Limits...
Hearing performance benefits of a programmable power baha® sound processor with a directional microphone for patients with a mixed hearing loss.

Flynn MC, Hedin A, Halvarsson G, Good T, Sadeghi A - Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol (2012)

Bottom Line: For any new technology, it is important to evaluate the degree of benefit under different listening situations.The test sound processor had significantly improved high frequency audibility (3,000-8,000 Hz).The test sound processor demonstrated significant improvements in the most challenging listening situation (speech recognition in noise).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Research and Applications, Cochlear Bone Anchored Solutions, Gothenburg, Sweden.

ABSTRACT

Objectives: New signal processing technologies have recently become available for Baha® sound processors. These technologies have led to an increase in power and to the implementation of directional microphones. For any new technology, it is important to evaluate the degree of benefit under different listening situations.

Methods: Twenty wearers of the Baha osseointegrated hearing system participated in the investigation. The control sound processor was the Baha Intenso and the test sound processor was the Cochlear™ Baha® BP110power. Performance was evaluated in terms of free-field audibility with narrow band noise stimuli. Speech recognition of monosyllabic phonetically balanced (PB) words in quiet was performed at three intensity settings (50, 65, and 80 dB sound pressure level [SPL]) with materials presented at 0 degrees azimuth. Speech recognition of sentences in noise using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) in an adaptive framework was performed with speech from 0 degrees and noise held constant at 65 dB SPL from 180 degrees. Testing was performed in both the omni and directional microphone settings. Loudness growth was assessed in randomly presented 10 dB steps between 30 and 90 dB SPL to narrow band noise stimuli at 500 Hz and 3,000 Hz.

Results: The test sound processor had significantly improved high frequency audibility (3,000-8,000 Hz). Speech recognition of PB words in quiet at three different intensity levels (50, 65, and 80 dB SPL) indicated a significant difference in terms of level (P<0.0001) but not for sound processor type (P>0.05). Speech recognition of sentences in noise demonstrated a 2.5 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) improvement in performance for the test sound processor. The directional microphone provided an additional 2.3 dB SNR improvement in speech recognition (P<0.0001). Loudness growth functions demonstrated similar performance, indicating that both sound processors had sufficient headroom and amplification for the required hearing loss.

Conclusion: The test sound processor demonstrated significant improvements in the most challenging listening situation (speech recognition in noise). The implementation of a directional microphone demonstrated a further potential improvement in hearing performance. Both the control and test sound processors demonstrated good performance in terms of audibility, word recognition in quiet and loudness growth.

No MeSH data available.


Comparison of the maximum gain between the control and test sound processors. Due to improved design and feedback, the available gain in the test sound processor is higher across the mid frequencies by approximately 5 dB.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3369989&req=5

Figure 2: Comparison of the maximum gain between the control and test sound processors. Due to improved design and feedback, the available gain in the test sound processor is higher across the mid frequencies by approximately 5 dB.

Mentions: Two sound processors were compared. The Baha Intenso was the control device and the Cochlear Baha BP110power was the test sound processor. It should be noted that the current study was performed with manufacturing prototypes PS1 and PS2, as the study took place before the BP110power was CE marked. Technical verification confirmed that the prototype sound processors were equivalent to the commercially available BP110power (10-12). The PS1 and PS2 prototypes were equivalent in terms of gain, output, fitting prescription, channels, and microphones. A sub-analysis comparing the comparative performance between subjects 1-10 and 11-20 demonstrated no significant differences across the test measures (P>0.05). Fig. 2 compares and full-on-gain of the Intenso and BP110power. The BP110power was designed to have a higher possible full-on-gain than the Intenso, which should be considered in any evaluation of performance. The gain and maximum output was not matched between the sound processors as the purpose of the study was to investigate what clinical differences in hearing performance might be expected for each sound processor.


Hearing performance benefits of a programmable power baha® sound processor with a directional microphone for patients with a mixed hearing loss.

Flynn MC, Hedin A, Halvarsson G, Good T, Sadeghi A - Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol (2012)

Comparison of the maximum gain between the control and test sound processors. Due to improved design and feedback, the available gain in the test sound processor is higher across the mid frequencies by approximately 5 dB.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3369989&req=5

Figure 2: Comparison of the maximum gain between the control and test sound processors. Due to improved design and feedback, the available gain in the test sound processor is higher across the mid frequencies by approximately 5 dB.
Mentions: Two sound processors were compared. The Baha Intenso was the control device and the Cochlear Baha BP110power was the test sound processor. It should be noted that the current study was performed with manufacturing prototypes PS1 and PS2, as the study took place before the BP110power was CE marked. Technical verification confirmed that the prototype sound processors were equivalent to the commercially available BP110power (10-12). The PS1 and PS2 prototypes were equivalent in terms of gain, output, fitting prescription, channels, and microphones. A sub-analysis comparing the comparative performance between subjects 1-10 and 11-20 demonstrated no significant differences across the test measures (P>0.05). Fig. 2 compares and full-on-gain of the Intenso and BP110power. The BP110power was designed to have a higher possible full-on-gain than the Intenso, which should be considered in any evaluation of performance. The gain and maximum output was not matched between the sound processors as the purpose of the study was to investigate what clinical differences in hearing performance might be expected for each sound processor.

Bottom Line: For any new technology, it is important to evaluate the degree of benefit under different listening situations.The test sound processor had significantly improved high frequency audibility (3,000-8,000 Hz).The test sound processor demonstrated significant improvements in the most challenging listening situation (speech recognition in noise).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Research and Applications, Cochlear Bone Anchored Solutions, Gothenburg, Sweden.

ABSTRACT

Objectives: New signal processing technologies have recently become available for Baha® sound processors. These technologies have led to an increase in power and to the implementation of directional microphones. For any new technology, it is important to evaluate the degree of benefit under different listening situations.

Methods: Twenty wearers of the Baha osseointegrated hearing system participated in the investigation. The control sound processor was the Baha Intenso and the test sound processor was the Cochlear™ Baha® BP110power. Performance was evaluated in terms of free-field audibility with narrow band noise stimuli. Speech recognition of monosyllabic phonetically balanced (PB) words in quiet was performed at three intensity settings (50, 65, and 80 dB sound pressure level [SPL]) with materials presented at 0 degrees azimuth. Speech recognition of sentences in noise using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) in an adaptive framework was performed with speech from 0 degrees and noise held constant at 65 dB SPL from 180 degrees. Testing was performed in both the omni and directional microphone settings. Loudness growth was assessed in randomly presented 10 dB steps between 30 and 90 dB SPL to narrow band noise stimuli at 500 Hz and 3,000 Hz.

Results: The test sound processor had significantly improved high frequency audibility (3,000-8,000 Hz). Speech recognition of PB words in quiet at three different intensity levels (50, 65, and 80 dB SPL) indicated a significant difference in terms of level (P<0.0001) but not for sound processor type (P>0.05). Speech recognition of sentences in noise demonstrated a 2.5 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) improvement in performance for the test sound processor. The directional microphone provided an additional 2.3 dB SNR improvement in speech recognition (P<0.0001). Loudness growth functions demonstrated similar performance, indicating that both sound processors had sufficient headroom and amplification for the required hearing loss.

Conclusion: The test sound processor demonstrated significant improvements in the most challenging listening situation (speech recognition in noise). The implementation of a directional microphone demonstrated a further potential improvement in hearing performance. Both the control and test sound processors demonstrated good performance in terms of audibility, word recognition in quiet and loudness growth.

No MeSH data available.