Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This article describes an evaluation of an in the ear hearing aid, which applies fast-acting full dynamic range compression independently in two frequency bands. This can compensate for the loudness recruitment typically associated with sensorineural hearing loss. The crossover frequency between the two bands and the gain and compression ratio in each band are programmable to suit the individual patient. Twenty subjects with moderate sensorineural hearing loss were tested in a counterbalanced order using the aid programmed as a linear amplifier (condition L) and as a two-band compressor (condition C). All subjects were fitted binaurally. Subjects were also tested without hearing aids (condition U) and using the hearing aids that they normally wore (condition Own). Speech intelligibility was measured in quiet at three sound levels (50, 65, and 80 dB SPL), and speech reception thresholds (SRTs) in 12-talker babble were measured under monaurally and binaurally aided conditions, with the speech and babble both coincident and spatially separated. In condition C, speech intelligibility in quiet was high at all sound levels. Speech intelligibility at the two lower levels decreased in condition L, and decreased still further in conditions Own and U. Condition C gave, on average, better speech intelligibility in babble (lower SRTs) than conditions L, Own, or U. The advantage of condition C over condition L varied across subjects and was correlated with the dynamic range for tones at high frequencies; small dynamic ranges were associated with greater benefit from compression. A significant advantage for binaural aiding was found both when the speech and noise were spatially separated and when they were coincident. The binaural advantage was similar for the C and L conditions, indicating that the independent compression at the two ears did not adversely affect the use of binaural cues. Questionnaires on the subjects' experiences with the aids in everyday life indicated that they generally preferred condition C over condition L.
Moore et al. (Thu,) studied this question.