Comparison of two adaptive procedures for fitting a multi-channel compression hearing aid.
We compared two adaptive procedures for fitting a multi-channel compression hearing aid. "Camadapt" uses judgements of the loudness of speech stimuli and the tonal quality of music stimuli. "Eartuner" uses judgements of the loudness and clarity of speech stimuli with differing spectral characteristics. Sixteen new users of hearing aids were fitted unilaterally, using each procedure. The fittings were assigned to Programs 1 and 2 in the aid, in a counter-balanced order. Subjects kept a diary of their experiences with each program in everyday life. Following 2-4 weeks of experience, they filled in the APHAB and other questionnaires and were re-fitted using both procedures. Camadapt generally led to higher low-level gains and lower high-level gains than Eartuner. Gains recommended by the procedures did not change following experience. Eight subjects preferred the Camadapt fitting and eight preferred the Eartuner fitting. Most subjects gave high overall satisfaction ratings for both procedures. Test-retest reliability was better for Eartuner than for Camadapt. Preference for the Camadapt fitting was associated with slightly better speech communication with Camadapt, while preference for the Eartuner fitting was associated with fewer problems with aversion for that procedure.
Moore
Brian C J
BC
Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. bcjm@cam.ac.uk
Marriage
Josephine
J
Alcántara
José
J
Glasberg
Brian R
BR
D000161:Acoustic Stimulation; D006310:Hearing Aids; D006317:Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced / Q000628:therapy; D006319:Hearing Loss, Sensorineural / Q000628:therapy*; D006801:Humans; D011304:Presbycusis / Q000628:therapy; D017755:Prosthesis Fitting; D016896:Treatment Outcome