Read about Starkey research studies in these interesting summaries of data and clinical observations.
Predicting hearing aid users' success with amplification is difficult. A metric of a listener's tolerance to background noise, known as the Acceptable Noise Level (ANL) test has shown promise in predicting success with hearing aids; additionally, noise reduction technology has been effective in improving listeners' acceptance noise. If hearing aid success can be predicted with the ANL test and a relationship exists between ANL scores and noise reduction, clinicians may be able to select optimal noise reduction settings that will maximize a patient's success. This study investigated this relationship between digital noise reduction and outcomes with the ANL.
Historically it has been difficult to predict success with hearing aids. Recent research has offered hope that hearing aid success may be predicted with a test of the Acceptable Noise Level (ANL); a measurement of the amount of background noise that a listener is willing to accept. A questionnaire was developed to gain insight into the cues that listeners are using to determine their individual ANLs. Understanding these cues may offer an explanation as to why some individuals are successful with hearing aids while others are not.
Forty-four research participants completed a study that evaluated speech understanding in noise while wearing S Series™ hearing aids. One of the experimental questions asked if directional benefit in a noisy background — relative to performance with omni-directional microphones — could be predicted from the pure-tone audiogram. While trends within the group data suggest that higher pure-tone thresholds may result in the greatest benefit from directional microphone technology, individual variability in performance suggests that directional benefit should not be attributed to audiometric data alone.
This article documents the real-world benefits of incorporating real-ear measurements into clinical practice. Data collected from clinical sites using real-ear measurements were compared to data from sites that did not complete real-ear measurements. Fittings optimized using real-ear verification resulted in increased high‑frequency output relative to fittings that did not utilize real-ear verification. Data from the Device‑Oriented Subjective Outcome (DOSO) Scale indicate that the fittings optimized with real-ear measurements delivered significantly greater benefit than fittings that were not optimized through real-ear measurements.