Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1745605
Listeners Who Prefer Monaural to Binaural Hearing Aids
Abstract
Four patients who preferred monaural as compared with binaural amplification were evaluated. For these patients, audiometric data, recognition performance on a dichotic digit task, and monaural and binaural hearing aid performance using four amplification strategies (National Acoustic Laboratories-Revised, a speech in noise algorithm, multiple-microphone arrays, and frequency modulated [FM]) are described. The results of dichotic testing using a one-, two-, and three-pair dichotic digit task in free- and directed-recall conditions indicated a left-ear deficit for all subjects that could not be explained by peripheral auditory findings or by a cognitive-based deficit. The results of soundfield testing using a speech in multitalker babble paradigm indicated that when listening in noise, there was little difference between aided and unaided word-recognition performance, suggesting that the binaural hearing aids originally fit for each patient were not providing substantial benefit when listening in a competing babble background. Word-recognition performance when aided monaurally in the right ear was superior to performance when aided monaurally in the left ear and when aided bin- aurally. The only successful binaural amplification strategy was the FM system. The results indicate that listeners with an auditory-based deficit in dichotic listening may function better with a monaural hearing aid fitting or with an assistive listening device such as an FM system. The findings also suggest that a test of dichotic listening is an important component in the evaluation of patients being considered for amplification.
Abbreviations: ALD = assistive listening device, BTE = behind the ear, DM = directional microphone, FM = frequency modulated, ITE = in the ear, NAL-R = National Acoustic Laboratories-Revised, NU-6 = Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6, S/B = signal-to-babble ratio, S/N - signal-to-noise ratio
Publication History
Article published online:
02 March 2022
© 2001. 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
- American National Standards Institute. (1996). American National Standards Specification for Audiometers. (ANSI S3–1996). New York: ANSI.
- Bayles K, Kaszniak A. (1987). Communication and Cognition in Normal Aging and Dementia. Boston: College Hill Press.
- Brooks DN. (1980). Binaural hearing aid application: United Kingdom. In: Libby ER, ed. Binaural Hearing and Amplification. Chicago: Zenetron, 159–176.
- Bryden MP, Munhall K, Allard F. (1983). Attentional biases and the right-ear effect in dichotic listening. Brain Lang 18:236–248.
- Byrne D. (1980). Binaural hearing aid fitting: research findings and clinical application. In: Libby ER, ed. Binaural Hearing and Amplification. Chicago: Zenetron, 23–73.
- Byrne D, Dillon H. (1986). The National Acoustic Laboratories (NAL) new procedure for selecting gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear Hear 7:257–265.
- Chmiel R, Jerger J. (1996). Hearing aid use, central auditory disorder, and hearing handicap in elderly persons. J Am Acad Audiol 7:190–202.
- Chmiel R, Jerger J, Murphy E, Pirozzolo F, Tooley-Young C. (1997). Unsuccessful use of binaural amplification by an elderly person. J Am Acad Audiol 8:1–10.
- Cox R, Gilmore C. (1990). Development of the Profile of Hearing Aid Performance (PHAP). J Speech Hear Res 33:343–357.
- Craik F. (1965). The nature of the age decrement in performance on dichotic listening tasks. J Exp Psychol 17:227–240.
- Department of Veterans Affairs. (1992). Tonal and Speech Materials for Auditory Perceptual Assessment, Disc 1.0. Long Beach, CA: VA Medical Center.
- Department of Veterans Affairs. (1998). Speech Recognition and Identification Materials, Disc 2.0. Mountain Home, TN: VA Medical Center.
- Department of Veterans Affairs. (1998). Tonal and Speech Materials for Auditory Perceptual Assessment, Disc 2.0. Mountain Home, TN: VA Medical Center.
- Dirks D, Carhart R. (1962). A survey of reactions from users of binaural and monaural hearing aids. J Speech Hear Disord 27:313–322.
- Erdman SA, Sedge RK. (1981). Subjective comparisons of binaural versus monaural amplification. Ear Hear 2:225–229.
- Fifer R, Jerger J, Berlin C, Tobey E, Campbell J. (1983). Development of a dichotic sentence identification test for hearing impaired adults. Ear Hear 4:300–305.
- Givens GD, Arnold T, Hume WG. (1998). Auditory processing skills and hearing aid satisfaction in a sample of older adults. Percept Mot Skills 86:795–801.
- Goldstein G, Braun L. (1974). Reversal of expected transfer as a function of increased age. Percept Mot Skills 38:1139–1145.
- Goldstein G, Shelly C. (1981). Does the right hemisphere age more rapidly than the left? J Clin Neuropsychol 3:67–78.
- Hughdahl K. (1988). Handbook of Dichotic Listening: Theorv. Methods and Research. New York: Wilev.
- Jerger J. (1996). ALD use in the elderly: a speech test than can help us predict success. Hear J 49(4):10,72–75.
- Jerger J. (1997). Functional asymmetries in the auditory system. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 106:23–30.
- Jerger J, Jerger S, Oliver T, Pirozzolo F. (1989). Speech understanding in the elderly. Ear Hear 10:79–89.
- Jerger J, Mahurin R, Pirozzolo F. (1990a). The separability of central auditory and cognitive deficits: implications for the elderly. J Am Acad Audiol 1:116–119.
- Jerger J, Stach B, Johnson K, Loiselle L, Jerger S. (1990b). Patterns of below normality in dichotic listening in the elderly. In: Jensen J, ed. Presbyacusis and Other Age Related Aspects. Copenhagen: Stougaard Jensen, 143–150.
- Jerger J, Silman S, Lew H, Chmiel R. (1993). Case studies in binaural interference: converging evidence from behavioral and electrophysiologic measures. J Am Acad Audiol 4:122–131.
- Jerger J, Chmiel R, Allen J, Wilson A. (1994). Effects of age and gender on dichotic sentence identification. Ear Hear 15:274–287.
- Jerger J, Alford B, Lew H, Rivera V, Chmiel R. (1995). Dichotic listening, event-related potentials, and interhemispheric transfer in the elderly. Ear Hear 16:482–498.
- Jerger J, Chmiel R, Florin E, Pirozzolo F, Wilson N. (1996). Comparison of conventional amplification and an assistive listening device in elderly persons. Ear Hear 17:490–504.
- Johnson RC, Cole RE, Bowers JK, Foiles SV, Patrick JW, Woliver RE. (1979). Hemisphere efficiency in middle and later adulthood. Cortex 15:109–119.
- Jordon O, Creisen O, Bentzen O. (1967). Treatment with binaural hearing aids. Arch Otolaryngol 85:105–112.
- Mueller HG, Grimes AM. (1993). Hearing aid selection and assessment. In: Alpiner JG, McCarthy PA, eds. Rehabilitative Audiology: Children and Adults. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 284–310.
- Pumford JM, Seewald RC, Scollie SD, Jenstad LM. (2000). Speech recognition with in-the-ear and behind-the-ear dual-microphone hearing instruments. J Am Acad Audiol 11:23–35.
- Ross M. (1980). Binaural versus monaural hearing aid amplification for hearing impaired individuals. In: Libby ER, ed. Binaural Hearing and Amplification. Chicago: Zenetron, 23–73.
- Schreurs KK, Olsen WO. (1985). Comparison of monaural and binaural hearing aid use on a trial period basis. Ear Hear 6:198–229.
- Sperry JL, Wiley TL, Chial MR. (1997). Word-recognition performance in various background competitors. J Am Acad Audiol 8:71–80.
- Strouse A, Wilson RH. (1999). Recognition of one, two, and three pair dichotic digits under free and directed recall. J Am Acad Audiol 10:557–571.
- Valente M, Fabry DA, Potts LG. (1995). Recognition of speech in noise with hearing aids using dual microphones. J Am Acad Audiol 6:440–449.
- Wilson RH, Jaffe MS. (1996). Interactions of age, ear, and stimulus complexity on dichotic digit recognition. J Am Acad Audiol 7:358–364.