Towards Auditory Profile-Based Hearing-Aid Fittings: BEAR Rationale and Clinical Implementation

Abstract

(1) Background: To improve hearing-aid rehabilitation, the Danish ‘Better hEAring Rehabilitation’ (BEAR) project recently developed methods for individual hearing loss characterization and hearing-aid fitting. Four auditory profiles differing in terms of audiometric hearing loss and supra-threshold hearing abilities were identified. To enable auditory profile-based hearing-aid treatment, a fitting rationale leveraging differences in gain prescription and signal-to-noise (SNR) improvement was developed. This report describes the translation of this rationale to clinical devices supplied by three industrial partners. (2) Methods: Regarding the SNR improvement, advanced feature settings were proposed and verified based on free-field measurements made with an acoustic mannikin fitted with the different hearing aids. Regarding the gain prescription, a clinically feasible fitting tool and procedure based on real-ear gain adjustments were developed. (3) Results: Analyses of the collected real-ear gain and SNR improvement data confirmed the feasibility of the clinical implementation. Differences between the auditory profile-based fitting strategy and a current ‘best practice’ procedure based on the NAL-NL2 fitting rule were verified and are discussed in terms of limitations and future perspectives. (4) Conclusion: Based on a joint effort from academic and industrial partners, the BEAR fitting rationale was transferred to commercially available hearing aids.

Auditory Profile-Based Hearing Aid Fitting: Self-Reported Benefit for First-Time Hearing Aid Users

“…Sanchez-Lopez et al [27] hinted at a potential risk of the BEAR fittings being perceived as inferior to the reference fitting. For profile B participants, aggressive NR and fast-acting compression were applied and compared to the reference fitting (with standard NR and amplitude compression settings).…”

“…The BEAR fittings were based on the auditory profiling results (for details, see Sanchez-Lopez et al [27]). Unclassifiable participants (N = 7) were allocated to the 'reference fitting' group.…”

“…The readability of the SSQ12-B was evaluated using the 'Laesbarhedsindex' (LIX) [33], a validated index for assessing the readability of written information in Danish. The LIX classifies text into five categories based on the obtained scores: very easy (<24), easy (25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34), standard/medium readability (35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44), difficult (45-54), and very difficult (>55) [34]. The number of words per item varied from 10 to 30 (mean = 21.9 words), totaling 261 words.…”

Translational Research in Audiology

“…This group found the first fitting strategy that prescribes gain targets and adjusts advanced hearing aid features for the purpose of clinical research. Other applications could also benefit from using such a fitting strategy [7].…”