Masking Effects Caused by Contralateral Distractors in Participants With Versus Without Listening Difficulties.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Tetsuaki Kawase, Chie Obuchi, Jun Suzuki, Yukio Katori, Shuichi Sakamoto
{"title":"Masking Effects Caused by Contralateral Distractors in Participants With Versus Without Listening Difficulties.","authors":"Tetsuaki Kawase, Chie Obuchi, Jun Suzuki, Yukio Katori, Shuichi Sakamoto","doi":"10.1097/AUD.0000000000001591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To examine the effects of distractor sounds presented to the contralateral ear on speech intelligibility in patients with listening difficulties without apparent peripheral pathology and in control participants.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This study examined and analyzed 15 control participants (age range, 22 to 30 years) without any complaints of listening difficulties and 15 patients (age range, 15 to 33 years) diagnosed as having listening difficulties without apparent peripheral pathology in the outpatient clinic of the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Tohoku University Hospital. Speech intelligibility for 50 Japanese monosyllables presented to the right ear was examined under the following three different conditions: \"without contralateral sound,\" \"with continuous white noise in the contralateral ear,\" and \"with music stimuli in the contralateral ear.\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results indicated the following: (1) speech intelligibility was significantly worse in the patient group with contralateral music stimuli and noise stimuli; (2) speech intelligibility was significantly worse with contralateral music stimuli than with contralateral noise stimuli in the patient group; (3) there was no significant difference in speech intelligibility among three contralateral masking conditions (without contra-stimuli, with contra-noise, and with contra-music) in the control group, although average and median values of speech intelligibility tended to be worse with contralateral music stimuli than without contralateral stimuli.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significantly larger masking effects due to a contralateral distractor sound observed in patients with listening difficulties without apparent peripheral pathology may suggest the possible involvement of masking mechanisms other than the energetic masking mechanism occurring in the periphery in these patients. In addition, it was also shown that the masking effect is more pronounced with real environmental sounds, that is, music with lyrics, than with continuous steady noise, which is often used as a masker for speech-in-noise testing in clinical trials. In other words, it should be noted that a speech-in-noise test using such steady noise may underestimate the degree of listening problems of patients with listening difficulties in their daily lives, and a speech-in-noise test using a masker such as music and/or speech sounds could make listening problems more obvious in patients with listening difficulties.</p>","PeriodicalId":55172,"journal":{"name":"Ear and Hearing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ear and Hearing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000001591","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To examine the effects of distractor sounds presented to the contralateral ear on speech intelligibility in patients with listening difficulties without apparent peripheral pathology and in control participants.

Design: This study examined and analyzed 15 control participants (age range, 22 to 30 years) without any complaints of listening difficulties and 15 patients (age range, 15 to 33 years) diagnosed as having listening difficulties without apparent peripheral pathology in the outpatient clinic of the Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Tohoku University Hospital. Speech intelligibility for 50 Japanese monosyllables presented to the right ear was examined under the following three different conditions: "without contralateral sound," "with continuous white noise in the contralateral ear," and "with music stimuli in the contralateral ear."

Results: The results indicated the following: (1) speech intelligibility was significantly worse in the patient group with contralateral music stimuli and noise stimuli; (2) speech intelligibility was significantly worse with contralateral music stimuli than with contralateral noise stimuli in the patient group; (3) there was no significant difference in speech intelligibility among three contralateral masking conditions (without contra-stimuli, with contra-noise, and with contra-music) in the control group, although average and median values of speech intelligibility tended to be worse with contralateral music stimuli than without contralateral stimuli.

Conclusions: Significantly larger masking effects due to a contralateral distractor sound observed in patients with listening difficulties without apparent peripheral pathology may suggest the possible involvement of masking mechanisms other than the energetic masking mechanism occurring in the periphery in these patients. In addition, it was also shown that the masking effect is more pronounced with real environmental sounds, that is, music with lyrics, than with continuous steady noise, which is often used as a masker for speech-in-noise testing in clinical trials. In other words, it should be noted that a speech-in-noise test using such steady noise may underestimate the degree of listening problems of patients with listening difficulties in their daily lives, and a speech-in-noise test using a masker such as music and/or speech sounds could make listening problems more obvious in patients with listening difficulties.

有听力障碍和无听力障碍的受试者对侧干扰物造成的掩蔽效应
目的:研究向无明显外周病变的听力障碍患者和对照组参与者的对侧耳发出干扰声对语言清晰度的影响:研究在无明显外周病变的听力障碍患者和对照组参与者中,向对侧耳呈现分散声音对言语清晰度的影响:本研究对在东北大学医院耳鼻咽喉头颈外科门诊就诊的 15 名无听力障碍主诉的对照组参与者(年龄在 22 岁至 30 岁之间)和 15 名被诊断为无明显外周病变的听力障碍患者(年龄在 15 岁至 33 岁之间)进行了检查和分析。在以下三种不同条件下,对右耳听到的 50 个日语单音节词的语音清晰度进行了检测:"结果:结果如下(1)患者组在有对侧音乐刺激和噪声刺激的情况下语言清晰度明显较差;(2)患者组在有对侧音乐刺激的情况下语言清晰度明显差于有对侧噪声刺激的情况;(3)对照组在三种对侧掩蔽条件(无对侧刺激、有对侧噪声和有对侧音乐)下语言清晰度无明显差异,但有对侧音乐刺激的情况下语言清晰度的平均值和中位值往往差于无对侧刺激的情况。结论在无明显外周病变的听力障碍患者中观察到对侧分心声引起的掩蔽效应明显增大,这可能表明在这些患者中,除了发生在外周的能量掩蔽机制外,还可能涉及到其他掩蔽机制。此外,研究还表明,真实环境声音(即带歌词的音乐)的掩蔽效应比连续稳定的噪声更明显,而后者在临床试验中常被用作噪声语音测试的掩蔽剂。换句话说,应该注意的是,使用这种稳定噪音进行的噪声中言语测试可能会低估听力困难患者在日常生活中的听力问题程度,而使用音乐和/或语音等掩蔽物进行的噪声中言语测试可能会使听力困难患者的听力问题更加明显。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ear and Hearing
Ear and Hearing 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
10.80%
发文量
207
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: From the basic science of hearing and balance disorders to auditory electrophysiology to amplification and the psychological factors of hearing loss, Ear and Hearing covers all aspects of auditory and vestibular disorders. This multidisciplinary journal consolidates the various factors that contribute to identification, remediation, and audiologic and vestibular rehabilitation. It is the one journal that serves the diverse interest of all members of this professional community -- otologists, audiologists, educators, and to those involved in the design, manufacture, and distribution of amplification systems. The original articles published in the journal focus on assessment, diagnosis, and management of auditory and vestibular disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信