Why and How we Need to Involve Background Noise in Audiological Assessment
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper explores the importance of assessing speech recognition in noise for individuals with sensorineural hearing loss, highlighting its relevance in audiological rehabilitation. Traditional assessments like pure tone and speech audiometry in quiet often fail to address patients' real-world listening challenges, particularly in noisy environments. Studies using the Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) in Australia and Belgium reveal that speech in noise is a common rehabilitation goal, though its prioritization varies by region. The MarkeTrak survey further emphasizes that hearing aid users report significantly higher satisfaction in noisy situations compared to non-users. Despite its clinical relevance, speech in noise testing faces implementation barriers. The Acceptable Noise Level (ANL) test and Speech Audiometry in Noise (SPIN) are discussed, with findings showing that the type and spectral characteristics of background noise significantly affect test outcomes. Specifically, speech-weighted noise yields more reliable and representative results. The paper concludes by recommending the inclusion of speech in noise testing in audiological assessments, using speech-weighted noise or babble matched to the long-term spectrum of the speech material, in line with ISO standard on speech audiometry.
Article Details
The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.
References
2. Bronkhorst AW. The cocktail-party problem revisited: early processing and selection of multi-talker speech. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2015 Jul;77(5):1465-87. doi: 10.3758/s13414-015-0882-9. PMID: 25828463; PMCID: PMC4469089.
3. Picou EM. Hearing Aid Benefit and Satisfaction Results from the MarkeTrak 2022 Survey: Importance of Features and Hearing Care Professionals. Semin Hear. 2022 Dec 1;43(4):301-316. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1758375. PMID: 36466566; PMCID: PMC9715311.
4. Dillon, H., A. James, and J. Ginis. 1997. “Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) and Its Relationship to Several Other Measures of Benefit and Satisfaction Provided by Hearing Aids.” Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 8 (1): 27–43.
5. Moore DR, Edmondson-Jones M, Dawes P, Fortnum H, McCormack A, Pierzycki RH, Munro KJ. Relation between speech-in-noise threshold, hearing loss and cognition from 40-69 years of age. PLoS One. 2014 Sep 17;9(9):e107720. doi: 10.1371/journal. pone.0107720. PMID: 25229622; PMCID: PMC4168235.
6. Windle R. Trends in COSI responses associated with age and degree of hearing loss. Int J Audiol. 2022 May;61(5):416-427. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2021.1937347. Epub 2021 Jun 17. PMID: 34137647.
7. Parmar BJ, Rajasingam SL, Bizley JK, Vickers DA. Factors Affecting the Use of Speech Testing in Adult Audiology. Am J Audiol. 2022 Sep;31(3):528-540. doi: 10.1044/2022_AJA-21-00233. Epub 2022 Jun 23. PMID: 35737980; PMCID: PMC7613483.
8. Meyhi, Y. , Van Doren P. & Laureyns M. (2020). Evaluatie van het gebruik van de Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) vragenlijst Vlaanderen - Deel: Classificatie van de doelstellingen in 5 en 16 clusters (Unpublished thesis). Thomas More University College, Department of Audiology, Antwerp.
9. Nabelek AK, Tucker FM, Letowski TR. Toleration of background noises: relationship with patterns of hearing aid use by elderly persons. J Speech Hear Res. 1991 Jun;34(3):679-85. PMID: 2072693.
10. Nabelek AK, Freyaldenhoven MC, Tampas JW, Burchfiel SB, Muenchen RA. Acceptable noise level as a predictor of hearing aid use. J Am Acad Audiol. 2006 Oct;17(9):626-39. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.17.9.2. PMID: 17039765.
11. Freyaldenhoven MC, Smiley DF, Muenchen RA, Konrad TN. Acceptable noise level: reliability measures and comparison to preference for background sounds. J Am Acad Audiol. 2006 Oct;17(9):640-8. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.17.9.3. PMID: 17039766.
12. Gordon-Hickey S, Moore RE, Estis JM. The impact of listening condition on background noise acceptance for young adults with normal hearing. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Oct;55(5):1356-72. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0140). Epub 2012 Mar 12. PMID: 22411277.
13. Francart T, van Wieringen A, Wouters J. Comparison of fluctuating maskers for speech recognition tests. Int J Audiol. 2011 Jan;50(1):2-13. doi: 10.3109/ 14992027.2010.505582. Epub 2010 Nov 23. PMID: 21091261.
14. Jansen S, Luts H, Dejonckere P, van Wieringen A, Wouters J. Efficient hearing screening in noise-exposed listeners using the digit triplet test. Ear Hear. 2013 Nov-Dec;34(6):773-8. doi: 10.1097/AUD. 0b013e318297920b. PMID: 23782715.
15. Kalikow DN, Stevens KN, Elliott LL. Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. J Acoust Soc Am. 1977 May;61(5):1337-51. doi: 10.1121/1.381436. PMID: 881487.
16. Laureyns M, Pugliese G, Freyaldenhoven Bryan M, Willekens M, Gasbarre AM, Zanetti D, Gilson J, Van Doren P, Di Berardino F. Multicenter Study on the Impact of the Masker Babble Spectrum on the Acceptable Noise Level (ANL) Test. Audiol Res. 2024 Dec 7;14(6):1075-1083. doi: 10.3390/audiolres14060088. PMID: 39727611; PMCID: PMC11673388.
17. World Health Organization (2021). Hearing screening: considerations for implementation. 54p. retrieved at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240032767
18. WHO. World Report on Hearing (2021) 252p. retrieved at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240020481
19. International Organization for Standardization. (2022). Acoustics — Audiometric test methods Part 3: Speech audiometry (ISO Standard No. 8253-3). https://www.iso.org/standard/74049.html