Article  |   December 2007
Objective and Subjective Hearing Aid Assessment Outcomes
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Lisa Lucks Mendel
    The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN
  • Contact author: Lisa Lucks Mendel, School of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, The University of Memphis, 807 Jefferson Avenue, Memphis, TN 38105. E-mail: lmendel@memphis.edu.
Hearing Aids, Cochlear Implants & Assistive Technology
Article   |   December 2007
Objective and Subjective Hearing Aid Assessment Outcomes
American Journal of Audiology December 2007, Vol.16, 118-129. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2007/016)
History: Accepted 09 May 2007 , Received 13 Oct 2006 , Revised 08 Mar 2007
American Journal of Audiology December 2007, Vol.16, 118-129. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2007/016)
History: Accepted 09 May 2007 , Received 13 Oct 2006 , Revised 08 Mar 2007

Purpose: To determine whether specific sentence recognition assessments were sensitive enough to serve as objective outcome measurements that document subjective improvements in speech understanding with hearing aids.

Method: The Revised Speech Perception in Noise test (R-SPIN; R. C. Bilger, J. M. Nuetzel, W. M. Rabinowitz, & C. Rzeczkowski, 1984), the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT; M. Nilsson, S. D. Soli, & J. A. Sullivan, 1994), and the Quick Speech-in-Noise test (QuickSIN; Etymotic Research, 2001; M. C. Killion, P. A. Niquette, G. I. Gudmundsen, L. J. Revit, & S. Banerjee, 2004) were administered to 21 hearing aid users to determine whether the tests could adequately document improvements in speech understanding with hearing aids compared with the research participants' self-assessments of their own performance. Comparisons were made between unaided and aided performance on these sentence tests and on the Hearing Aid Performance Inventory (HAPI; B. E. Walden, M. Demorest, & E. Hepler, 1984).

Results: The R-SPIN, the HINT Quiet threshold, and the QuickSIN signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) loss were the most sensitive of the sentence recognition tests to objectively assess improvements in speech perception performance with hearing aids. Comparisons among the subjective and objective outcome measures documented that HAPI ratings improved as performance on the R-SPIN, the HINT Quiet threshold, and the QuickSIN SNR loss improved.

Conclusions: Objective documentation of subjective impressions is essential for determining the efficacy of treatment outcomes in hearing aid fitting. The findings reported here more clearly define the relationship between objective and subjective outcome measures in an attempt to better define true hearing aid benefit.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Audiology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access

Related Articles

Can Behavioral Speech-In-Noise Tests Improve the Quality of Hearing Aid Fittings?
Perspectives on Audiology November 2011, Vol.7, 8-14. doi:10.1044/poa7.1.8
Coordinator’s Column
SIG 7 Perspectives on Aural Rehabilitation and Its Instrumentation October 2013, Vol.20, 41-43. doi:10.1044/arii20.2.41
Benefits of Adaptive FM Systems on Speech Recognition in Noise for Listeners Who Use Hearing Aids
American Journal of Audiology June 2010, Vol.19, 36-45. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2010/09-0014)
Coordinator’s Column
SIG 6 Perspectives on Hearing and Hearing Disorders: Research and Diagnostics February 2009, Vol.13, 2-3. doi:10.1044/hhd13.1.2
The Acceptance of Background Noise in Adult Cochlear Implant Users
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research April 2008, Vol.51, 502-515. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2008/036)