Hua Ou

Self-reported spatial hearing abilities across different cochlear implant profiles.

PURPOSE The goal of this study was to determine how self-reported spatial hearing abilities differ across various cochlear implant (CI) profiles and to examine the degree of subjective benefit following cochlear implantation across different groups of CI users. METHOD This was a retrospective study of subjective spatial hearing ability of CI recipients. The subjects consisted of 99 unilateral CI users, 49 bilateral CI users, 32 subjects with a CI and contralateral hearing aid (bimodal users), and 37 short-electrode CI users. All subjects completed the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (Tyler, Perreau, & Ji, 2009), a questionnaire assessing spatial hearing ability, after implantation, and a subset of the subjects completed the questionnaire pre- and postimplantation. RESULTS Subjective spatial hearing ability was rated higher for the bilateral and short electrode CI users compared to the unilateral and bimodal users. There was no significant difference in subjective spatial hearing performance between the bilateral and short electrode CI users and the unilateral CI and bimodal users. A separate analysis of pre- and postimplant performance revealed that all CI groups reported significant improvements in spatial hearing ability after implantation. CONCLUSION This study suggests that there are substantial differences in perceived spatial hearing ability among unilateral and bimodal CI users compared with bilateral and short electrode CI users.

The Spatial Hearing Questionnaire: Data From Individuals With Normal Hearing

PURPOSE Although a number of questionnaires are available to assess hearing aid benefit and general hearing disability, relatively few investigate spatial hearing ability in more complex listening situations. The aim of this study was to document the performance of individuals with normal hearing using the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ; Tyler, Perreau, & Ji, 2009) and to compare performance with published data from cochlear implant (CI) users. METHOD Fifty-one participants with normal hearing participated. All participants completed the 24-item SHQ. Also, a factor analysis and reliability tests were performed. RESULTS Performance on the SHQ was high (87%) for the participants with normal hearing. Subjective ratings varied across different listening situations: Understanding speech in quiet (98%) was rated higher than sound localization (84%) and understanding speech in a background of noise (85%). Compared with previously published data (Tyler, Perreau, & Ji, 2009), listeners with normal hearing rated their spatial hearing ability significantly better than bilateral and unilateral CI users. Results confirmed that the SHQ is a reliable measure of spatial hearing ability for listeners with normal hearing. CONCLUSIONS Overall, results indicated that the SHQ is able to capture expected differences between individuals with normal hearing and CI users. These new data can be used as targets following the provision of hearing devices.

Validation of the Chinese Translation of the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire and Its Short Form

PURPOSE Few questionnaires address how to measure spatial hearing ability in complex listening situations. The purpose of the study was (a) to validate the Chinese translation of the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (C-SHQ) among Chinese participants and (b) to provide a shortened version for the purpose of clinical screening. METHOD This was a cross-sectional study. The C-SHQ was developed from the process of translation and back-translation of the original 24-item, English version (Tyler, Perreau, & Ji, 2009). The C-SHQ was administered to 146 patients at the Department of Otolaryngology Clinic of Sichuan Provincial Peoples Hospital between October 2013 and May 2014 at Sichuan, China. Exploratory factor analysis and reliability tests were performed for the full version, and confirmatory factor analysis was applied for the shortened version of the C-SHQ. RESULTS The exploratory factor analysis revealed scores loaded on 3 similar factors compared with the original SHQ. The internal consistency reliability was high (Cronbachs α = 0.99). The confirmatory factor analysis indicated that a shortened version of 12 items is sufficient to measure spatial hearing abilities. CONCLUSIONS The C-SHQ and its short form are both reliable and valid questionnaires, which are suitable for both research and clinical settings to measure spatial hearing ability in the Chinese population.

The effect on localization of frequency-specific gain reduction schemes when matched and mismatched across ears

Abstract Objective: To evaluate the impact of non-adaptive matched and mismatched gain reduction schemes on localization in spatially-separated noise. Design: Inspired by the function of commercial noise reduction algorithms, five frequency-specific gain reduction filter schemes were created, three for a modulated babble-noise and two for an unmodulated speech-shaped noise. Applying these schemes as both matched and mismatched conditions across ears, localization of five everyday sounds in noise was measured in a virtual environment using insert earphones. The performance in the reference scheme (no gain reduction in either ear) was measured as well. Study sample: Twenty-four adult bilateral hearing-aid users were enrolled in this study. Results: One of the two mismatched gain reduction schemes for the unmodulated noise had a small but negative impact on localization compared to the reference scheme. For that scheme more high-frequency reduction was noted than for the other schemes. Matching gain reduction across ears restored the deteriorated localization performance. No localization performance differences were observed in the modulated babble-noise regardless of whether the scheme was matched or mismatched across ears. Conclusions: The impact of noise-induced gain reduction on localization in noise was trivial in the study regardless of whether gain reduction schemes were matched or not across ears.

Development of a Shortened Version of the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ-S) for Screening Spatial-Hearing Ability

Purpose The Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ) was developed to address how to measure spatial-hearing ability in complex listening situations (Tyler, Perreau, & Ji, 2009). It has been translated and validated into various languages, including Chinese, Dutch, French, and Persian. Although the SHQ contains only 24 items, it could be time-consuming in a busy clinic to administer. The purposes of this study were to develop and validate a shortened version of the SHQ (SHQ-S) and to compare self-perceived spatial-hearing ability across adults with normal hearing (NH), hearing loss (HL), and cochlear implants (CIs). Method This was a retrospective study. The full version of the SHQ was administered to measure self-perceived spatial-hearing ability for 51 adults with NH at Augustana College, 47 adults with essentially mild to moderately severe sensorineural HL at Illinois State University, and 72 adult CI users at the University of Iowa. Exploratory factor analysis was performed for the full version for the data collected from adults with NH and HL. Appropriate items were chosen to develop the SHQ-S from the results of the exploratory factor analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis was then applied to test the factor structure of the SHQ-S for all participants. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the self-perceived spatial-hearing performance scores between the 3 groups. Results The exploratory factor analysis revealed scores loaded on 2 factors. Six items from the full version were chosen accordingly. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis indicated that that a shortened version of 6 items is sufficient to measure spatial-hearing ability. The internal consistency reliability of the SHQ-S was high. The main effect of the one-way analysis of variance was significant for the groups, F(2, 167) = 36.0, p < .0001. The comparisons with the Tukey adjustment indicated that the NH group reported significantly better spatial-hearing ability than either the HL or the CI group (both adjusted p values < .05). There was no significant difference between the participants with HL and CI users. Conclusions The psychometric characteristics of the 6-item SHQ-S were similar to those of the full version of the SHQ. We conclude that the SHQ-S is a reliable and valid tool for measuring spatial-hearing ability and screening for spatial-hearing difficulties. Participants with NH reported better spatial-hearing ability than those with HL or with CIs, whereas the CI users and participants with HL perceived similar spatial-hearing ability in the present study.