A comparison of speech intelligibility and subjective quality with hearing-aid processing in older adults with hearing loss.
Kathryn H Arehart, Song Hui Chon, Emily M H Lundberg and 5 others
PMID 33913795WHAT IT FOUND
Speech quality keeps improving even after intelligibility hits its ceiling, but this gap varies widely between listeners.
Do not assume a hearing aid that maximises word recognition also sounds good to the patient, because quality ratings were inconsistent across individuals.
Key findings
01Speech quality continues to improve after intelligibility has already peaked, meaning the two outcomes do not track each other at the top end.
02The relationship between intelligibility and quality varies substantially across individual listeners, so a specific intelligibility score does not predict a specific quality rating.
03Signal-to-noise ratio was the dominant factor affecting both intelligibility and quality, with hearing-aid processing causing smaller changes.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study used a hearing-aid simulation rather than actual commercial devices, so real-world fitting variables were not tested. Only 15 participants were included, which is too few to assess how patient factors like degree of hearing loss or cognitive status affect the intelligibility-quality relationship. Quality was rated on a single overall scale, and the study did not test standardised clinical quality measures because none currently exist. The hearing-aid processing conditions involved multiple simultaneous algorithms (noise reduction, frequency compression, compression), so the effect of any single feature cannot be isolated.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that improving intelligibility automatically improves sound quality for your patient. The study found that quality ratings varied widely between individuals and that quality continued to change even when intelligibility had already peaked, meaning a patient could have high word scores but still dislike the sound.