188
Views
27
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Comparison of three procedures for initial fitting of compression hearing aids. III. Inexperienced versus experienced users

, &
Pages 198-210 | Received 02 Dec 2002, Accepted 23 Apr 2003, Published online: 07 Jul 2009
 

Abstract

We assessed whether gain requirements differ for experienced users and new users when fitted with multi-band compression hearing aids. Three procedures for initial fitting were used: the Cambridge method for loudness equalization (CAMEQ), the Cambridge method for loudness restoration (CAMREST), and the desired sensation level input/output (DSL[i/o]) method. Twenty experienced hearing aid users and 20 new users with mild-to-severe sensorineural loss were fitted with Danalogic 163D digital hearing aids, using each procedure in turn in a counter-balanced order. The new users were given a pre-fitting with slightly reduced gains prior to the ‘formal’ fitting. Immediately after formal fitting with a given procedure, and 1 week after fitting, the gains were adjusted by the minimum amount necessary to achieve acceptable fittings. The amount of adjustment required provided the main measure of the adequacy of the initial fitting. On average, new users required decreases in gain for all procedures, the decreases being larger for DSL[i/o] than for CAMEQ or CAMREST. For experienced users, gain adjustments were small for CAMEQ and CAMREST, but were larger and mostly negative for DSL[i/o]. After these gain adjustments, users wore the aids for at least 3 weeks before filling out the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) questionnaire and taking part in laboratory measurements of the speech reception threshold (SRT) for sentences in quiet and in steady and fluctuating background noise at levels of 60 and 75dBSPL. The scores on the APHAB test and the SRTs did not differ significantly for the three procedures. We conclude that the CAMEQ and CAMREST procedures provide more appropriate initial fittings than DSL[i/o]. For inexperienced users, gains typically need to be reduced by about 3 dB relative to those prescribed by CAMEQ or CAMREST, although the amount of reduction may depend on hearing loss. An analysis of gain adjustments as a function of order of testing provided some evidence for increased tolerance to high-frequency amplification with increasing experience during the 4-month course of the trial, but this effect did not differ for the experienced and new users.

Sumario

Evaluamos si existen diferencias en los requerimientos de ganancia entre usuarios inexpertos o experimentados, al adaptarles auxiliares auditivos (AA) de compresión multibanda. Se usaron tres procedimientos para adaptación inicial: los métodos Cambridge para ecualización (CAMEQ) y restauración (CAMREST) de la intensidad subjetiva y el de ingreso/egreso para nivel de sensación deseada (DSL[i/o] ). Se adaptaron AA digitales Danalogic 163D a veinte usuarios experimentados y a 20 nuevos, con pérdidas neurosensoriales medias a severas, usando balanceadamente los tres procedimientos. Los nuevos usuarios fueron pre-adaptados con ganancias ligeramente reducidas, antes de la adaptación “formal”. Inmediatamente después de ésta y una semana después, con cada uno de los procedimientos de adaptación, se ajustaron las ganancias con el mínimo necesario para lograr adaptaciones aceptables. El monto del ajuste fue la principal medición para basar la adaptación inicial. En promedio, los nuevos usuarios requirieron disminución de la ganancia con todos los métodos, siendo mayor con DSL[i/o] que con CAMEQ o CAMREST. Para los experimentados, los ajustes de ganancia fueron menores con CAMEQ y CAMREST, pero más amplios y en su mayoría negativos para DSL[i/o]. Después de estos ajustes de ganancia los AA fueron usados no menos de 3 semanas, antes de llenar el Perfil Abreviado de Beneficio de AA APHAB) y de tomar parte en mediciones de laboratorio del umbral de recepción del lenguaje (SRT) con palabras, sin y con ruido de fondo fijo o fluctuante, en niveles de 60 y 75 dB SPL. Las puntuaciones del APHAB y del SRT no variaron significativamente con los tres métodos. Concluimos que el CAMEQ y el CAMREST permiten una adaptación inicial más apropiada que el DSL[i/o]. En usuarios inexpertos, fue típicamente necesario reducir la ganancia en cerca de 3 dB cuando la prescripción se hizo con CAMEQ o CAMREST, aunque el monto de la reducción puede depender de la pérdida auditiva. Un análisis de los ajustes de ganancia como función del orden de las pruebas, mostró evidencias de mayor tolerancia a la amplificación en frecuencias agudas conforme aumentó la experiencia en los cuatro meses del protocolo, pero este efecto no varió entre usuarios experimentados o inexpertos.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.