Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2023; 27(02): e302-e308
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1744170
Original Research

Bluetooth Coupling in Hearing Aids: Effect on Audiovisual Speech Recognition and Quality Rating of Compressed Speech in Older Individuals with Sloping Hearing Loss

Hemanth Narayan Shetty 
1   Department of Audiology, JSS Institute of Speech and Hearing, Mysuru, Karnataka, India
,
Shubhaganga Dhrruva Kumar 
2   Department of Speech and Hearing, Manipal College of Health Professions, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal
,
Srikar Vijayasarathy 
1   Department of Audiology, JSS Institute of Speech and Hearing, Mysuru, Karnataka, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Older individuals often report that they find it difficulty in enjoying watching television since they find it hard to follow the rapid intensity variations, and voice changes from scene to scene.

Objective The present study investigated the effect of coupling the hearing aid with the television via Bluetooth on audiovisual speech recognition and quality rating of compressed speech in older individuals with hearing loss.

Method Twenty participants in the age range of 60 to 75 years who had moderate to moderately severe sloping sensorineural hearing loss were bilaterally fitted with digital receiver in the canal hearing aids. The hearing aid was coupled with a television via Bluetooth using a streamer. The video recorded stimuli were presented at 65 dB SPL at normal rate, 35% compression and 45% compression conditions. Speech recognition scores and quality ratings were obtained for each condition with and without the Bluetooth streamer connected to the hearing aids.

Results Speech recognition scores were significantly better with Bluetooth coupling compared with conventional hearing aid use at 40% compressed speech rate. The quality was also rated higher in almost all parameters across speech rates when Bluetooth was used.

Conclusions The improved clarity and nullification of room reverberation offered by Bluetooth coupling can potentially compensate for the age-related temporal processing deficit contributing to ease of listening.

Keywords

speech perception - signal-to-noise ratio - aging - Bluetooth


Publication History

Received: 03 September 2021

Accepted: 26 January 2022

Article published online:
28 April 2023

© 2023. Fundação Otorrinolaringologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • References

  • 1 Depp CA, Schkade DA, Thompson WK, Jeste DV. Age, affective experience, and television use. Am J Prev Med 2010; 39 (02) 173-178
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Kochkin S. MarkeTrak VII: Customer satisfaction with hearing instruments in the digital age. Hear J 2005; 58 (09) 30
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Lin FR, Yaffe K, Xia J. et al; Health ABC Study Group. Hearing loss and cognitive decline in older adults. JAMA Intern Med 2013; 173 (04) 293-299
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Peelle JE, Troiani V, Grossman M, Wingfield A. Hearing loss in older adults affects neural systems supporting speech comprehension. J Neurosci 2011; 31 (35) 12638-12643
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Picou EM. MarkeTrak 10 (MT10) Survey Results Demonstrate High Satisfaction with and Benefits from Hearing Aids. Semin Hear 2020; 41 (01) 21-36
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Jilla AM, Johnson CE, Danhauer JL. et al. Predictors of Hearing Aid Use in the Advanced Digital Era: An Investigation of Benefit, Satisfaction, and Self-Efficacy. J Am Acad Audiol 2020; 31 (02) 87-95
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Edwards B. The future of hearing aid technology. Trends Amplif 2007; 11 (01) 31-45
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Kim M-B, Chung W-H, Choi J. et al. Effect of a Bluetooth-implemented hearing aid on speech recognition performance: subjective and objective measurement. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2014; 123 (06) 395-401
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Smith P, Davis A. The benefits of using bluetooth accessories with hearing aids. Int J Audiol 2014; 53 (10) 770-773
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Venkateshan S. Ethical guidelines for bio behavioral research. All India Institute of Speech and Hearing;; 2009
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 Geetha C, Kumar KSS, Manjula P, Pavan M. Development and standardisation of the sentence identification test in the Kannada language. J Hear Sci 2014; 4 (01) 18-26
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Shetty HN, Raju S. Effect of compression release time of a hearing aid on sentence recognition and the quality judgment of speech. Noise Health 2019; 21 (103) 232-241
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Boike KT, Souza PE. Effect of compression ratio on speech recognition and speech-quality ratings with wide dynamic range compression amplification. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2000; 43 (02) 456-468
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Wingfield A, Poon LW, Lombardi L, Lowe D. Speed of processing in normal aging: effects of speech rate, linguistic structure, and processing time. J Gerontol 1985; 40 (05) 579-585
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Gordon-Salant S, Fitzgibbons PJ. Recognition of multiply degraded speech by young and elderly listeners. J Speech Hear Res 1995; 38 (05) 1150-1156
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Gordon-Salant S. Hearing loss and aging: new research findings and clinical implications. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005; 42 (4, Suppl 2) 9-24
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Jenstad LM, Souza PE. Temporal envelope changes of compression and speech rate: combined effects on recognition for older adults. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2007; 50 (05) 1123-1138
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Van Tasell DJ. Hearing loss, speech, and hearing aids. J Speech Hear Res 1993; 36 (02) 228-244
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Bustamante DK, Braida LD. Multiband compression limiting for hearing-impaired listeners. J Rehabil Res Dev 1987; 24 (04) 149-160
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Verschuure J, Maas AJJ, Stikvoort E, de Jong RM, Goedegebure A, Dreschler WA. Compression and its effect on the speech signal. Ear Hear 1996; 17 (02) 162-175
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Plomp R. The negative effect of amplitude compression in multichannel hearing aids in the light of the modulation-transfer function. J Acoust Soc Am 1988; 83 (06) 2322-2327
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Arehart KH, Souza P, Baca R, Kates JM. Working memory, age, and hearing loss: susceptibility to hearing aid distortion. Ear Hear 2013; 34 (03) 251-260
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Schneider B, Speranza F, Pichora-Fuller MK. Age-related changes in temporal resolution: envelope and intensity effects. Can J Exp Psychol 1998; 52 (04) 184-191
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Snell KB. Age-related changes in temporal gap detection. J Acoust Soc Am 1997; 101 (04) 2214-2220
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Gatehouse S. Factors that influence the benefit from amplification in the elderly. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 1990; 476 (476) 262-268 , discussion 269
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 27 Letowski TR, Poch NE. Understanding of time compressed speech in older adults. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 95 (05) 433-439
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Vaughan NE, Letowski T. Effects of age, speech rate, and type of test on temporal auditory processing. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1997; 40 (05) 1192-1200
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Wingfield A, McCoy SL, Peelle JE, Tun PA, Cox LC. Effects of adult aging and hearing loss on comprehension of rapid speech varying in syntactic complexity. J Am Acad Audiol 2006; 17 (07) 487-497
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Gordon-Salant S, Zion DJ, Espy-Wilson C. Recognition of time-compressed speech does not predict recognition of natural fast-rate speech by older listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2014; 136 (04) EL268-EL274
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Sherbecoe RL, Studebaker GA. Audibility-index functions for the connected speech test. Ear Hear 2002; 23 (05) 385-398
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Finitzo-Hieber T, Tillman TW. Room acoustics effects on monosyllabic word discrimination ability for normal and hearing-impaired children. J Speech Hear Res 1978; 21 (03) 440-458
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Nabelek AK, Pickett JM. Monaural and binaural speech perception through hearing aids under noise and reverberation with normal and hearing-impaired listeners. J Speech Hear Res 1974; 17 (04) 724-739
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Levitt H. Historically, the paths of hearing aids and telephones have often intertwined. Hear J 2007; 60 (11) 20-24
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar