Download PDF
J Am Acad Audiol 2022; 33(04): 196-205
DOI: 10.1055/a-1692-9670
Research Article

Low-Level Speech Recognition of Children with Hearing Aids

Jace Wolfe
1   Hearts for Hearing Foundation, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
,
Mila Duke
1   Hearts for Hearing Foundation, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
,
Sharon Miller
2   Department of Audiology & Speech-Language Pathology, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas
,
Erin Schafer
2   Department of Audiology & Speech-Language Pathology, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas
,
Christine Jones
3   Phonak LLC, Warrenville, Illinois
,
Lori Rakita
3   Phonak LLC, Warrenville, Illinois
,
Andrea Dunn
3   Phonak LLC, Warrenville, Illinois
,
Jarrod Battles
1   Hearts for Hearing Foundation, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
,
Sara Neumann
1   Hearts for Hearing Foundation, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
,
Jacy Manning
1   Hearts for Hearing Foundation, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
2   Department of Audiology & Speech-Language Pathology, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas
› Author Affiliations Funding This research was partially funded by a grant from Phonak, LLC.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background For children with hearing loss, the primary goal of hearing aids is to provide improved access to the auditory environment within the limits of hearing aid technology and the child's auditory abilities. However, there are limited data examining aided speech recognition at very low (40 decibels A [dBA]) and low (50 dBA) presentation levels.

Purpose Due to the paucity of studies exploring aided speech recognition at low presentation levels for children with hearing loss, the present study aimed to (1) compare aided speech recognition at different presentation levels between groups of children with “normal” hearing and hearing loss, (2) explore the effects of aided pure tone average and aided Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) on aided speech recognition at low presentation levels for children with hearing loss ranging in degree from mild to severe, and (3) evaluate the effect of increasing low-level gain on aided speech recognition of children with hearing loss.

Research Design In phase 1 of this study, a two-group, repeated-measures design was used to evaluate differences in speech recognition. In phase 2 of this study, a single-group, repeated-measures design was used to evaluate the potential benefit of additional low-level hearing aid gain for low-level aided speech recognition of children with hearing loss.

Study Sample The first phase of the study included 27 school-age children with mild to severe sensorineural hearing loss and 12 school-age children with “normal” hearing. The second phase included eight children with mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss.

Intervention Prior to the study, children with hearing loss were fitted binaurally with digital hearing aids. Children in the second phase were fitted binaurally with digital study hearing aids and completed a trial period with two different gain settings: (1) gain required to match hearing aid output to prescriptive targets (i.e., primary program), and (2) a 6-dB increase in overall gain for low-level inputs relative to the primary program. In both phases of this study, real-ear verification measures were completed to ensure the hearing aid output matched prescriptive targets.

Data Collection and Analysis Phase 1 included monosyllabic word recognition and syllable-final plural recognition at three presentation levels (40, 50, and 60 dBA). Phase 2 compared speech recognition performance for the same test measures and presentation levels with two differing gain prescriptions.

Conclusion In phase 1 of the study, aided speech recognition was significantly poorer in children with hearing loss at all presentation levels. Higher aided SII in the better ear (55 dB sound pressure level input) was associated with higher Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant word recognition at a 40 dBA presentation level. In phase 2, increasing the hearing aid gain for low-level inputs provided a significant improvement in syllable-final plural recognition at very low-level inputs and resulted in a nonsignificant trend toward better monosyllabic word recognition at very low presentation levels. Additional research is needed to document the speech recognition difficulties children with hearing aids may experience with low-level speech in the real world as well as the potential benefit or detriment of providing additional low-level hearing aid gain.

Keywords

hearing aids - speech recognition - aided thresholds

Disclosure

Christine Jones and Andrea Dunn are employees of Phonak, LLC, and Jace Wolfe is a member of the Phonak Pediatric Advisory Board. Lori Rakita was an employee of Phonak during the time in which this study was completed.


Disclaimer

Any mention of a product, service, or procedure in the Journal of the American Academy of Audiology does not constitute an endorsement of the product, service, or procedure by the American Academy of Audiology.




Publication History

Received: 21 June 2021

Accepted: 05 November 2021

Accepted Manuscript online:
10 November 2021

Article published online:
18 November 2022

© 2022. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

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

 

  • References

  • 1 Ching TYC, Dillon H, Leigh G, Cupples L. Learning from the Longitudinal Outcomes of Children with Hearing Impairment (LOCHI) study: summary of 5-year findings and implications. Int J Audiol 2018; 57 (sup2, Suppl. 2): S105-S111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Tomblin JB, Harrison M, Ambrose SE, Walker EA, Oleson JJ, Moeller MP. Language outcomes in young children with mild to severe hearing loss. Ear Hear 2015; 36 (Suppl. 01) 76S-91S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ambrose SE, VanDam M, Moeller MP. Linguistic input, electronic media, and communication outcomes of toddlers with hearing loss. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (02) 139-147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ambrose SE, Walker EA, Unflat-Berry LM, Oleson JJ, Moeller MP. Quantity and quality of caregivers' linguistic input to 18-month and 3-year-old children who are hard of hearing. Ear Hear 2015; 36 (Suppl. 01) 48S-59S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 DesJardin JL, Doll ER, Stika CJ. et al. Parental support for language development during joint book reading for young children with hearing loss. Comm Disord Q 2014; 35 (03) 167-181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Dirks E, Stevens A, Kok S, Frijns J, Rieffe C. Talk with me! Parental linguistic input to toddlers with moderate hearing loss. J Child Lang 2020; 47 (01) 186-204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hart B, Risley TR. Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes; 1995
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Huttenlocher J, Waterfall H, Vasilyeva M, Vevea J, Hedges LV. Sources of variability in children's language growth. Cognit Psychol 2010; 61 (04) 343-365
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rowe ML. A longitudinal investigation of the role of quantity and quality of child-directed speech in vocabulary development. Child Dev 2012; 83 (05) 1762-1774
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 VanDam M, Ambrose SE, Moeller MP. Quantity of parental language in the home environments of hard-of-hearing 2-year-olds. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2012; 17 (04) 402-420
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 American Academy of Audiology Task Force on Pediatric Amplification (2013). American Academy of Audiology Clinical Practice Guideline on Pediatric Amplification. Retrieved on April 28, 2021, from http://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/PediatricAmplificationGuidelines.pdf_539975b3e7e9f1.74471798.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Marriage JE, Vickers DA, Baer T, Glasberg BR, Moore BCJ. Comparison of different hearing aid prescriptions for children. Ear Hear 2018; 39 (01) 20-31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Seewald R, Mills J, Bagatto M, Scollie S, Moodie S. A comparison of manufacturer-specific prescriptive procedures for infants. Hear J 2008; 61 (11) 26-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Scollie S, Ching TYC, Seewald R. et al. Evaluation of the NAL-NL1 and DSL v4.1 prescriptions for children: preference in real world use. Int J Audiol 2010; a 49 (Suppl. 01) S49-S63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Scollie SD, Ching TYC, Seewald RC. et al. Children's speech perception and loudness ratings when fitted with hearing aids using the DSL v.4.1 and the NAL-NL1 prescriptions. Int J Audiol 2010; b 49 (Suppl. 01) S26-S34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Snik AF, Stollman MH. Measured and calculated insertion gains in young children. Br J Audiol 1995; 29 (01) 7-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Tomblin JB, Oleson J, Ambrose SE, Walker EA, McCreery RW, Moeller MP. Aided hearing moderates the academic outcomes of children with mild to severe hearing loss. Ear Hear 2020; 41 (04) 775-789
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Bagatto M, Moodie S, Scollie S. et al. Clinical protocols for hearing instrument fitting in the desired sensation level method. Trends Amplif 2005; 9 (04) 199-226
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Byrne D, Dillon H, Ching T, Katsch R, Keidser G. NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures. J Am Acad Audiol 2001; 12 (01) 37-51
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Scollie S, Seewald R, Cornelisse L. et al. The Desired Sensation Level multistage input/output algorithm. Trends Amplif 2005; 9 (04) 159-197
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Pearsons KS, Bennett RL, Fidell S. Speech Levels in Various Noise Environments (Report No. EPA-600/1–77–025). Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 1977
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Cole EB, Flexer C. Children with hearing loss: developing listening and talking (p. 107). San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing, Inc.; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Haskins H. (1949) A phonetically balanced test of speech discrimination for children. Master's thesis, Northwestern University.
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Tillman T, Carhart R. (1966) An expanded test for speech discrimination using CNC monosyllabic words. Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6). SAM-TR-66–55
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Sanderson-Leepa ME, Rintelmann WF. Articulation functions and test-retest performance of normal-hearing children on three speech discrimination tests: WIPI, PBK-50, and NV Auditory Test No. 6. J Speech Hear Disord 1976; 41 (04) 503-519
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Peterson GE, Lehiste I. Revised CNC lists for auditory tests. J Speech Hear Disord 1962; 27: 62-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Glista D, Scollie S. Development and evaluation of an English language measure of detection of word-final plurality markers: the University of Western Ontario Plurals Test. Am J Audiol 2012; 21 (01) 76-81
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Stiles DJ, Bentler RA, McGregor KK. The Speech Intelligibility Index and the pure-tone average as predictors of lexical ability in children fit with hearing AIDS. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2012; 55 (03) 764-778
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Davidson LS, Geers AE, Blamey PJ, Tobey EA, Brenner CA. Factors contributing to speech perception scores in long-term pediatric cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 2011; 32 (1, Suppl): 19S-26S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Eisenberg LS, Fisher LM, Johnson KC, Ganguly DH, Grace T, Niparko JK. CDaCI Investigative Team. Sentence recognition in quiet and noise by pediatric cochlear implant users: relationships to spoken language. Otol Neurotol 2016; 37 (02) e75-e81
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 McCreery RW, Miller MK, Buss E, Leibold LJ. Cognitive and linguistic contributions to masked speech recognition in children. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2020; 63 (10) 3525-3538
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 McCreery RW, Spratford M, Kirby B, Brennan M. Individual differences in language and working memory affect children's speech recognition in noise. Int J Audiol 2017; 56 (05) 306-315
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 McCreery RW, Walker EA, Spratford M, Lewis D, Brennan M. Auditory, cognitive, and linguistic factors predict speech recognition in adverse listening conditions for children with hearing loss. Front Neurosci 2019; 13: 1093
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Scollie SD. Children's speech recognition scores: the Speech Intelligibility Index and proficiency factors for age and hearing level. Ear Hear 2008; 29 (04) 543-556
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Stelmachowicz PG, Hoover BM, Lewis DE, Kortekaas RW, Pittman AL. The relation between stimulus context, speech audibility, and perception for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired children. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2000; 43 (04) 902-914
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 McCreery R. Building blocks: the trouble with functional gain in verifying pediatric hearing aids. Hear J 2013; 66 (03) 14-16
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Gustafson SJ, Pittman AL. Sentence perception in listening conditions having similar speech intelligibility indices. Int J Audiol 2011; 50 (01) 34-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Pittman AL. Short-term word-learning rate in children with normal hearing and children with hearing loss in limited and extended high-frequency bandwidths. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2008; 51 (03) 785-797
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Stelmachowicz PG, Pittman AL, Hoover BM, Lewis DE. Effect of stimulus bandwidth on the perception of /s/ in normal- and hearing-impaired children and adults. J Acoust Soc Am 2001; 110 (04) 2183-2190
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar