Aided speech recognition abilities of adults with a severe or severe-to-profound hearing loss

Author(s): Dowell, R. C., Clark, G. M.

Journal/Book: J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998; 41: 10801 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-3279. Amer Speech-Language-Hearing Assoc. 285-299.

Abstract: Adults with severe or severe-to-profound hearing losses constitute between 11% and 13.5% of the hearing-impaired population. A detailed investigation of the speech recognition of adults with severe (n = 20) or severe-to-profound (n = 14) hearing loss was conducted at The University of Melbourne. Each participant took part in a series of speech recognition tasks while wearing his or her currently fitted hearing aid(s). The assessments included closed-set tests of consonant recognition and vowel recognition, combined with open-set tests of monosyllabic word recognition and sentence recognition. Sentences were presented in quiet and in noise at +10 dB SNR to replicate an environment more typical of everyday listening conditions. Although the results demonstrated wide variability in performance, some general trends were observed. As expected vowels were generally well perceived compared with consonants. Monosyllabic word recognition scores for both the adults with a severe hearing impairment (M = 67.2%) and the adults with a severe-to-profound hearing impairment (M = 38.6%) could be predicted from the segmental tests, with an allowance for lexical effects. Scores for sentences presented in quiet showed additional linguistic effects and a significant decrease in performance with the addition of background noise (from 82.9% to 74.1% for adults with a severe hearing loss and from 55.8% to 34.2% For adults with a severe-to-profound hearing loss). Comparisons were made between the participants and a group of adults using a multiple-channel cochlear implant. This comparison indicated that some adults with a severe or severe-to-profound hearing loss may benefit from the use of a cochlear implant. The results of this study support the contention that cochlear implant candidacy should not rely solely on audiometric thresholds.

Note: Article Flynn MC, Univ Melbourne, Dept Otolaryngol, 32 Gisbourne St, Melbourne, Vic 3002, AUSTRALIA

Keyword(s): speech recognition; hearing aids; cochlear implants; hearing impairment; IMPAIRED LISTENERS; CONSONANT-RECOGNITION; FREQUENCY-RESPONSE; RESIDUAL HEARING; NOISE; DISCRIMINATION; PERCEPTION; CONFUSIONS; PROCESSOR; HANDICAP

Zurück | Weiter