuickSIN和HINT测量上的表现明显更好。
{"title":"Improvements in speech understanding with wireless binaural broadband digital hearing instruments in adults with sensorineural hearing loss.","authors":"Brian M Kreisman,&nbsp;Annette G Mazevski,&nbsp;Donald J Schum,&nbsp;Ravichandran Sockalingam","doi":"10.1177/1084713810364396","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713810364396","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This investigation examined whether speech intelligibility in noise can be improved using a new, binaural broadband hearing instrument system. Participants were 36 adults with symmetrical, sensorineural hearing loss (18 experienced hearing instrument users and 18 without prior experience). Participants were fit binaurally in a planned comparison, randomized crossover design study with binaural broadband hearing instruments and advanced digital hearing instruments. Following an adjustment period with each device, participants underwent two speech-in-noise tests: the QuickSIN and the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT). Results suggested significantly better performance on the QuickSIN and the HINT measures with the binaural broadband hearing instruments, when compared with the advanced digital hearing instruments and unaided, across and within all noise conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"14 1","pages":"3-11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1084713810364396","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"28977597","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 37
Cochlear implantation in the very young child: issues unique to the under-1 population. 幼童的人工耳蜗植入:1岁以下儿童特有的问题。
Pub Date : 2010-03-01 DOI: 10.1177/1084713810370039
Maura Cosetti, J Thomas Roland

Since the advent of cochlear implantation, candidacy criteria have slowly broadened to include increasingly younger patients. Spurred by evidence demonstrating both perioperative safety and significantly increased speech and language benefit with early auditory intervention, children younger than 12 months of age are now being successfully implanted at many centers. This review highlights the unique challenges involved in cochlear implantation in the very young child, specifically diagnosis and certainty of testing, anesthetic risk, surgical technique, intraoperative testing and postoperative programming, long-term safety, development of receptive and expressive language, and outcomes of speech perception. Overall, the current body of literature indicates that cochlear implantation prior to 1 year of age is both safe and efficacious.

自从人工耳蜗植入术出现以来,候选标准逐渐扩大,包括越来越多的年轻患者。有证据表明,早期听觉干预既能保证围手术期的安全性,又能显著提高语音和语言能力,因此,许多中心已经成功地将年龄小于12个月的儿童植入人工耳蜗。这篇综述强调了幼儿人工耳蜗植入的独特挑战,特别是诊断和测试的确定性、麻醉风险、手术技术、术中测试和术后规划、长期安全性、接受性和表达性语言的发展以及语言感知的结果。总的来说,目前的文献表明,1岁前的人工耳蜗植入是安全有效的。
{"title":"Cochlear implantation in the very young child: issues unique to the under-1 population.","authors":"Maura Cosetti,&nbsp;J Thomas Roland","doi":"10.1177/1084713810370039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713810370039","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since the advent of cochlear implantation, candidacy criteria have slowly broadened to include increasingly younger patients. Spurred by evidence demonstrating both perioperative safety and significantly increased speech and language benefit with early auditory intervention, children younger than 12 months of age are now being successfully implanted at many centers. This review highlights the unique challenges involved in cochlear implantation in the very young child, specifically diagnosis and certainty of testing, anesthetic risk, surgical technique, intraoperative testing and postoperative programming, long-term safety, development of receptive and expressive language, and outcomes of speech perception. Overall, the current body of literature indicates that cochlear implantation prior to 1 year of age is both safe and efficacious.</p>","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"14 1","pages":"46-57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1084713810370039","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"29000897","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 59
Application of paired-comparison methods to hearing AIDS. 配对比较法在助听器中的应用。
Pub Date : 2009-12-01 DOI: 10.1177/1084713809352908
Amyn M Amlani, Erin C Schafer

The method of paired comparisons was introduced into the hearing aid literature nearly 50 years ago. Over time, studies have found paired comparisons to be sensitive, valid, and reliable in determining either the perceptual difference or relative ranking among hearing aids and electroacoustic characteristics. With the increasing number of adjustable electroacoustic parameters in today's digital hearing aids-and the lack of procedural guidelines necessary to fit many of them-the method of paired comparisons provides the clinician with the ability to compare different devices, electroacoustic characteristics, memory settings, or combinations of these variables under the listener's everyday listening conditions. Furthermore, this procedure provides the clinician with the ability to individualize the prescriptive approach-which is predicated mainly on hearing threshold data and listening in quiet-so that a combination of parameters can be set to optimize the user's listening needs in a given environment. In this article, the authors present an overview of the theoretical principle supporting this procedure, the various paired-comparison strategies and associated approaches, the advantages of this method, and recommended procedures for implementing the method of paired comparisons in the fitting of today's sophisticated hearing aids.

配对比较的方法是在近50年前引入助听器文献的。随着时间的推移,研究发现配对比较在确定助听器和电声特性之间的感知差异或相对排名方面是敏感、有效和可靠的。随着当今数字助听器中可调节的电声参数数量的增加,以及缺乏必要的程序指南来适应许多电声参数,配对比较方法为临床医生提供了在听者日常听力条件下比较不同设备、电声特性、记忆设置或这些变量组合的能力。此外,该程序为临床医生提供了个性化处方方法的能力-主要基于听力阈值数据和安静听力-因此可以设置参数组合以优化给定环境中用户的听力需求。在这篇文章中,作者概述了支持这一过程的理论原理,各种配对比较策略和相关方法,这种方法的优点,并推荐了在当今复杂的助听器验配中实施配对比较方法的程序。
{"title":"Application of paired-comparison methods to hearing AIDS.","authors":"Amyn M Amlani,&nbsp;Erin C Schafer","doi":"10.1177/1084713809352908","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713809352908","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The method of paired comparisons was introduced into the hearing aid literature nearly 50 years ago. Over time, studies have found paired comparisons to be sensitive, valid, and reliable in determining either the perceptual difference or relative ranking among hearing aids and electroacoustic characteristics. With the increasing number of adjustable electroacoustic parameters in today's digital hearing aids-and the lack of procedural guidelines necessary to fit many of them-the method of paired comparisons provides the clinician with the ability to compare different devices, electroacoustic characteristics, memory settings, or combinations of these variables under the listener's everyday listening conditions. Furthermore, this procedure provides the clinician with the ability to individualize the prescriptive approach-which is predicated mainly on hearing threshold data and listening in quiet-so that a combination of parameters can be set to optimize the user's listening needs in a given environment. In this article, the authors present an overview of the theoretical principle supporting this procedure, the various paired-comparison strategies and associated approaches, the advantages of this method, and recommended procedures for implementing the method of paired comparisons in the fitting of today's sophisticated hearing aids.</p>","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"13 4","pages":"241-59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1084713809352908","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"28709588","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 30
Achieving developmental synchrony in young children with hearing loss. 实现幼儿听力损失的发育同步。
Pub Date : 2009-12-01 DOI: 10.1177/1084713809356701
Nancy K Mellon, Meredith Ouellette, Tracy Greer, Patricia Gates-Ulanet

Children with hearing loss, with early and appropriate amplification and intervention, demonstrate gains in speech, language, and literacy skills. Despite these improvements many children continue to exhibit disturbances in cognitive, behavioral, and emotional control, self-regulation, and aspects of executive function. Given the complexity of developmental learning, educational settings should provide services that foster the growth of skills across multiple dimensions. Transdisciplinary intervention services that target the domains of language, communication, psychosocial functioning, motor, and cognitive development can promote academic and social success. Educational programs must provide children with access to the full range of basic skills necessary for academic and social achievement. In addition to an integrated curriculum that nurtures speech, language, and literacy development, innovations in the areas of auditory perception, social emotional learning, motor development, and vestibular function can enhance student outcomes. Through ongoing evaluation and modification, clearly articulated curricular approaches can serve as a model for early intervention and special education programs. The purpose of this article is to propose an intervention model that combines best practices from a variety of disciplines that affect developmental outcomes for young children with hearing loss, along with specific strategies and approaches that may help to promote optimal development across domains. Access to typically developing peers who model age-appropriate skills in language and behavior, small class sizes, a co-teaching model, and a social constructivist perspective of teaching and learning, are among the key elements of the model.

在早期和适当的放大和干预下,听力损失儿童在言语、语言和识字技能方面表现出进步。尽管有这些改善,但许多儿童在认知、行为和情绪控制、自我调节和执行功能方面仍然表现出障碍。鉴于发展性学习的复杂性,教育环境应提供促进跨多个维度技能增长的服务。针对语言、沟通、社会心理功能、运动和认知发展领域的跨学科干预服务可以促进学业和社会成功。教育项目必须为孩子们提供获得学术和社会成就所必需的全部基本技能的机会。除了培养言语、语言和读写能力发展的综合课程外,听觉感知、社会情感学习、运动发展和前庭功能领域的创新也可以提高学生的成绩。通过持续的评估和修改,清晰的课程方法可以作为早期干预和特殊教育项目的模型。本文的目的是提出一种干预模型,该模型结合了影响听力损失幼儿发育结果的各种学科的最佳实践,以及可能有助于促进跨领域最佳发展的具体策略和方法。该模式的关键要素包括与典型的发展中同龄人接触,这些同龄人在语言和行为方面具有与年龄相适应的技能,小班授课,合作教学模式,以及社会建构主义的教与学观点。
{"title":"Achieving developmental synchrony in young children with hearing loss.","authors":"Nancy K Mellon,&nbsp;Meredith Ouellette,&nbsp;Tracy Greer,&nbsp;Patricia Gates-Ulanet","doi":"10.1177/1084713809356701","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713809356701","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Children with hearing loss, with early and appropriate amplification and intervention, demonstrate gains in speech, language, and literacy skills. Despite these improvements many children continue to exhibit disturbances in cognitive, behavioral, and emotional control, self-regulation, and aspects of executive function. Given the complexity of developmental learning, educational settings should provide services that foster the growth of skills across multiple dimensions. Transdisciplinary intervention services that target the domains of language, communication, psychosocial functioning, motor, and cognitive development can promote academic and social success. Educational programs must provide children with access to the full range of basic skills necessary for academic and social achievement. In addition to an integrated curriculum that nurtures speech, language, and literacy development, innovations in the areas of auditory perception, social emotional learning, motor development, and vestibular function can enhance student outcomes. Through ongoing evaluation and modification, clearly articulated curricular approaches can serve as a model for early intervention and special education programs. The purpose of this article is to propose an intervention model that combines best practices from a variety of disciplines that affect developmental outcomes for young children with hearing loss, along with specific strategies and approaches that may help to promote optimal development across domains. Access to typically developing peers who model age-appropriate skills in language and behavior, small class sizes, a co-teaching model, and a social constructivist perspective of teaching and learning, are among the key elements of the model.</p>","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"13 4","pages":"223-40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1084713809356701","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"28709587","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23
Short-term hearing aid benefit in a large group. 大群体短期助听器受益。
Pub Date : 2009-12-01 DOI: 10.1177/1084713809354902
Peter J Ivory, Bryan L Hendricks, Dennis Van Vliet, Cynthia M Beyer, Harvey B Abrams

Short-term benefit in a very large group (N = 4,584) following hearing aid treatment was estimated using a revised version of the Self-Assessment of Communication (SAC-Hx). A total of 4,584 veterans with adult-onset hearing loss and mean audiometric findings consistent with a mild to severe, sloping, symmetrical, sensorineural hearing impairment were fitted with hearing aids. Responses to the SAC-Hx were gathered prior to and then 6 weeks following hearing aid fitting. Benefit was defined as the difference between the baseline and the posttreatment SAC-Hx scores. Hearing aid treatment resulted in robust and statistically significant benefit in each category of self-perceived communication consequences. Prior experience influenced benefit: New hearing aid users demonstrated the greatest magnitude of benefit, but even previously satisfied and dissatisfied users obtained significant benefit after new hearing aid fitting. Duration of experience did not have a remarkable effect on the magnitude of benefit: All groups with various durations of experience obtained comparable benefit. Severity of the baseline scores paralleled degree of hearing impairment when impairment was defined using a better ear pure tone average at 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, and 4,000 Hz. Also, severity of perceived communication consequences paralleled poorer monosyllabic word recognition. Hearing aid treatment provided a functional, robust, and statistically significant benefit to individuals in all categories of hearing impairment (normal, mild, moderate, severe, and profound). This report demonstrates the feasibility of the SAC-Hx as a tool to efficiently assess outcome domains in hearing aid fitting.

我们使用修订版的 "沟通自我评估"(SAC-Hx)估算了一大批退伍军人(4584 人)在接受助听器治疗后的短期受益情况。共有 4584 名退伍军人患有成人听力损失,平均听力测定结果为轻度至重度、倾斜、对称、感音神经性听力损伤,他们都配戴了助听器。在助听器验配前和验配 6 周后,对 SAC-Hx 的反应进行了收集。疗效定义为基线与治疗后 SAC-Hx 分数之间的差异。助听器治疗在每一类自我感知的沟通后果方面都带来了显著的、具有统计学意义的益处。先前经验对获益的影响:新助听器用户获益最大,但即使是先前满意和不满意的用户,在新助听器验配后也能获得显著获益。使用助听器的时间长短对受益程度的影响并不明显:所有使用助听器时间长短不同的群体都获得了类似的受益。基线分数的严重程度与听力受损程度相当,听力受损程度是用 1000、2000、3000 和 4000 赫兹的较好耳纯音平均值来定义的。此外,感知到的交流后果的严重程度与单音节词识别能力较差的程度相当。助听器治疗为所有听力障碍类别(正常、轻度、中度、重度和极重度)的人提供了功能性的、稳健的和统计学意义上的显著益处。本报告证明了 SAC-Hx 作为有效评估助听器验配结果领域的工具的可行性。
{"title":"Short-term hearing aid benefit in a large group.","authors":"Peter J Ivory, Bryan L Hendricks, Dennis Van Vliet, Cynthia M Beyer, Harvey B Abrams","doi":"10.1177/1084713809354902","DOIUrl":"10.1177/1084713809354902","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Short-term benefit in a very large group (N = 4,584) following hearing aid treatment was estimated using a revised version of the Self-Assessment of Communication (SAC-Hx). A total of 4,584 veterans with adult-onset hearing loss and mean audiometric findings consistent with a mild to severe, sloping, symmetrical, sensorineural hearing impairment were fitted with hearing aids. Responses to the SAC-Hx were gathered prior to and then 6 weeks following hearing aid fitting. Benefit was defined as the difference between the baseline and the posttreatment SAC-Hx scores. Hearing aid treatment resulted in robust and statistically significant benefit in each category of self-perceived communication consequences. Prior experience influenced benefit: New hearing aid users demonstrated the greatest magnitude of benefit, but even previously satisfied and dissatisfied users obtained significant benefit after new hearing aid fitting. Duration of experience did not have a remarkable effect on the magnitude of benefit: All groups with various durations of experience obtained comparable benefit. Severity of the baseline scores paralleled degree of hearing impairment when impairment was defined using a better ear pure tone average at 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, and 4,000 Hz. Also, severity of perceived communication consequences paralleled poorer monosyllabic word recognition. Hearing aid treatment provided a functional, robust, and statistically significant benefit to individuals in all categories of hearing impairment (normal, mild, moderate, severe, and profound). This report demonstrates the feasibility of the SAC-Hx as a tool to efficiently assess outcome domains in hearing aid fitting.</p>","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"13 4","pages":"260-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4111477/pdf/10.1177_1084713809354902.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"28709589","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Auditory midbrain implant: a review. 听觉中脑植入:综述。
Pub Date : 2009-09-01 DOI: 10.1177/1084713809348372
Hubert H Lim, Minoo Lenarz, Thomas Lenarz

The auditory midbrain implant (AMI) is a new hearing prosthesis designed for stimulation of the inferior colliculus in deaf patients who cannot sufficiently benefit from cochlear implants. The authors have begun clinical trials in which five patients have been implanted with a single shank AMI array (20 electrodes). The goal of this review is to summarize the development and research that has led to the translation of the AMI from a concept into the first patients. This study presents the rationale and design concept for the AMI as well a summary of the animal safety and feasibility studies that were required for clinical approval. The authors also present the initial surgical, psychophysical, and speech results from the first three implanted patients. Overall, the results have been encouraging in terms of the safety and functionality of the implant. All patients obtain improvements in hearing capabilities on a daily basis. However, performance varies dramatically across patients depending on the implant location within the midbrain with the best performer still not able to achieve open set speech perception without lip-reading cues. Stimulation of the auditory midbrain provides a wide range of level, spectral, and temporal cues, all of which are important for speech understanding, but they do not appear to sufficiently fuse together to enable open set speech perception with the currently used stimulation strategies. Finally, several issues and hypotheses for why current patients obtain limited speech perception along with several feasible solutions for improving AMI implementation are presented.

听觉中脑植入体(AMI)是一种新型听力假体,设计用于刺激下丘,以治疗无法充分受益于人工耳蜗植入的耳聋患者。作者已开始临床试验,为五名患者植入了单柄 AMI 阵列(20 个电极)。本综述旨在总结 AMI 从概念转化为首例患者的开发和研究过程。本研究介绍了 AMI 的基本原理和设计理念,并总结了临床批准所需的动物安全性和可行性研究。作者还介绍了前三位植入患者的初步手术、心理物理和语言结果。总的来说,就植入物的安全性和功能性而言,结果令人鼓舞。所有患者每天的听力都有所提高。然而,由于植入体在中脑内的位置不同,患者的表现也大相径庭,表现最好的患者在没有唇读提示的情况下仍无法实现开放式言语感知。对听觉中脑的刺激提供了广泛的电平、频谱和时间线索,所有这些线索对语音理解都很重要,但它们似乎并没有充分融合在一起,因此目前使用的刺激策略无法实现开放式语音感知。最后,我们提出了目前患者获得有限言语感知的几个问题和假设,以及改善 AMI 实施的几个可行解决方案。
{"title":"Auditory midbrain implant: a review.","authors":"Hubert H Lim, Minoo Lenarz, Thomas Lenarz","doi":"10.1177/1084713809348372","DOIUrl":"10.1177/1084713809348372","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The auditory midbrain implant (AMI) is a new hearing prosthesis designed for stimulation of the inferior colliculus in deaf patients who cannot sufficiently benefit from cochlear implants. The authors have begun clinical trials in which five patients have been implanted with a single shank AMI array (20 electrodes). The goal of this review is to summarize the development and research that has led to the translation of the AMI from a concept into the first patients. This study presents the rationale and design concept for the AMI as well a summary of the animal safety and feasibility studies that were required for clinical approval. The authors also present the initial surgical, psychophysical, and speech results from the first three implanted patients. Overall, the results have been encouraging in terms of the safety and functionality of the implant. All patients obtain improvements in hearing capabilities on a daily basis. However, performance varies dramatically across patients depending on the implant location within the midbrain with the best performer still not able to achieve open set speech perception without lip-reading cues. Stimulation of the auditory midbrain provides a wide range of level, spectral, and temporal cues, all of which are important for speech understanding, but they do not appear to sufficiently fuse together to enable open set speech perception with the currently used stimulation strategies. Finally, several issues and hypotheses for why current patients obtain limited speech perception along with several feasible solutions for improving AMI implementation are presented.</p>","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"13 3","pages":"149-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4111439/pdf/10.1177_1084713809348372.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"28408737","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Moving at the speed of sound: scientific innovation in auditory research. 以声音的速度移动:听觉研究的科学创新。
Pub Date : 2009-09-01 Epub Date: 2009-09-07 DOI: 10.1177/1084713809348498
Charles J Limb
147 individuals as we are to have valid medical opinions publicly shot down by frustrated patients on an online forum. It seems in this age that anybody with a computer is now entitled to provide their opinion of material that they are not necessarily qualified to judge and that, indeed, an entity such as the Internet is not subject to peer review or editorial correction. Yet despite my uneasiness, I cannot help but realize that there is no turning back. The world is smaller today than it was yesterday, and this trend will unrelentingly continue. With these thoughts in mind, I question the ways in which scientific material is distributed today. In an era in which information evolves daily and travels instantaneously, why do we continue to invite authors to contribute to a textbook that is published months to years after the contributions are prepared? How can we improve the process by which scientific data collected are distributed publicly? Why perpetuate a system of scientific funding that encourages already having completed the experiments proposed in the grant application, thereby prolonging the period between data analysis and distribution? Clearly we need to reevaluate our methods of scientific communication in the digital age in which information can be distributed in seconds, rather than months. Yet we would be foolish to dispense entirely with the deliberate, methodical ways in which we have acquired and shared information for years. It seems that we are at a crossroad. Although the Internet may never be subject to the guidance of an editor-in-chief, I suspect that the cream will continue to rise to the top in this age of information overload. Now that we can routinely perform Einstein-like time compression to accomplish in seconds what used to take weeks, it may be more important than ever that we apply filters based on objective data, rational evaluation of the facts, and conservative appraisal of the potential impact of a I recently evaluated a young woman as a candidate for possible cochlear implantation. Later that week, I read a detailed account of her appointment with me on her online blog. Several days later, I ran into another patient of mine, an 11-year-old girl with bilateral cochlear implants, while shopping for groceries. Her parents told me that they posted videos of her activation appointments for anyone to view online on YouTube. Through Twitter, individuals worldwide describe new events, breakthrough discoveries, and medical outcomes in short real-time bursts of text—tweets, that is—at such a fast rate that regular news agencies now report on tweets that are coming in. I have had several patients and students correspond with me through Facebook, and many patients that I encounter seem to have completed recent graduate studies on auditory neuroscience at Google University. All of this digital activity, in which I gladly participate, makes me uneasy if I stop to think about it. The direct accessibility of information; the
{"title":"Moving at the speed of sound: scientific innovation in auditory research.","authors":"Charles J Limb","doi":"10.1177/1084713809348498","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713809348498","url":null,"abstract":"147 individuals as we are to have valid medical opinions publicly shot down by frustrated patients on an online forum. It seems in this age that anybody with a computer is now entitled to provide their opinion of material that they are not necessarily qualified to judge and that, indeed, an entity such as the Internet is not subject to peer review or editorial correction. Yet despite my uneasiness, I cannot help but realize that there is no turning back. The world is smaller today than it was yesterday, and this trend will unrelentingly continue. With these thoughts in mind, I question the ways in which scientific material is distributed today. In an era in which information evolves daily and travels instantaneously, why do we continue to invite authors to contribute to a textbook that is published months to years after the contributions are prepared? How can we improve the process by which scientific data collected are distributed publicly? Why perpetuate a system of scientific funding that encourages already having completed the experiments proposed in the grant application, thereby prolonging the period between data analysis and distribution? Clearly we need to reevaluate our methods of scientific communication in the digital age in which information can be distributed in seconds, rather than months. Yet we would be foolish to dispense entirely with the deliberate, methodical ways in which we have acquired and shared information for years. It seems that we are at a crossroad. Although the Internet may never be subject to the guidance of an editor-in-chief, I suspect that the cream will continue to rise to the top in this age of information overload. Now that we can routinely perform Einstein-like time compression to accomplish in seconds what used to take weeks, it may be more important than ever that we apply filters based on objective data, rational evaluation of the facts, and conservative appraisal of the potential impact of a I recently evaluated a young woman as a candidate for possible cochlear implantation. Later that week, I read a detailed account of her appointment with me on her online blog. Several days later, I ran into another patient of mine, an 11-year-old girl with bilateral cochlear implants, while shopping for groceries. Her parents told me that they posted videos of her activation appointments for anyone to view online on YouTube. Through Twitter, individuals worldwide describe new events, breakthrough discoveries, and medical outcomes in short real-time bursts of text—tweets, that is—at such a fast rate that regular news agencies now report on tweets that are coming in. I have had several patients and students correspond with me through Facebook, and many patients that I encounter seem to have completed recent graduate studies on auditory neuroscience at Google University. All of this digital activity, in which I gladly participate, makes me uneasy if I stop to think about it. The direct accessibility of information; the ","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"13 3","pages":"147-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1084713809348498","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"28387609","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Filtering to match hearing aid insertion gain to individual ear acoustics. 过滤以使助听器插入增益与单个耳朵的声学效果相匹配。
Pub Date : 2009-09-01 Epub Date: 2009-08-26 DOI: 10.1177/1084713809344974
Steven L Bell

When hearing aid gain is prescribed by software, gain is calculated based on the average acoustics for the age of patient, gender, mold type, and so on. The acoustics of the individual's ear often vary from the average values, so there will be a mismatch between the prescribed gain and the real-ear gain. Real-ear measurement can be used to verify the gain and adjust it to meet targets, but the quality of the match will be limited by the number of channels and the flexibility of the hearing aid. A potential way to improve this process is to generate a filter that compensates for variations in real-ear insertion gain due to individual ear acoustics. Such a filter could be included in the processing path of a digital hearing aid. This article describes how such a filter can be generated using the windowing method, and the principle is demonstrated in a real ear. The approach requires communication between the real-ear measurement and hearing aid programming software. A finite impulse response filter with group delay just over 2 ms matched insertion gain to target values within the acceptable tolerance defined by British Society of Audiology guidelines.

当软件规定助听器增益时,增益是根据患者年龄,性别,霉菌类型等的平均声学计算的。个人耳朵的声学效果通常与平均值不同,因此规定增益与实耳增益之间会存在不匹配。实耳测量可用于验证增益并对其进行调整以达到目标,但匹配质量将受到通道数量和助听器灵活性的限制。改进这一过程的一个潜在方法是生成一个滤波器,补偿由于单个耳朵声学而导致的实耳插入增益的变化。该滤波器可包含在数字助听器的处理路径中。本文介绍了如何使用开窗法生成这样的滤波器,并在一个真实的耳朵中演示了该原理。该方法需要在实耳测量和助听器编程软件之间进行通信。一个有限脉冲响应滤波器,群延迟刚刚超过2ms,将插入增益匹配到英国听力学协会指南规定的可接受公差范围内的目标值。
{"title":"Filtering to match hearing aid insertion gain to individual ear acoustics.","authors":"Steven L Bell","doi":"10.1177/1084713809344974","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1084713809344974","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When hearing aid gain is prescribed by software, gain is calculated based on the average acoustics for the age of patient, gender, mold type, and so on. The acoustics of the individual's ear often vary from the average values, so there will be a mismatch between the prescribed gain and the real-ear gain. Real-ear measurement can be used to verify the gain and adjust it to meet targets, but the quality of the match will be limited by the number of channels and the flexibility of the hearing aid. A potential way to improve this process is to generate a filter that compensates for variations in real-ear insertion gain due to individual ear acoustics. Such a filter could be included in the processing path of a digital hearing aid. This article describes how such a filter can be generated using the windowing method, and the principle is demonstrated in a real ear. The approach requires communication between the real-ear measurement and hearing aid programming software. A finite impulse response filter with group delay just over 2 ms matched insertion gain to target values within the acceptable tolerance defined by British Society of Audiology guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":48972,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Amplification","volume":"13 3","pages":"181-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1084713809344974","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"28369328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
期刊
Trends in Amplification
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1