Comparison of Speech Recognition With Adaptive Digital and FM Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technology by Listeners Who Use Hearing Aids Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the benefits of 3 types of remote microphone hearing assistance technology (HAT), adaptive digital broadband, adaptive frequency modulation (FM), and fixed FM, through objective and subjective measures of speech recognition in clinical and real-world settings. Method Participants included 11 ... Research Article
Research Article  |   June 01, 2014
Comparison of Speech Recognition With Adaptive Digital and FM Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technology by Listeners Who Use Hearing Aids
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Linda Thibodeau
    Callier Center for Communication Disorders, University of Texas at Dallas
  • Disclosure: The author serves as a consultant for Phonak by conducting evaluations of new products and educational seminars. Phonak provided financial support for this study.
    Disclosure: The author serves as a consultant for Phonak by conducting evaluations of new products and educational seminars. Phonak provided financial support for this study.×
  • Correspondence to Linda Thibodeau: thib@utdallas.edu
  • Editor: Larry Humes
    Editor: Larry Humes×
Article Information
Hearing Disorders / Hearing Aids, Cochlear Implants & Assistive Technology / Research Articles
Research Article   |   June 01, 2014
Comparison of Speech Recognition With Adaptive Digital and FM Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technology by Listeners Who Use Hearing Aids
American Journal of Audiology, June 2014, Vol. 23, 201-210. doi:10.1044/2014_AJA-13-0065
History: Received December 4, 2013 , Revised March 11, 2014 , Accepted March 24, 2014
 
American Journal of Audiology, June 2014, Vol. 23, 201-210. doi:10.1044/2014_AJA-13-0065
History: Received December 4, 2013; Revised March 11, 2014; Accepted March 24, 2014
Web of Science® Times Cited: 3

Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the benefits of 3 types of remote microphone hearing assistance technology (HAT), adaptive digital broadband, adaptive frequency modulation (FM), and fixed FM, through objective and subjective measures of speech recognition in clinical and real-world settings.

Method Participants included 11 adults, ages 16 to 78 years, with primarily moderate-to-severe bilateral hearing impairment (HI), who wore binaural behind-the-ear hearing aids; and 15 adults, ages 18 to 30 years, with normal hearing. Sentence recognition in quiet and in noise and subjective ratings were obtained in 3 conditions of wireless signal processing.

Results Performance by the listeners with HI when using the adaptive digital technology was significantly better than that obtained with the FM technology, with the greatest benefits at the highest noise levels. The majority of listeners also preferred the digital technology when listening in a real-world noisy environment. The wireless technology allowed persons with HI to surpass persons with normal hearing in speech recognition in noise, with the greatest benefit occurring with adaptive digital technology.

Conclusion The use of adaptive digital technology combined with speechreading cues would allow persons with HI to engage in communication in environments that would have otherwise not been possible with traditional wireless technology.

Acknowledgments
This research was supported in part by Phonak AG. Appreciation is expressed to Amanda Loveless, Lauren Schaper, Nancy McLellan, Sarah Wallace, and Amanda Blackwell for assistance with data collection and manuscript preparation.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Audiology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access