Startseite How difficult is difficult? Speech perception in noise in the elderly hearing impaired
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

How difficult is difficult? Speech perception in noise in the elderly hearing impaired

  • Limor Lavie EMAIL logo , Karen Banai , Joseph Attias und Avi Karni
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 5. August 2014

Abstract

Background: Perception of speech in the presence of competing multitalker noise is difficult for most individuals with sensory hearing loss, and in particular, for the elderly hearing impaired. Elderly people frequently report that these difficulties are poorly compensated for by hearing aids, albeit the algorithms and technologies aiming to improve speech perception in noise. The aim of the current study was therefore to assess competing speech signals processing by measuring the amount of signal to noise ratio (SNR) loss experienced by elderly hearing impaired individuals and their performance in dichotic listening tests.

Methods: Speech in multitalker babble noise and dichotic listening were assessed in older hearing impaired individuals and in young normal-hearing adults.

Results: The average dichotic scores in the elderly group were substantially and significantly lower compared with the scores of the younger group with a significant right ear advantage (higher accuracy in reporting words arriving at the right ear than words arriving at the left ear) in the elderly group. Speech identification in noise in the older group was significantly poorer than in the younger group (SNR loss: 10 dB).

Conclusions: The poor performance in the elderly hearing impaired group highlights the difficulties faced by hearing impaired older adults in demanding listening environments. Our results suggest that it may be unreasonable to expect that elderly hearing impaired individuals may fully understand speech in multitalker environments even when hearing aids are used.


Corresponding author: Limor Lavie, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Haifa, 199 Aba Khoushy Avenue, Mount Carmel, Haifa 3498838, Israel, E-mail:

Conflict of interest statement

Authors’ conflict of interest disclosure: The authors stated that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.

Research funding: None declared.

Employment or leadership: None declared.

Honorarium: None declared.

References

1. Martin JS, Jerger JF. Some effects of aging on central auditory processing. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005;42:25–43.10.1682/JRRD.2004.12.0164Suche in Google Scholar

2. Schneider BA, Pichora-Fuller MK. Age-related changes in temporal processing: implications for speech perception. Semin Hear 2001;22:227–40.10.1055/s-2001-15628Suche in Google Scholar

3. Divenyi PL, Stark PB, Haupt KM. Decline of speech understanding and auditory thresholds in the elderly. J Acoust Soc Am 2005;118:1089–100.10.1121/1.1953207Suche in Google Scholar

4. Hallgren M, Larsby B, Lyxell B, Arlinger S. Cognitive effects in dichotic speech testing in elderly persons. Ear Hear 2001;22:120–9.10.1097/00003446-200104000-00005Suche in Google Scholar

5. Roup CM, Wiley TL, Wilson RH. Dichotic word recognition in young and older adults. J Am Acad Audiol 2006;17:230–40.10.3766/jaaa.17.4.2Suche in Google Scholar

6. Killion MC. SNR loss: “I can hear what people say, but I can’t understand them”. Hearing Review 1997;4:8–14.Suche in Google Scholar

7. Bentler RA. Effectiveness of directional microphones and noise reduction schemes in hearing aids: a systematic review of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol 2005;16:473–84.10.3766/jaaa.16.7.7Suche in Google Scholar

8. McCreery RW, Venediktov RA, Coleman JJ, Leech HM. An evidence-based systematic review of directional microphones and digital noise reduction hearing aids in school-age children with hearing loss. Am J Audiol 2012;21:295–312.10.1044/1059-0889(2012/12-0014)Suche in Google Scholar

9. Divenyi PL, Haupt KM. Audiological correlates of speech understanding deficits in elderly listeners with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. I. Age and lateral asymmetry effects. Ear Hear 1997;18:42–61.10.1097/00003446-199702000-00005Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

10. Humes LE, Dubno JR. Factors affecting speech understanding in older adults. In: Gordon Salant S, Frisina RD, Popper AM, Fay RR, editors. The aging auditory system. New York: Springer, 2010: 211–57.Suche in Google Scholar

11. Humes LH, Dubno JR, Gordon-Salant S, Lister JJ, Cacace AT, Cruickshanks KJ, et al. Central presbycusis: a review and evaluation of the evidence. J Am Acad Audiol 2012;23:635–66.10.3766/jaaa.23.8.5Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

12. Schneider BA, Pichora-Fuller K, Daneman M. Effects of senescent changes in audition and cognition on spoken language comprehension. In: Gordon Salant S, Frisina RD, Popper AM, Fay RR, editors. The aging auditory system. New York: Springer, 2010:167–210.Suche in Google Scholar

13. Gordon-Salant S. Hearing loss and aging: new research findings and clinical implications. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005;42:9–24.10.1682/JRRD.2005.01.0006Suche in Google Scholar

14. Kochkin S. MarkeTrak VI. On the issue of value: hearing aids benefit, price, satisfaction, and brand repurchase rates. The Hearing Review 2003;10:12–26.Suche in Google Scholar

15. Lavie L, Banai K, Attias J, Karni A. Better together: reduced compliance after sequential vs. simultaneous bilateral hearing aids fitting. Am J Audiol 2014;23:93–8.10.1044/1059-0889(2013/13-0010)Suche in Google Scholar

16. Kimura, D. Functional asymmetry of the brain in dichotic listening. Cortex 1967;3:163–8.10.1016/S0010-9452(67)80010-8Suche in Google Scholar

17. Lavie L, Banai K, Attias J. Dichotic listening: A predictor of speech-in-noise perception in older hearing-impaired adults? Auditory Plasticity – Listening with the Brain, Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, August 2013, Nyborg, Denmark. Pp 357–364.Suche in Google Scholar

18. Nilsson M, Soli SD, Sullivan JA. Development of the hearing in noise test for the measurement of speech reception, thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 95:1085–99.10.1121/1.408469Suche in Google Scholar

19. Killion MC, Niquette PA, Gudmunsen GI, Revit LJ, Benerjee S. Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;116:2395–405.10.1121/1.1784440Suche in Google Scholar

20. Strouse A, Wilson RH, Brush N. Effect of order bias on the recognition of dichotic digits in young and elderly listeners. Audiology 2000;39:93–101.10.3109/00206090009073059Suche in Google Scholar

21. Lavie L, Attias J, Karni A. semi-structured listening experience (listening training) in hearing aid fitting: influence on dichotic listening. Am J Audiol 2013;22:347–50.10.1044/1059-0889(2013/12-0083)Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2014-3-10
Accepted: 2014-6-30
Published Online: 2014-8-5
Published in Print: 2014-9-1

©2014 by De Gruyter

Heruntergeladen am 28.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jbcpp-2014-0025/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen