助听器配戴对听配能随任务变化趋势的影响

田宏斌; 李佳龄; 张敏; 韩朝

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-4933.2024.02.005

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

助听器配戴对听配能随任务变化趋势的影响

听配能走进临床 | 更新时间：2024-04-09

- 助听器配戴对听配能随任务变化趋势的影响
- The Impact of Hearing Aid Use on the Trajectory of Listening Effort as a Function of Taskload
- 中国听力语言康复科学杂志 2024年22卷第2期页码：132-138
- 作者机构：
  
  1.博聆助听器（上海）有限公司上海 200010
  2.复旦大学附属华东医院上海市老年医学临床重点实验上海 200040
  3.复旦大学附属华东医院耳鼻咽喉科上海 200040
- 作者简介：
  
  田宏斌博士；研究方向：成人听力健康管理
  李佳龄本科；研究方向：成人听力健康管理
  张敏，E-mail：miz18@pitt.edu
  韩朝，E-mail：sfhanzao@163.com
- 基金信息：
  
  上海市临床重点专科建设项目(shslczdzk02801)
- DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1672-4933.2024.02.005
  中图分类号： R764.5
- 纸质出版日期：2024-03-15，
  
  收稿日期：2024-01-17，
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
田宏斌,李佳龄,张敏等.助听器配戴对听配能随任务变化趋势的影响[J].中国听力语言康复科学杂志,2024,22(02):132-138.

TIAN Hong-bin,LI Jia-ling,ZHANG Min,et al.The Impact of Hearing Aid Use on the Trajectory of Listening Effort as a Function of Taskload[J].Chinese Scientific Journal of Hearing and Speech Rehabilitation,2024,22(02):132-138.
田宏斌,李佳龄,张敏等.助听器配戴对听配能随任务变化趋势的影响[J].中国听力语言康复科学杂志,2024,22(02):132-138. DOI： 10.3969/j.issn.1672-4933.2024.02.005.

TIAN Hong-bin,LI Jia-ling,ZHANG Min,et al.The Impact of Hearing Aid Use on the Trajectory of Listening Effort as a Function of Taskload[J].Chinese Scientific Journal of Hearing and Speech Rehabilitation,2024,22(02):132-138. DOI： 10.3969/j.issn.1672-4933.2024.02.005.

摘要

目的

探讨助听器配戴是否影响听配能随任务难度变化的趋势，以及听觉任务诱发的主观听配能评价与日常生活经验相关的听配能评价之间的关系。

方法

选取24名双耳配戴助听器的成年患者，分别在未助听和助听的条件下，采用语速和信噪比两个听觉任务（分别包括6个难度级别）诱导进行听配能主观评估，并结合日常生活场景相关的听配能评价。通过线性回归模型对听配能评分随任务负荷变化趋势进行分析，线性回归线斜率和截距为听配能因变量，分析助听前后听配能的变化以及两种主观听配能评价间的相关性。

结果

在语速和信噪比听觉任务下，助听器配戴前听配能回归线截距均显著高于助听器配戴后，即在较容易的聆听环境下助听器配戴使听配能明显减少（

0.05），助听器配戴后听配能回归线斜率显著高于助听器配戴前，即助听后听配能在难易任务中的差距更明显（

0.05）；听配能的减少幅度与每日配戴助听器的时数有关，每日配戴时间越长，听配能减少越多（

0.05）；助听后听觉任务诱导的主观听配能评分与常见生活场景相关的主观听配能评分无关（

0.05）。

结论

在典型的听力临床门诊环境下，采用具有较宽任务难度梯度的听觉任务诱导听配能自陈评估的方法能够有效地反映助听器配戴对优化听配能投入的积极效果。每日助听器配戴时间是获得听配能收益的重要影响因素。主观评价听配能时需要充分考虑情景诱导的差异性。

Abstract

Objective

To explore whether hearing aid use influences the listening effort trajectory as a function of task difficulty levels

and the relationship between the subjective listening effort ratings induced by auditory tasks and by daily life experience recall.

Methods

Twenty-four adult binaural hearing aids wearers were asked to rate their listening effort under a speeded speech understanding task and a speech in noise understanding task on a 0-10 analogue scale with and without their hearing aids. Each task consisted of 6 difficulty levels. They were also asked to rate the aided listening effort based on their experiences in 6 typical daily life scenarios. A Linear regression model was applied to analyze the listening effort trajectory. Pearson correlation was performed between the two subjective evaluations of listening effort.

Results

The intercept of the regression line of listening effort without hearing aids was significantly higher than that with hearing aids (i.e.

hearing aid use significantly reduced listening effort in easier listening conditions

0.05). The slope of the regression line of listening effort with hearing aids was significantly higher than that without hearing aids (i.e.

the aided listening effort trajectory was more similar to that of normal hearing individuals

0.05). The decrease in listening effort was associated with the number of hours of daily hearing aid use (i.e.

the longer the daily wearing time

the more the listening effort decreased

0.05). The subjective listening effort induced by auditory tasks was not related to that induced by daily listening experiences (

0.05).

Conclusion

In a typical audiology clinic setting

auditory task with speech rate and signal-to-noise ratio manipulations can be applied to effectively induce subjective listening effort ratings and compare listening effort allocation patterns between with and without hearing aids use. The daily wearing time of hearing aids is an important influencing factor in obtaining listening effort reduction benefits from hearing aids use. When evaluating subjective listening effort

it is necessary to consider the differences in induction scenarios.

关键词

助听器听配能语速信噪比

Keywords

Hearing aidsListening effortSpeech rateSignal-to-noise ratio

references

Bräcker T, Opie J, Nopp P, et al. Introducing real-life listening features into the clinical test environment: Part I: measuring the hearing performance and evaluating the listening effort of individuals with normal hearing[J]. Cochlear Implants International, 2019, 20(3): 138-146.

Bräcker T, Hellmiss S, Batsoulis C, et al. Introducing real-life listening features into the clinical test environment: Part II: Measuring the hearing performance and evaluating the listening effort of individuals with a hearing implant [J]. Cochlear Implants International, 2019, 20(4): 165-175.

Kahneman D. Attention and effort [M]. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1973.40-46.

Pichora-Fuller MK, Kramer SE, Eckert MA, et al. Hearing impairment and cognitive energy: the Framework for Understanding Effortful Listening (FUEL) [J]. Ear and Hearing, 2016, 37 (Supplement 1): 5-27.

Herrmann B, Johnsrude IS. A model of listening engagement (MoLE) [J]. Hearing Research, 2020, 397: 108-116.

Johnson J, Xu J, Cox R, et al. A comparison of two methods for measuring listening effort as part of an audiologic test battery [J]. American journal of audiology, 2015, 24(3): 419-431.

Kaplan Neeman R, Roziner I, Muchnik C. A Clinical Paradigm for Listening Effort Assessment in Middle-Aged Listeners [J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2022, 13: 202-227.

张华, 王硕, 王靓, 等. 普通话言语测听双音节词表的编辑与初步等价性评估 [J]. 中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志, 2006, 41(6): 425-429.

Zhang M, Siegle GJ, McNeil MR, et al. The role of reward and task demand in value-based strategic allocation of auditory comprehension effort [J]. Hearing Research, 2019, 381: 107-122.

Alhanbali S, Dawes P, Lloyd S, et al. Self-Reported Listening-Related Effort and Fatigue in Hearing-Impaired Adults [J]. Ear and Hearing, 2017, 38(1): 1-21.

Pfister R, Schwarz K, Carson R, et al. Easy methods for extracting individual regression slopes: Comparing SPSS, R, and Excel[J]. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 2013, 9(2): 72-78.

Müller JA, Wendt D, Kollmeier B, et al. Effect of Speech Rate on Neural Tracking of Speech [J]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2019, 10: 449-454.

Krizman J, Skoe E, Kraus N. Stimulus rate and subcortical auditory processing of speech [J]. Audiology and Neurotology, 2010, 15(5): 332-342.

Adank P, Janse E. Perceptual learning of time-compressed and natural fast speech [J]. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2009, 126(5): 2649-2659..

Winn MB, Teece KH. Slower speaking rate reduces listening effort among listeners with cochlear implants [J]. Ear and hearing, 2021, 42(3): 584-595.

Jilla AM, Johnson CE, Danhauer JL, et al. Predictors of hearing aid use in the advanced digital era: an investigation of benefit, satisfaction, and self-efficacy [J]. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 2020, 31(2): 87-95.

Dashti R, Khiavi FF, Sameni SJ, et al. Satisfaction with hearing aids among aged patients with different degrees of hearing loss and length of daily use [J]. Journal of audiology & otology, 2015, 19(1): 14-21.

Glick HA, Sharma A. Cortical Neuroplasticity and Cognitive Function in Early-Stage, Mild-Moderate Hearing Loss: Evidence of Neurocognitive Benefit From Hearing Aid Use [J]. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 2020, 14: 93-101.

Fiedler L, Ala TS, Graversen C, et al. Hearing Aid Noise Reduction Lowers the Sustained Listening Effort During Continuous Speech in Noise-A Combined Pupillometry and EEG Study [J]. Ear and hearing, 2021, 42(6): 1590-1601.

Hickson L, Meyer C, Lovelock K, et al. Factors associated with success with hearing aids in older adults [J]. International Journal of Audiology, 2014, 53(sup1): 18-27.

Shukla B, Rao BS, Saxena U, et al. Measurement of speech in noise abilities in laboratory and real-world noise [J]. Indian Journal of Otology, 2018, 24(2): 109-113.

Ruiz R, Absil E, Harmegnies B, et al. Time-and spectrum-related variabilities in stressed speech under laboratory and real conditions [J]. Speech Communication, 1996, 20(12): 111-129.

Barker AB, Leighton P, Ferguson MA. Coping together with hearing loss: a qualitative meta-synthesis of the psychosocial experiences of people with hearing loss and their communication partners [J]. International Journal of Audiology, 2017, 56(5): 297-305.

Heffernan E, Coulson NS, Henshaw H, et al. Understanding the psychosocial experiences of adults with mild-moderate hearing loss: An application of Leventhal's self-regulatory model [J]. International Journal of Audiology, 2016, 55(sup3): 3-12.

Barker BA, Scharp KM, Long SA, et al. Narratives of identity: understanding the experiences of adults with hearing loss who use hearing aids [J]. International Journal of Audiology, 2020, 59(3): 186-194.

浏览量

下载量

CSCD

文章被引用时，请邮件提醒。

提交

工具集

关联资源

老年听力损失患者配戴助听器满意度调查及其影响因素分析

听配能在学龄儿童中的研究进展

耳鸣感知和感受与主观听配能的关系研究

口罩对学前听障儿童语音感知投入听配能的影响研究

言语刺激强度对健听者听配能的影响