Hearing Aid Verification: comparison of two protocols of probe microphone measures Probe microphone measurements are often used to evaluate real ear aided response (REAR) matching to discrete target values, prescribed by empirically validated mathematical formulas. This procedure is usually performed with artificial speech stimuli, that bears little relationship with the stimuli users find in daily life. On the other hand, speech mapping makes it possible to obtain the REAR with real speech stimuli, being a form of analysis the comparison of REAR to a target area, representative of the amplified speech banana, that falls in the residual dynamic area of hearing. The aim of this study was to compare the results of use, speech perception, benefit and satisfaction in daily life, obtained with hearing aids verified through two different protocols: REAR matching to NAL-NL1 prescribed targets (NAL-NL1 protocol) and to the personalized amplified speech banana (PSB protocol). As secondary goals, the generated target values and REAR matching to targets were compared for NAL-NL1 and PSB protocols. Participated in this study 60 individuals (22 males and 38 females), aged 56-96 years (mean 76.88 ± 8.1). with mild to severe bilateral sensorineural hearing loss with no previous experience with hearing aids. The study used a crossed, counterbalanced and repeated measures design. In the first stage, half of the participants performed the programming and verification of their hearing aids with the NAL-NL1 protocol (ISTS stimulus, presented at 50, 65 and 80 dB SPL) and half with the PSB protocol (standardized stimulus, presented at 50, 65 and 80 dB NPS). After 3 to 4 weeks the daily hours of hearing aid use was observed (interview and verification of datalogging), benefit and satisfaction inventory (IOI-HA) was administered and speech perception assessment, in silence and noise (HINT Brazil), were performed. Participants were then crossed for hearing aid programming and verification as well as obtaintion of outcome measurements with the opposite protocol. The participants were given the opportunity to express the hearing aid adjustment of their choice (NAL-NL1 versus PSB). The paired t-test showed that PSB targets, according to the criteria determined in this study, were significantly higher (4 to 20 dB) than those prescribed by NAL-NL1, especially at high frequencies and at low levels (50 dB SPL). However, small differences (1 to 3 dB), although significant, were observed between REAR obtained with PSB and NAL-NL1. Thus, mean differences between REAR and target were significantly higher for PSB-root mean square of errors (500-4000Hz inter-octaves) at the intensities of 50, 65 and 80 dB SPL were respectively 6.8, 5.56 and 5.1 (NAL-NL1) and 15.5, 13.2 and 11.7 (PSB). It was verified, that 77.3% of the ears did not match the BFP target, whereas for NAL-NL1 this percentage was 47.9%. There was no significant difference between mean hourly use (7.5±3.1 NAL; 7.6 ± 3.2 BFP), mean IOI-HA total scores (30.5 ± 2.9 NAL, 30.2 ± 3.1 BFP) and s...
