title: Objective and perceptual comparisons of two bluetooth hearing aid assistive devices.
abstract: With the advent of Bluetooth technology, many of the assistive listening devices for hearing have become manufacturer specific, with little objective information about the performance provided.
  
  
  
  Thirty native English-speaking adults (mean age 29.8) with normal hearing were tested pseudo-randomly with two major hearing aid manufacturers' proprietary Bluetooth connectivity devices paired to the accompanying manufacturer's specific hearing aids. Sentence recognition performance was objectively measured for each system with signals transmitted via a land-line to the same iPhone in two conditions.
  
  
  
  There was a significant effect of participant's performance according to listening condition. There was no significant effect between device manufacturers according to listening condition, but there was a significant effect in participant's perception of "quality of sound".
  
  
  
  Despite differences in signal transmission for each devise, when worn by participants both the systems performed equally. In fact, participants expressed personal preferences for specific technology that was largely due to their perceived quality of sound while listening to recorded signals. While further research is necessary to investigate other measures of benefit for Bluetooth connectivity devices, preliminary data suggest that in order to ensure comfort and compatibility, not only should objective measures of the patient benefit be completed, but also assessing the patient's perception of benefit is equally important. Implications for Rehabilitation All professionals who work with individuals with hearing loss, become aware of the differences in the multiple choices for assistive technology readily available for hearing loss. With the ever growing dispensing of Bluetooth connectivity devices coupled to hearing aids, there is an increased burden to determine whether performance differences could exist between manufacturers. There is a growing need to investigate other measures of benefit for Bluetooth hearing aid connectivity devices that not only include objective measures, but also patient perception of benefit.
authors.affiliation: a University of Texas, Callier Center for Communication Disorders , Dallas , TX , USA.|b University of the Witwatersrand , Johannesburg , South Africa.
authors.forename: Jackie L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Clark
authors.affiliation: c Heard it Through the Grapevine; Grapevine , TX , USA.
authors.forename: Carmen
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Pustejovsky
authors.affiliation: a University of Texas, Callier Center for Communication Disorders , Dallas , TX , USA.
authors.forename: Sven
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Vanneste
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D005260:Female; D006310:Hearing Aids / Q000592:standards*; D034381:Hearing Loss / Q000628:therapy; D006320:Hearing Tests; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012656:Self-Help Devices; D013016:Sound; D059015:Wireless Technology; D055815:Young Adult
keywords: Assistive listening devices; Bluetooth technology; signal-to-noise ratio; speech-in-noise; speech/sentence recognition scores; telecommunication strategies