Comparing the Effect of Digital Noise Reduction Technique on Frequency Gain of Behind-the-Ear Digital Hearing Aids
Background and Aim: Background noise as a serious challenge mainly affects the speech perception in people with hearing loss. One of the methods used to control noise is digital noise reduction (DNR) technique. The present study aimed to investigate the effect of DNR program (activated and deactivated) on the frequency gain of basic and advanced behind-the-ear (BTE) Oticon hearing aids, using different DNR strategies to reduce background noise.
Methods: Two behind-the-ear Oticon hearing aids (Opn1 S105 and GetP) were used in this study. The Affinity 2.0 test box was first used to measure their DNR (off/on) gains using the national acoustic laboratories-non linear2 (NAL-NL2) and desired sensation level multi-stage [input/output] (DSLm[I/O]) formulas at sound pressure levels of 45, 65 and 85 dB SPL at a frequency range of 250-8000 Hz for three hearing loss (HL) patterns using the international speech test signal and broad band noise.
Results: There was a significant difference in DNR performance between the Opn1 S105 and GetP models for all three HL patterns at 45 and 65 dB SPL and most frequencies.
Conclusion: The DNR performance of advanced and basic hearing aids is different for different HLs at 45 and 65 dB SPL and most frequencies. The performance of advanced hearing aids is significant using the DSLm[I/O] formula at most frequencies
 Chisolm TH, Johnson CE, Danhauer JL, Portz LJP, Abrams HB, Lesner S, et al. A systematic review of health-related quality of life and hearing aids: final report of the American Academy of Audiology Task Force on the Health-Related Quality of Life Benefits of Amplification in Adults. J Am Acad Audiol. 2007;18(2):151-83. [DOI:10.3766/jaaa.18.2.7]
 Lin FR, Yaffe K, Xia J, Xue Q-L, Harris T B, Purchase-Helzner E, et al. Hearing loss and cognitive decline in older adults. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(4):293-9. [DOI:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.1868]
 Humes LE. Understanding the speech-understanding problems of the hearing impaired. J Am Acad Audiol. 1991;2(2):59-69.
 Plomp RA. Signal-to-noise ratio model for the speech-reception threshold of the hearing impaired. J Speech Hear Res. 1986;29(2):146-54. [DOI:10.1044/jshr.2902.146]
 Levitt H. Noise reduction in hearing aids: A review. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2001;38(1):111-21.
 Taghavi SMR, Geshani A, Rouhbakhsh N, Habibzadeh Mardani S. Acceptable noise level test: bases and theories. Aud Vestib Res. 2017;26(4):184-94.
 BentlerR, ChiouL-K. Digitalnoisereduction: Anoverview. Trends Amplif. 2006;10(2):67-82. [DOI:10.1177/1084713806289514]
 Beck DL, Behrens T. The Surprising Success of Digital Noise Reduction. Hearing Review. 2016;23(5):20.
 Mueller HG, Weber J, Hornsby BWY. The effects of digital noise reduction on the acceptance of background noise. Trends Amplif. 2006;10(2):83-93. [DOI:10.1177/1084713806289553]
 Beck DL, LeGoff N. Speech-in-noise test results for Oticon Opn. Hearing Review. 2017;24(9):26-30.
 Ramirez P, Jons C, Powers TA. Optimizing noise reduction using directional speech enhancement. Hearing Review. 2013;11(7):14-8.
 Wong LLN, Chen Y, Wang Q, Kuehnel V. Efficacy of a hearing aid noise reduction function. Trends Hear. 2018;22:2331216518782839. [DOI:10.1177/2331216518782839]
 Desjardins JL. The effects of hearing aid directional microphone and noise reduction processing on listening effort in older adults with hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol. 2016;27(1):29-41. [DOI:10.3766/jaaa.15030]
 Brons I, Houben R, Dreschler WA. Effects of noise reduction on speech intelligibility, perceived listening effort, and personal preference in hearing-impaired listeners. Trends Hear. 2014;18:2331216514553924. [DOI:10.1177/2331216514553924]
|Issue||Vol 31 No 2 (2022)|
|Digital noise reduction international speech test signal frequency response broad band noise|
|Rights and permissions|
|This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|