Current Issue
Volumes and Issues
For Authors
Manuscript Guidelines
Review Process
Conflict of Interest
Copyright
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Aim and Scope
Policy and Ethical Guidelines
Promotion of the Journal
Print-Version Subscription
Publisher and Contact Information
Contact Information
Sign in
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
INFLUENCE OF WORKING MEMORY AND SPEECH PERCEPTION ABILITY ON HEARING AID USE AND BENEFIT IN OLDER ADULTS
1
Audiology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, India
2
Professor of Audiology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, India
A - Research concept and design; B - Collection and/or assembly of data; C - Data analysis and interpretation; D - Writing the article; E - Critical revision of the article; F - Final approval of article;
Submission date: 2020-06-25
Final revision date: 2020-09-11
Acceptance date: 2020-10-08
Publication date: 2020-12-31
Corresponding author
Vikas Mysore Dwarakanath
Audiology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Manasagangothri, 570006, Mysuru, India
Audiology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Manasagangothri, 570006, Mysuru, India
J Hear Sci 2020;10(4):27-32
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Hearing aids are equipped with many features to improve the speech perception abilities in quiet as well as in challenging situations. Despite that, older adults who use and benefit from hearing aids remain less satisfied. The present study focuses on aspects such as working memory, speech perception in noise (SNR-50), hearing aid usage, and its impact on perceived hearing aid benefit in older adults.
Material and methods:
Digit backward test and speech perception in noise test were administered on 34 older adults having mild to moderately-severe sensorineural hearing loss who were naïve users of hearing aids. The participants were divided into good and poor performers based on SNR-50. Two months later, the same tests were repeated along with administration of International Outcome Inventory - Hearing Aids (IOI-HA).
Results:
There was a significant difference in working memory and speech perception in noise with hearing aid outcome measures. It was also seen that individuals with better working memory and lower SNR-50 scores benefited more from a hearing aid. Cognition plays an important role in determining the amount of benefit derived from hearing aids in older adults.
Conclusions:
The present study highlights the importance of measuring working memory and speech perception abilities in older adults with hearing loss before fitting a hearing aid. These measures have a significant role in counselling about the realistic expectations of benefits from a hearing aid.
Hearing aids are equipped with many features to improve the speech perception abilities in quiet as well as in challenging situations. Despite that, older adults who use and benefit from hearing aids remain less satisfied. The present study focuses on aspects such as working memory, speech perception in noise (SNR-50), hearing aid usage, and its impact on perceived hearing aid benefit in older adults.
Material and methods:
Digit backward test and speech perception in noise test were administered on 34 older adults having mild to moderately-severe sensorineural hearing loss who were naïve users of hearing aids. The participants were divided into good and poor performers based on SNR-50. Two months later, the same tests were repeated along with administration of International Outcome Inventory - Hearing Aids (IOI-HA).
Results:
There was a significant difference in working memory and speech perception in noise with hearing aid outcome measures. It was also seen that individuals with better working memory and lower SNR-50 scores benefited more from a hearing aid. Cognition plays an important role in determining the amount of benefit derived from hearing aids in older adults.
Conclusions:
The present study highlights the importance of measuring working memory and speech perception abilities in older adults with hearing loss before fitting a hearing aid. These measures have a significant role in counselling about the realistic expectations of benefits from a hearing aid.
REFERENCES (37)
1.
Sprinzl GM, Riechelmann H. Current trends in treating hearing loss in elderly people: a review of the technology and treatment options – a mini review. Gerontology, 2010; 56: 351–8.
2.
Arlinger S. (). Negative consequences of untreated hearing loss: a review. Int J Audiol, 2003; 42: 2S17–2S21.
3.
Willott JF, Chisolm TH, Lister JJ. Modulation of presbycusis: current status and future directions. Audiol Neurootol, 2001; 6: 231–49.
4.
Fitzgibbons P, Gordon-Salant S. Auditory temporal processing in elderly listeners. J Am Acad Audiol, 1996; 7: 183–9.
5.
Pichora-Fuller MK, Souza PE. Effects of aging on auditory processing of speech. Int J Audiol, 2003; 42: 2S11–2S16.
6.
Florentine M, Buus S. Temporal gap detection in sensorineural and simulated hearing impairments. J Sp Lang Hear Res, 1984; 27(3): 449–55.
7.
Souza P, Arehart K, Neher T. Working memory and hearing aid processing: literature findings, future directions, and clinical applications. Front Psychol, 2015; 6: 1894.
8.
Kiessling J, Pichora-Fuller MK, Gatehouse S, et al. Candidature for and delivery of audiological services: special needs of older people. Int J Audiol, 2003; 42: 2S92–2S101.
9.
Cheesman MG. Speech perception by elderly listeners: basic knowledge and implications for audiology. J Speech Lang Pathol Audiol 1996; 21: 104–110.
10.
Jain C, Dwarakanath VM, Amritha G. Influence of subcortical auditory processing and cognitive measures on cocktail party listening in younger and older adults. Int J Audiol, 2019; 58: 87–96.
11.
Goff AE. The use of hearing aid outcome measures in the audiologic treatment of older adults. PhD thesis: Ohio State University, 2013.
12.
Abrams HB, McArdle R, Chisolm TH. From outcomes to evidence: establishing best practices for audiologists. Sem Hear, 2005; 26(3): 157–69.
13.
Popelka MM, Cruickshanks KJ, Wiley TL, Tweed TS, Klein BE, Klein R. Low prevalence of hearing aid use among older adults with hearing loss: the epidemiology of hearing loss study. J Am Geriatr Soc, 1998; 46: 1075–8.
14.
Davis A. Population study of the ability to benefit from amplification and the provision of a hearing aid in 55–74-year-old firsttime hearing aid users. Int J Audiol, 2003; 42: 2S39–2S52.
15.
Duijvestijn JA, Anteunis LJ, Hoek CJ, Van Den Brink RH, Chenault MN, Manni JJ. Help-seeking behaviour of hearingimpaired persons aged > or = 55 years; effect of complaints, significant others and hearing aid image. Acta Otolaryngol, 2003; 123(7): 846–50.
16.
Smits C, Kramer SE, Houtgast T. Speech-reception-thresholds in noise and self-reported hearing disability in a general adult population. Ear Hear, 2006; 27: 538–49.
17.
Abrams HB, McArdle R, Chisolm TH. From outcomes to evidence: establishing best practices for audiologists. Sem Hear, 2005; 26(3), 157–69.
18.
Kochkin S. Hearing professionals’ views on market expansion. Hear Instr, 1991; 42: 6–8.
19.
Stephens D, Hétu R. Impairment, disability and handicap in audiology: towards a consensus. Audiology, 1991; 30(4): 185–200.
20.
Brooks DN. Some factors influencing choice of type of hearing aid in the UK: behind-the-ear or in-the-ear. Br J Audiol, 1994; 28: 91–8.
21.
Garstecki DC. Hearing aid acceptance in adults. In: Clark JG and Martin FN, eds. Effective Counselling in Audiology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1994, 210–46.
22.
Cox RM, Alexander GC. Expectations about hearing aids and their relationship to fitting outcome. J Am Acad Audiol, 2000; 11(7): 368–82.
23.
Gatehouse S, Naylor G, Elberling C. Benefits from hearing aids in relation to the interaction between the user and the environment. Int J Audiol, 2003; 42: 1S77–1S86.
24.
Lunner T, Sundewall-Thorén E. Interactions between cognition, compression, and listening conditions: effects on speech-in-noise performance in a two-channel hearing aid. J Am Acad Audiol, 2007; 18: 604–17.
25.
Foo C, Rudner M, Rönnberg J, et al. Recognition of speech in noise with new hearing instrument compression release settings requires explicit cognitive storage and processing capacity. J Am Acad Audiol, 2007;18: 618–31.
26.
Cox RM, Xu J. Short and long compression release times: speech understanding, real-world preferences, and association with cognitive ability. J Am Acad Audiol, 2010; 21(2): 121–38.
27.
AIISH. Ethical Guidelines for Bio-behavioral Research Involving Human Subjects. All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Manasagangothri: Mysore, 2009.
28.
Yathiraj A, Vijayalakshmi CS. Phonemically Balanced Word List in Kannada. Developed in Department of Audiology, AIISH, Mysore, 2005.
29.
Geetha C, Kumar KS, Manjula P, Pavan M. Development and standardisation of the sentence identification test in the Kannada language. J Hear Sci, 2014; 4(1): 18–26.
30.
Thammaiah S, Manchaiah V, Easwar V, Krishna R. Translation and adaptation of five English language self-report health measures to South Indian Kannada language. Audiol Res, 2016; 6(1): 153.
31.
Mythri N, Krishna R. International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) in Kannada: Adaptation from (IOI-HA) English. Unpublished dissertation: University of Mysore, 2016.
32.
Tun PA, O’Kane G, Wingfield A. Distraction by competing speech in young and older adult listeners. Psychol Aging, 2002; 17: 453–67.
33.
Larsby B, Hällgren M, Lyxell B, et al. Cognitive performance and perceived effort in speech processing tasks: effects of different noise backgrounds in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. Int J Audiol, 2005; 44: 131–43.
34.
Ng EH, Rudner M, Lunner T, Rönnberg J. Relationships between self-report and cognitive measures of hearing aid outcome. Speech Lang Hear, 2013; 16(4): 197–207.
35.
Akeroyd MA. Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults. Int J Audiol, 2008; 47(Suppl2): S53–S71.
36.
Hickson L, Timm M, Worrall L. Hearing aid fitting: outcomes for older adults. Austr J Audiol, 1999; 21: 9–21.
37.
Uriarte M, Denzin L, Dunstan A, Sellars J, Hickson L. Measuring hearing aid outcomes using the Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life (SADL) questionnaire: Australian data. J Am Acad Audiol, 2005; 16: 383–402.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
