PDF herunterladen
Semin Hear 2015; 36(04): 284-295
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1564461
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Options for Auditory Training for Adults with Hearing Loss

Anne D. Olson
1   Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
26. Oktober 2015 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Hearing aid devices alone do not adequately compensate for sensory losses despite significant technological advances in digital technology. Overall use rates of amplification among adults with hearing loss remain low, and overall satisfaction and performance in noise can be improved. Although improved technology may partially address some listening problems, auditory training may be another alternative to improve speech recognition in noise and satisfaction with devices. The literature underlying auditory plasticity following placement of sensory devices suggests that additional auditory training may be needed for reorganization of the brain to occur. Furthermore, training may be required to acquire optimal performance from devices. Several auditory training programs that are readily accessible for adults with hearing loss, hearing aids, or cochlear implants are described. Programs that can be accessed via Web-based formats and smartphone technology are reviewed. A summary table is provided for easy access to programs with descriptions of features that allow hearing health care providers to assist clients in selecting the most appropriate auditory training program to fit their needs.

Keywords

Auditory training - hearing loss - adult - hearing aids - cochlear implant - computer training - mobile training
 

  • References

  • 1 Strom K. Worldwide hearing aid sales. Hear Rev 2014; 21 (2) xx-xx
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Lupsakko TA, Kautiainen HJ, Sulkava R. The non-use of hearing aids in people aged 75 years and over in the city of Kuopio in Finland. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2005; 262 (3) 165-169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Smeeth L, Fletcher AE, Ng ES , et al. Reduced hearing, ownership, and use of hearing aids in elderly people in the UK—the MRC trial of the assessment and management of older people in the community: a cross-sectional survey. Lancet 2002; 359 (9316) 1466-1470
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Schow R, Nerbonne M. Introduction to Audiologic Rehabilitation. Vol. 5. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Burk MH, Humes LE. Effects of long-term training on aided speech-recognition performance in noise in older adults. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2008; 51 (3) 759-771
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Stecker GC, Bowman GA, Yund EW, Herron TJ, Roup CM, Woods DL. Perceptual training improves syllable identification in new and experienced hearing aid users. J Rehabil Res Dev 2006; 43 (4) 537-552
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Sweetow R, Sabes J. Listening and communication enhancement (LACE). Semin Hear 2007; 28 (2) 133-141
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Sweetow RW, Sabes JH. Auditory training and challenges associated with participation and compliance. J Am Acad Audiol 2010; 21 (9) 586-593
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Henshaw H, Ferguson MA. Efficacy of individual computer-based auditory training for people with hearing loss: a systematic review of the evidence. PLoS ONE 2013; 8 (5) e62836
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Sweetow R, Palmer CV. Efficacy of individual auditory training in adults: a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16 (7) 494-504
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Chisolm TH, Saunders GH, Frederick MT, McArdle RA, Smith SL, Wilson RH. Learning to listen again: the role of compliance in auditory training for adults with hearing loss. Am J Audiol 2013; 22 (2) 339-342
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Levitt H, Oden C, Simon HJ, Noack C, Lotze A. Entertainment overcomes barriers of auditory training. Hear J 2011; 64 (8) 40-42
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Henderson Sabes J, Sweetow RW. Variables predicting outcomes on listening and communication enhancement (LACE) training. Int J Audiol 2007; 46 (7) 374-383
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Olson AD, Preminger JE, Shinn JB. The effect of LACE DVD training in new and experienced hearing aid users. J Am Acad Audiol 2013; 24 (3) 214-230
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Erber N, Hirsh I. Auditory training. In: Davis H, Silverman S, , eds. Hearing and Deafness, 4th ed. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1978: 358-374
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Laplante-Lévesque A, Hickson L, Worrall L. Rehabilitation of older adults with hearing impairment: a critical review. J Aging Health 2010; 22 (2) 143-153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Knudsen LV, Nielsen C, Kramer SE, Jones L, Laplante-Lévesque A. Client labor: adults with hearing impairment describing their participation in their hearing help-seeking and rehabilitation. J Am Acad Audiol 2013; 24 (3) 192-204
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Henshaw H, Clark DP, Kang S, Ferguson MA. Computer skills and internet use in adults aged 50-74 years: influence of hearing difficulties. J Med Internet Res 2012; 14 (4) e113
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Stacey PC, Summerfield AQ. Effectiveness of computer-based auditory training in improving the perception of noise-vocoded speech. J Acoust Soc Am 2007; 121 (5 Pt1): 2923-2935
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Watson CS, Miller JD, Kewley-Port D, Humes LE, Wightman FL. Training listeners to identify the sounds of speech: I. A review of past studies. Hear J 2008; 61 (9) 26
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Nahm ES, Preece J, Resnick B, Mills ME. Usability of health Web sites for older adults: a preliminary study. Comput Inform Nurs 2004; 22 (6) 326-334 , quiz 335–336
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Brooke J. SUS: A quick and dirty usability scale. In: Jordan P, Thomas B, Weerdmeester B, McClelland A, , eds. Usability Evaluation in Industry. London, UK: Taylor and Francis; 1996
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Fu QJ, Galvin J, Wang X, Nogaki G. Effects of auditory training on adult cochlear implant patients: a preliminary report. Cochlear Implants Int 2004; 5 (Suppl. 01) 84-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Fu QJ, Galvin III JJ. Perceptual learning and auditory training in cochlear implant recipients. Trends Amplif 2007; 11 (3) 193-205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Oba SI, Fu QJ, Galvin III JJ. Digit training in noise can improve cochlear implant users' speech understanding in noise. Ear Hear 2011; 32 (5) 573-581
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Richie C, Kewley-Port D. The effects of auditory-visual vowel identification training on speech recognition under difficult listening conditions. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2008; 51 (6) 1607-1619
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Richie C, Kewley-Port D, Coughlin M. Vowel perception by noise masked normal-hearing young adults. J Acoust Soc Am 2005; 118 (2) 1101-1110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Ingvalson EM, Lee B, Fiebig P, Wong PC. The effects of short-term computerized speech-in-noise training on postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant recipients. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2013; 56 (1) 81-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Miller JD, Watson CS, Kewley-Port D, Sillings R, Mills WB, Burleson DF. SPATS: Speech Perception Assessment and Training System. J Acoust Soc Am 2007; 122 (5) 3063
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Miller JD, Watson CS, Kistler DJ, Preminger JE, Wark DJ. Training listeners to identify the sounds of speech: II. Using SPATS software. Hear J 2008; 61 (10) 29-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Bernstein C, Baake M, Mazevski A , et al. Benefits of speech tracking training on sentence recognition, tracking rate and self-assessed communication function in adult cochlear implant users. J Acad Rehabil Audiol 2012; 45: 11-39
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Boothroyd A, Hnath-Chisolm T, Hanin L, Kishon-Rabin L. Voice fundamental frequency as an auditory supplement to the speechreading of sentences. Ear Hear 1988; 9 (6) 306-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Mackersie CL, Boothroyd A, Minniear D. Evaluation of the Computer-Assisted Speech Perception Assessment Test (CASPA). J Am Acad Audiol 2001; 12 (8) 390-396
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Fu QJ, Galvin III JJ. Computer-assisted speech training for cochlear implant patients: feasibility, outcomes and future directions. Semin Hear 2007; 28 (2) 142-150
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Burk MH, Humes LE. Effects of training on speech recognition performance in noise using lexically hard words. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2007; 50 (1) 25-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Burk MH, Humes LE, Amos NE, Strauser LE. Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners. Ear Hear 2006; 27 (3) 263-278
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Humes LE, Burk MH, Strauser LE, Kinney DL. Development and efficacy of a frequent-word auditory training protocol for older adults with impaired hearing. Ear Hear 2009; 30 (5) 613-627
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Ferguson MA, Henshaw H, Clark DP, Moore DR. Benefits of phoneme discrimination training in a randomized controlled trial of 50- to 74-year-olds with mild hearing loss. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (4) e110-e121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Prochaska JO, Velicer WF. The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Am J Health Promot 1997; 12 (1) 38-48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Grenness C, Hickson L, Laplante-Lévesque A, Davidson B. Patient-centred care: a review for rehabilitative audiologists. Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (Suppl. 01) S60-S67
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Bush NE, Skopp N, Smolenski D, Crumpton R, Fairall J. Behavioral screening measures delivered with a smartphone app: psychometric properties and user preference. J Nerv Ment Dis 2013; 201 (11) 991-995
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Kuhn E, Greene C, Hoffman J , et al. Preliminary evaluation of PTSD Coach, a smartphone app for post-traumatic stress symptoms. Mil Med 2014; 179 (1) 12-18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Bricker JB, Mull KE, Kientz JA , et al. Randomized, controlled pilot trial of a smartphone app for smoking cessation using acceptance and commitment therapy. Drug Alcohol Depend 2014; 143: 87-94
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 BinDhim NF, McGeechan K, Trevena L. Assessing the effect of an interactive decision-aid smartphone smoking cessation application (app) on quit rates: a double-blind automated randomised control trial protocol. BMJ Open 2014; 4 (7) e005371
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Wharton CM, Johnston CS, Cunningham BK, Sterner D. Dietary self-monitoring, but not dietary quality, improves with use of smartphone app technology in an 8-week weight loss trial. J Nutr Educ Behav 2014; 46 (5) 440-444
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Min YH, Lee JW, Shin YW , et al. Daily collection of self-reporting sleep disturbance data via a smartphone app in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: a feasibility study. J Med Internet Res 2014; 16 (5) e135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Grindrod KA, Li M, Gates A. Evaluating user perceptions of mobile medication management applications with older adults: a usability study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2014; 2 (1) e11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar