Open-Fit Domes and Children with Bilateral High-Frequency Sensorineural Hearing Loss: Benefits and Outcomes

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background:

Open-fit domes (OFDs) coupled with behind-the-ear (BTE) hearing aids were designed for adult listeners with moderate-to-severe bilateral high-frequency hearing loss (BHFL) with little to no concurrent loss in the lower frequencies. Adult research shows that BHFL degrades sound localization accuracy (SLA) and that BTE hearing aids with conventional earmolds (CEs) make matters worse. In contrast, research has shown that OFDs enhance spatial hearing percepts in adults with BHFL. Although the benefits of OFDs have been studied in adults with BHFL, no published studies to date have investigated the use of OFDs in children with the same hearing loss configuration. This study seeks to use SLA measurements to assess efficacy of bilateral OFDs in children with BHFL.

Purpose:

To measure SLA in children with BHFL to determine the extent to which hearing loss, age, duration of CE use, and OFDs affect localization accuracy.

Research Design:

A within-participant experimental design using repeated measures was used to determine the effect of OFDs on localization accuracy in children with BHFL. A between-participant experimental design was used to compare localization accuracy between children with BHFL and age-matched controls with normal hearing (NH).

Study Sample:

Eighteen children with BHFL who used CE and 18 age-matched NH controls. Children in both groups were divided into two age groups: older children (10–16 yr) and younger children (6–9 yr).

Data Collection and Analysis:

All testing was done in a sound-treated booth with a horizontal array of 15 loudspeakers (radius of 1 m). The stimulus was a spondee word, “baseball”: the level averaged 60 dB SPL and randomly roved (±8 dB). Each child was asked to identify the location of a sound source. Localization error was calculated across the loudspeaker array for each listening condition.

Results:

A significant interaction was found between immediate benefit from OFD and duration of CE usage. Longer CE usage was associated with degraded localization accuracy using OFDs. Regardless of chronological age, children who had used CEs for <6 yr showed immediate localization benefit using OFDs, whereas children who had used CEs for >6 yr showed immediate localization interference using OFDs. Development, however, may play a role in SLA in children with BHFL. When unaided, older children had significantly better localization acuity than younger children with BHFL. When compared to age-matched controls, children with BHFL of all ages showed greater localization error. Nearly all (94% [17/18]) children with BHFL spontaneously reported immediate own-voice improvement when using OFDs.

Conclusions:

OFDs can provide sound localization benefit to younger children with BHFL. However, immediate benefit from OFDs is reduced by prolonged use of CEs. Although developmental factors may play a role in improving localization abilities over time, children with BHFL will rarely equal that of peers without early use of minimally disruptive hearing aid technology. Also, the occlusion effect likely impacts children far more than currently thought.

Portions of this research were presented at the annual conference of the American Speech Hearing Association in 2013, and at the Oticon Pediatric Conferences in Toronto, Canada, and Phoenix, AZ, in 2016.

• REFERENCES

• Alworth LN, Plyler PN, Reber MB, Johnstone PM. 2010; The effects of receiver placement on probe microphone, performance, and subjective measures with open canal hearing instruments. J Am Acad Audiol 21 (04) 249-266
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boyd AW, Whitmer WM, Soraghan JJ, Akeroyd MA. 2012; Auditory externalization in hearing-impaired listeners: the effect of pinna cues and number of talkers. J Acoust Soc Am 131 (03) EL268-EL274
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Byrne D, Noble W, Glauerdt B. 1996; Effects of earmold type on ability to locate sounds when wearing hearing aids. Ear Hear 17 (03) 218-228
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Byrne D, Sinclair S, Noble W. 1998; Open earmold fittings for improving aided auditory localization for sensorineural hearing losses with good high-frequency hearing. Ear Hear 19 (01) 62-71
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Godar SP, Litovsky RY. 2010; Experience with bilateral cochlear implants improves sound localization acuity in children. Otol Neurotol 31: 1287-1292
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goode RL, Krusemark J. 1999; Advantages of a new miniature hearing aid for mild to moderate hearing loss. Laryngoscope 109 (12) 1919-1923
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grieco-Calub TM, Litovsky RY. 2010; Sound localization skills in children who use bilateral cochlear implants and in children with normal acoustic hearing. Ear Hear 31 (05) 645-656
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Häusler R, Colburn S, Marr E. 1983; Sound localization in subjects with impaired hearing. Spatial-discrimination and interaural-discrimination tests. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 400 (Suppl) 1-62
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Humes LE, Allen SK, Bess FH. 1980; Horizontal sound localization skills of unilaterally hearing-impaired children. Audiology 19 (06) 508-518
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Johnstone PM, Nábĕlek AK, Robertson VS. 2010; Sound localization acuity in children with unilateral hearing loss who wear a hearing aid in the impaired ear. J Am Acad Audiol 21 (08) 522-534
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Johnstone PM, Robertson VS. 2011 Earmold considerations for optimal spatial hearing in children with unilateral hearing loss. In: Seewald RC, Bamford JM, eds. A Sound Foundation through Early Amplification 2010. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference, Chicago, IL, 133–142. Phonak AG
  PubMed
• Johnstone PM, Yeager KR, Noss E. 2013; Spatial hearing in a child with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder and bilateral cochlear implants. Int J Audiol 52 (06) 400-408
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jones GL, Litovsky RY. 2008; Role of masker predictability in the cocktail party problem. J Acoust Soc Am 124 (06) 3818-3830
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kidd Jr G, Arbogast TL, Mason CR, Gallun FJ. 2005; The advantage of knowing where to listen. J Acoust Soc Am 118 (06) 3804-3815
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuk F, Baekgaard L. 2008; Hearing aid selection and BTEs: choosing among various “open ear” and “receiver in canal” options. Hear Rev 15: 22-36
  Google Scholar
• Kuk F, Keenan D, Lau CC. 2005; Vent configurations on subjective and objective occlusion effect. J Am Acad Audiol 16 (09) 747-762
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lantz J, Jensen OD, Haastrup A, Olsen SØ. 2007; Real-ear measurement verification for open, non-occluding hearing instruments. Int J Audiol 46 (01) 11-16
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Litovsky RY, Johnstone PM, Godar SP. 2006; a Benefits of bilateral cochlear implants and/or hearing aids in children. Int J Audiol 45 (01) (Suppl) S78-S91
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Litovsky RY, Johnstone PM, Godar S, Agrawal S, Parkinson A, Peters R, Lake J. 2006; b Bilateral cochlear implants in children: localization acuity measured with minimum audible angle. Ear Hear 27 (01) 43-59
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Macaulay EJ, Hartmann WM, Rakerd B. 2010; The acoustical bright spot and mislocalization of tones by human listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 127 (03) 1440-1449
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Martin K, Johnstone P, Hedrick M. 2015; Auditory and visual localization accuracy in young children and adults. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 79 (06) 844-851
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Noble W, Byrne D, Lepage B. 1994; Effects on sound localization of configuration and type of hearing impairment. J Acoust Soc Am 95 (02) 992-1005
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Noble W, Sinclair S, Byrne D. 1998; Improvement in aided sound localization with open earmolds: observations in people with high-frequency hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 9 (01) 25-34
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sebkova J, Bamford JM. 1981; Evaluation of binaural hearing aids in children using localization and speech intelligibility tasks. Br J Audiol 15 (02) 125-132
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stenfelt S, Reinfeldt S. 2007; A model of the occlusion effect with bone-conducted stimulation. Int J Audiol 46 (10) 595-608
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Van den Bogaert T, Klasen TJ, Moonen M, Van Deun L, Wouters J. 2006; Horizontal localization with bilateral hearing aids: without is better than with. J Acoust Soc Am 119 (01) 515-526
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Van Deun L, van Wieringen A, Van den Bogaert T, Scherf F, Offeciers FE, Van de Heyning PH, Desloovere C, Dhooge IJ, Deggouj N, De Raeve L, Wouters J. 2009; Sound localization, sound lateralization, and binaural masking level differences in young children with normal hearing. Ear Hear 30 (02) 178-190
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zheng Y, Godar SP, Litovsky RY. 2015; Development of sound localization strategies in children with bilateral cochlear implants. PLoS One. 10 (08) e0135790
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar