4.3 Article

Audibility-Based Hearing Aid Fitting Criteria for Children With Mild Bilateral Hearing Loss

Journal

Publisher

AMER SPEECH-LANGUAGE-HEARING ASSOC
DOI: 10.1044/2019_LSHSS-OCHL-19-0021

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders [R01DC009560, R01DC013591]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Because of uncertainty about the level of hearing where hearing aids should be provided to children, the goal of the current study was to develop audibility-based hearing aid candidacy criteria based on the relationship between unaided hearing and language outcomes in a group of children with hearing loss who did not wear hearing aids. Method: Unaided hearing and language outcomes were examined for 52 children with mild-to-severe hearing losses. A group of 52 children with typical hearing matched for age, nonverbal intelligence, and socioeconomic status was included as a comparison group representing the range of optimal language outcomes. Two audibility-based criteria were considered: (a) the level of unaided hearing where unaided children with hearing loss fell below the median for children with typical hearing and (b) the level of unaided hearing where the slope of language outcomes changed significantly based on an iterative, piecewise regression modeling approach. Results: The level of unaided audibility for children with hearing loss that was associated with differences in language development from children with typical hearing or based on the modeling approach varied across outcomes and criteria but converged at an unaided speech intelligibility index of 80. Conclusions: Children with hearing loss who have unaided speech intelligibility index values less than 80 may be at risk for delays in language development without hearing aids. The unaided speech intelligibility index potentially could be used as a clinical criterion for hearing aid fitting candidacy for children with hearing loss.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available