| 1. |
- Laplante-Lévesque, Ariane, et al.
(author)
-
Optimal Hearing Aid Use: Focus Groups With Hearing Aid Clients and Audiologists
- 2013
-
In: Ear and Hearing. - : Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins. - 0196-0202 .- 1538-4667. ; 34:2, s. 193-202
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: This study explored the meaning and determinants of optimal hearing aid use from the perspectives of hearing aid clients and audiologists. An additional objective was to contrast the perspectives of the clients and audiologists. less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanDesign: Four focus groups were conducted: (1) clients (n = 7) in Denmark, (2) clients (n = 10) in the United Kingdom, (3) audiologists (n = 6) in Denmark, and (4) audiologists (n = 7) in the United Kingdom. Clients owned hearing aids and audiologists had regular contact with clients. The focus group facilitators used a topic guide to generate the participants views on optimal hearing aid use. The focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, translated into English if conducted in Danish, and qualitatively analyzed with content analysis. less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanResults: Both clients and audiologists described optimal hearing aid use as being frequent and regular and driven by the individual needs of the clients. When describing determinants of optimal hearing aid use, both clients and audiologists mentioned the role of the client (e. g., adjustment to hearing aids), the role of the audiologist (e. g., audiologic practice and profession), and the role of the hearing aid (e. g., benefits and limitations of the hearing aid). They both highlighted the importance of client access to information. However, how clients and audiologists described the influence of these determinants varied somewhat. Clients emphasized the role of the hearing aid in achieving optimal hearing aid use. From a client perspective, hearing aids that performed well and had relevant features were most central. In contrast, audiologists emphasized the role of a good client-audiologist relationship in achieving optimal hearing aid use. From the audiologists perspective, audiologists who were able to understand the needs of the clients and to instruct clients appropriately were most central. less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanConclusions: This study highlights similarities and differences in how clients and audiologists describe optimal hearing aid use and its determinants. It is commendable that audiologists acknowledge the importance of the client-audiologist relationship, but given clients focus on hearing aids, audiologists might wish to describe more explicitly to their clients how their intervention can extend beyond provision of the optimal hearing aid. (Ear andamp; Hearing 2013;34;193-202)
|
|
| 2. |
- Micula, Andreea, 1991-
(author)
-
Cognition Seen Through the Eyes of Hearing Aid Users : Working Memory Resource Allocation for Speech Perception and Recall
- 2022
-
Doctoral thesis (other academic/artistic)abstract
- This thesis investigates how hearing aid users allocate working (WM) memory resources under various task demands when listening to and storing speech in memory for later recall. This was done by combining an auditory recall task, the Sentence-final Word Identification and Recall (SWIR) test, with pupillometry. Different pupillary responses were used to obtain insights into momentary WM resource allocation and overall WM resource allocation over time. The task demands were manipulated by varying hearing aid noise reduction settings, as well as by varying the task difficulty of the SWIR test and the task difficulty predictability.The findings from the first two studies showed that recall performance in competing speech was better, and baseline pupillary responses were higher when noise reduction was activated compared to when it was not. This indicates that attenuating background noise frees up WM resources to be used for storing speech in memory rather than speech processing. While unpredictable task difficulty elicited higher baseline pupillary responses than predictable task difficulty, it did not have any effect on recall performance. This finding suggests that task difficulty predictability does not affect WM resource allocation. Instead, unpredictable task difficulty may lead to increased alertness in anticipation of the end of the SWIR test list. The findings of the third study showed that increased transient task-evoked pupillary responses, which reflect the momentary intensity of attention during encoding, were associated with a higher likelihood of subsequent recall. Moreover, higher WM capacity was also linked to higher likelihood of subsequent recall, presumably due to the ability to allocate more attentional resources during encoding. Lastly, the findings from the fourth study indicated that the combination of the SWIR test and pupillometry is suitable for capturing WM resource allocation. Although arousal decreased over time, recall performance remained stable, suggesting that participants did not reach the point of disengagement.Overall, a novel learning from this thesis is that increased pupillary responses may be a marker of “successful effort” when additional WM resources are allocated to achieve a better recall performance in the SWIR test. Furthermore, this thesis gives insights into which factors affect WM resource allocation and how to reduce the amount of processing resources required to understand speech, which may contribute to optimizing auditory rehabilitation in the future.
|
|
