Effects of noise source configuration on directional benefit using symmetric and asymmetric directional hearing aid fittings.
OBJECTIVE
The benefits of directional processing in hearing aids are well documented in laboratory settings. Likewise, substantial research has shown that speech understanding is optimized in many settings when listening binaurally. Although these findings suggest that speech understanding would be optimized by using bilateral directional technology (e.g., a symmetric directional fitting), recent research suggests similar performance with an asymmetrical fitting (directional in one ear and omnidirectional in the other). The purpose of this study was to explore the benefits of using bilateral directional processing, as opposed to an asymmetric fitting, in environments where the primary speech and noise sources come from different directions.


METHODS
Sixteen older adults with mild-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) were recruited for the study. Aided sentence recognition using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) was assessed in a moderately reverberant room, in three different speech and noise conditions in which the locations of the speech and noise sources were varied. In each speech and noise condition, speech understanding was assessed in four different microphone modes (bilateral omnidirectional mode; bilateral directional mode; directional mode left and omnidirectional mode right; omnidirectional mode left and directional mode right). The benefits and limitations of bilateral directional processing were assessed by comparing HINT thresholds across the various symmetric and asymmetric microphone processing conditions.


RESULTS
Study results revealed directional benefit varied based on microphone mode symmetry (i.e., symmetric versus asymmetric directional processing) and the specific speech and noise configuration. In noise configurations in which the speech was located in the front of the listener and the noise was located to the side or surrounded the listener, maximum directional benefit (approximately 3.3 dB) was observed with the symmetric directional fitting. HINT thresholds obtained when using bilateral directional processing were approximately 1.4 dB better than when an asymmetric fitting (directional processing in only one ear) was used. When speech was located on the side of the listener, the use of directional processing on the ear near the speech significantly reduced speech understanding.


CONCLUSIONS
Although directional benefit is present in asymmetric fittings, the use of bilateral directional processing optimizes speech understanding in noise conditions in which the speech comes from in front of the listener and the noise sources are located to the side of or surround the listener. In situations in which the speech is located to the side of the listener, the use of directional processing on the ear adjacent to the speaker is likely to reduce speech audibility and thus degrade speech understanding.
Hornsby
Benjamin W Y
BW
Dan Maddox Hearing Aid Research Laboratory, Vanderbilt Bill Wilkerson Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37232-8242, USA. ben.hornsby@vanderbilt.edu
Ricketts
Todd A
TA
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001301:Audiometry, Pure-Tone; D005260:Female; D006310:Hearing Aids; D006319:Hearing Loss, Sensorineural / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000628:therapy*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009622:Noise / Q000009:adverse effects*; D010470:Perceptual Masking / Q000502:physiology; D017755:Prosthesis Fitting; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D013067:Speech Perception