Using a Bone-Conduction Headset to Improve Speech Discrimination in Children With Otitis Media With Effusion.
Tamsin Holland Brown, Marina Salorio-Corbetto, Roger Gray and 2 others
PMID 31464177WHAT IT FOUND
Children with glue ear heard distant speech better with a bone-conduction headset and microphone.
Quiet thresholds fell from 39 to 23 dB(A); in noise from 59 to 45. It may help during watchful waiting, but long-term benefit is unproven.
Key findings
01With the headset paired to a Bluetooth microphone, the median word-discrimination threshold for distant speech in quiet was 23 dB(A), compared with 39 dB(A) without it.
02In speech-shaped noise, the median word-discrimination threshold for distant speech was 45 dB(A) with the headset and 59 dB(A) without it.
03When six children with normal hearing at testing were excluded, the median threshold was still 24 dB(A) with the headset and 41 dB(A) without it in quiet, and 45 dB(A) with the headset and 60 dB(A) without it 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 19 children were tested, and quiet results were available for 17 children, so the sample was small. Each condition had one run, and two children did not complete the quiet test, so random variability could affect individual scores. The order of conditions was fixed, not randomized, so learning effects cannot be fully excluded. OME hearing fluctuates: six children had normal hearing around the time of testing, and for 10 children the audiogram was not done on the test day, with a median gap of 1.2 weeks. One child in noise without the headset did not reach 71% correct at the maximum level, and the assigned value may underestimate the true threshold. The outcome was a lab measure of word-discrimination threshold, not a measure of speech, language, reading, attention, or classroom participation. The study did not compare the headset and microphone with air-conduction hearing aids, sound-field systems, or other remote-microphone setups. Bone-conduction headset output is difficult to measure and fit in children, and the methods for verifying such devices are not yet validated for children. The headset did not have a near-the-ear microphone, so it may not help children communicate with peers in class.
Declared interests
Funding was provided by British Association of Paediatricians in Audiology, Cambridge Hearing Trust, and British Society of Audiology.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the bone-conduction headset alone caused the improvement. The study tested the headset paired with a Bluetooth microphone, and the authors state that the remote microphone likely contributed greatly to the threshold improvement.