Download PDF
J Am Acad Audiol
DOI: 10.1055/a-1865-3449
Research Article

Listening Effort in Hearing Aid Users: Is It Related to Hearing Aid Use and Satisfaction?

Samet Kiliç 
1   Department of Audiology, Hacettepe University, Sihhiye, Ankara, Turkey
,
Öznur Yiğit 
1   Department of Audiology, Hacettepe University, Sihhiye, Ankara, Turkey
,
Meral D. Türkyilmaz 
1   Department of Audiology, Hacettepe University, Sihhiye, Ankara, Turkey
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Listening effort is primarily reflective of real-world performance. Therefore, it is crucial to evaluate the listening effort to predict the performance of hearing aid (HA) users in their daily lives.

Purpose This study aimed to investigate the relationship between listening effort, daily HA use time, and HA satisfaction.

Research Design This is a cross-sectional study.

Study Sample Thirty-three bilateral behind-the-ear HA users (17 females and 16 males) between 19 and 37 years were participated. All participants had bilateral, symmetric, moderate sensorineural hearing loss and at least 6 months of experience using HAs. The pure-tone average thresholds (PTA) of the participants' left and right ears were 55.34 ± 4.38 and 54.85 ± 5.05, respectively.

Data Collection and Analysis First, daily HA use times of the last 30 days were derived from data logging. Second, participants were asked to fill in the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life Scale questionnaire (SADL). Lastly, participants performed the dual-task paradigm to evaluate listening effort. The dual-task paradigm consisted of a primary speech recognition task that included three different individualized signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) conditions, that is, SNR100, SNR80, and SNR50, which the participant could understand 100, 80, and 50% of the speech, respectively. The secondary task was a visual reaction time task that required participants to press the key in response to a visual probe (an image of a white or red rectangle). Multiple linear regression analyses were used to model the effect of factors (daily HA use time and HA satisfaction) on reaction times (RT) of each three individualized SNR sessions.

Results Mean daily HA use time of the participants was 5.72 ± 4.14 hours. Mean RTs of SNR50, SNR80, and SNR100 conditions were 1,050.61 ± 286.49, 893.33 ± 274.79, and 815.45 ± 233.22 ms, respectively. Multiple linear regression analyses showed that daily HA use time and HA satisfaction are significantly related to listening effort in all SNR conditions. For SNR80 condition; F (2,30) = 47.699, p < 0.001, with an adjusted R 2 of 0.745.

Conclusion As far as we know, this study is the first to demonstrate a strong link between listening effort, daily HA use time, and HA satisfaction. Evaluating listening effort following the HA fitting session may provide preliminary information about the treatment success of HA.

Keywords

hearing aids assistive listening devices - listening effort - hearing aid use - hearing aid satisfaction - dual-task paradigm

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: 19 March 2022

Accepted: 29 May 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
31 May 2022

Article published online:
29 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 Wang X, Zheng Y, Liu Y, Lu J, Cui Z, Li Z. Effects of demographic, audiologic, and hearing-aid-related variables on the outcomes of using hearing aids. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2021; (e-pub ahead of print). DOI: 10.1007/s00405-021-07126-4.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Roup CM, Post E, Lewis J. Mild-gain hearing aids as a treatment for adults with self-reported hearing difficulties. J Am Acad Audiol 2018; 29 (06) 477-494
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lopez-Poveda EA, Johannesen PT, Pérez-González P, Blanco JL, Kalluri S, Edwards B. Predictors of hearing-aid outcomes. Trends Hear 2017; 21: 2331216517730526
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Meister H, Rählmann S, Walger M, Margolf-Hackl S, Kießling J. Hearing aid fitting in older persons with hearing impairment: the influence of cognitive function, age, and hearing loss on hearing aid benefit. Clin Interv Aging 2015; 10: 435-443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Moon IJ, Baek SY, Cho Y-S. Hearing aid use and associated factors in South Korea. Medicine (Baltimore) 2015; 94 (42) e1580
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Korkmaz MH, Bayır Ö, Er S. et al. Satisfaction and compliance of adult patients using hearing aid and evaluation of factors affecting them. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016; 273 (11) 3723-3732
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Timmer BHB, Hickson L, Launer S. Do hearing aids address real-world hearing difficulties for adults with mild hearing impairment? Results from a pilot study using ecological momentary assessment. Trends Hear 2018; 22: 2331216518783608
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 McGarrigle R, Gustafson SJ, Hornsby BWY, Bess FH. Behavioral measures of listening effort in school-age children: examining the effects of signal-to-noise ratio, hearing loss, and amplification. Ear Hear 2019; 40 (02) 381-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Giuliani NP, Brown CJ, Wu Y-H. Comparisons of the sensitivity and reliability of multiple measures of listening effort. Ear Hear 2021; 42 (02) 465-474
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 McGarrigle R, Munro KJ, Dawes P. et al. Listening effort and fatigue: what exactly are we measuring? A British Society of Audiology Cognition in Hearing Special Interest Group ‘white paper’. Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (07) 433-440
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Rahne T, Fröhlich L, Wagner L, Kropp MH, Müller A. Speech perception and hearing effort using a new active middle ear implant audio processor. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2021; (e-pub ahead of print). DOI: 10.1007/s00405-021-07207-4.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Wu Y-H, Stangl E, Zhang X, Perkins J, Eilers E. Psychometric functions of dual-task paradigms for measuring listening effort. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (06) 660-670
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Picou EM, Ricketts TA. The effect of changing the secondary task in dual-task paradigms for measuring listening effort. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (06) 611-622
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Wu Y-H, Aksan N, Rizzo M, Stangl E, Zhang X, Bentler R. Measuring listening effort: driving simulator versus simple dual-task paradigm. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (06) 623-632
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Brännström KJ, Karlsson E, Waechter S, Kastberg T. Listening effort: order effects and core executive functions. J Am Acad Audiol 2018; 29 (08) 734-747
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Picou EM, Lewis D, Angley G, Tharpe AM. Rerouting hearing aid systems for overcoming simulated unilateral hearing in dynamic listening situations. Ear Hear 2020; 41 (04) 790-803
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Genç M, Çildir B, Kaya M. Psychometric properties of the turkish version of the satisfaction with amplification in daily living questionnaire in hearing aid users. J Am Acad Audiol 2018; 29 (10) 898-908
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Keidser G, Dillon H, Flax M, Ching T, Brewer S. The NAL-NL2 prescription procedure. Audiology Res 2011; 1 (01) e24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Picou EM, Ricketts TA, Hornsby BW. How hearing aids, background noise, and visual cues influence objective listening effort. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (05) e52-e64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Zokoll MA, Fidan D, Türkyılmaz D. et al. Development and evaluation of the Turkish matrix sentence test. Int J Audiol 2015; 54 (Suppl. 02) 51-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Winn MB, Edwards JR, Litovsky RY. The impact of auditory spectral resolution on listening effort revealed by pupil dilation. Ear Hear 2015; 36 (04) e153-e165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Ratcliff R. Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers. Psychol Bull 1993; 114 (03) 510-532
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Cox RM, Alexander GC. Measuring satisfaction with amplification in daily life: The SADL scale. Ear Hear 1999; 20 (04) 306-320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Wright D, Gagné J-P. Acclimatization to hearing aids by older adults. Ear Hear 2021; 42 (01) 193-205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Brons I, Houben R, Dreschler WA. Effects of noise reduction on speech intelligibility, perceived listening effort, and personal preference in hearing-impaired listeners. Trends Hear 2014; 18: 2331216514553924
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Hornsby BW. The effects of hearing aid use on listening effort and mental fatigue associated with sustained speech processing demands. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (05) 523-534
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Alhanbali S, Dawes P, Lloyd S, Munro KJ. Hearing handicap and speech recognition correlate with self-reported listening effort and fatigue. Ear Hear 2018; 39 (03) 470-474
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Kaplan-Neeman R, Muchnik C, Hildesheimer M, Henkin Y. Hearing aid satisfaction and use in the advanced digital era. Laryngoscope 2012; 122 (09) 2029-2036
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Saunders GH, Forsline A. The Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT) and its relationship to aided reported handicap and hearing aid satisfaction. Ear Hear 2006; 27 (03) 229-242
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Wong LL, Hickson L, McPherson B. Hearing aid satisfaction: what does research from the past 20 years say?. Trends Amplif 2003; 7 (04) 117-161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Humes LE, Rogers SE, Quigley TM, Main AK, Kinney DL, Herring C. The effects of service-delivery model and purchase price on hearing-aid outcomes in older adults: A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial. Am J Audiol 2017; 26 (01) 53-79
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Prodi N, Visentin C. A slight increase in reverberation time in the classroom affects performance and behavioral listening effort. Ear Hear 2022; 43 (02) 460-476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Ohlenforst B, Zekveld AA, Jansma EP. et al. Effects of hearing impairment and hearing aid amplification on listening effort: a systematic review. Ear Hear 2017; 38 (03) 267-281
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Hughes SE, Hutchings HA, Rapport FL, McMahon CM, Boisvert I. Social connectedness and perceived listening effort in adult cochlear implant users: A grounded theory to establish content validity for a new patient-reported outcome measure. Ear Hear 2018; 39 (05) 922-934
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar