Effects of Slow- and Fast-Acting Compression on Hearing-Impaired Listeners' Consonant-Vowel Identification in Interrupted Noise.
Borys Kowalewski, Johannes Zaar, Michal Fereczkowski and 4 others
PMID 30311552WHAT IT FOUND
Fast compression improved consonant recognition by 8% to 9% at 55 and 65 dB SPL in nine older hearing-impaired listeners, but not at 45 or 75 dB SPL.
No clear harm appeared at higher levels.
Key findings
01In noise, fast compression gave consonant recognition rates 8% to 9% higher than slow compression at 55 and 65 dB SPL, but not at 45 or 75 dB SPL.
02In quiet shadow-controlled conditions at 45 dB SPL, linear amplification gave 55% recognition, fast compression 46%, and slow compression 34%, and the differences were statistically significant.
03At 75 dB SPL, fast and slow compression did not show statistically significant differences in consonant recognition in quiet or in noise.
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
Only nine hearing-impaired listeners completed the aided conditions, and they were older adults with mild to moderately severe high-frequency loss, so results may not apply to other hearing losses or ages. The normal-hearing and hearing-impaired groups differed by nearly 50 years in age, so age and hearing loss cannot be separated. Speech material was nonsense consonant-vowel tokens, not words or sentences, and the noise was artificial interrupted white noise, so real-world listening is not tested. Hearing aids were simulated with fixed compression ratios and a shadow-controlled quiet condition, not actual hearing aids in everyday environments. Linear amplification was included as a baseline but provided unrealistically high gain at high input levels. There was large variability among hearing-impaired listeners, and some did not benefit from higher audibility. Ceiling effects may have hidden differences at higher speech levels. No cognitive assessment was done, and context or top-down processing was prevented by nonsense tokens.
Declared interests
Funders named were Danmarks Tekniske Universitet and Sonova AG. The supplied text does not say whether either funder designed the study, collected data, or wrote the manuscript.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the 8% to 9% improvement as proof that fast compression will help patients understand everyday speech. It came from nine hearing-impaired listeners identifying nonsense consonant-vowel tokens through a simulator in artificial interrupted noise. The benefit was not present at the lowest or highest speech levels.