AudiologyOnline Phone: 800-753-2160


Sennheiser All Day Clear - July 2023

Two Ears - Two Aids? Well, Yes and No!

Two Ears - Two Aids? Well, Yes and No!
James Jerger, PhD
April 2, 2001
Share:

In a memorable scene from 'Alice's Adventures in Wonderland' the Knave of Hearts is on trial for the theft of tarts. The King of Hearts asks the jury for its verdict, but the Queen of Hearts objects. 'No, no!' she says, 'Sentence first - verdict afterwards.'

In the arena of binaural hearing aids, many audiologists echo the stance of the irascible Queen. Sentence first - (two aids for everyone!) Verdict afterwards (Are two aids really better than one for this patient?).

During the past decade, two lines of research have converged to suggest that there is no single amplification solution appropriate for every person with bilateral hearing loss.

On one hand, there is a growing body of literature on the phenomena of auditory deprivation and acclimatization (Silverman & Silman, 1990; Silman, et al.,1992; Gatehouse, 1992; Hurley, 1993; Gelfand, 1995; ) indicating that, over time, the unaided ear of a monaurally fitted individual may lose functional capacity in comparison with the aided ear. The inescapable conclusion is that, all other things being equal, both ears should be aided at the earliest sign of auditory handicap. But 'all other things' are not always equal.

On the other hand, the literature on binaural interference (Jerger, et al., 1993; Hurley, 1993; Silman, 1995) suggests that, for reasons of either prolonged deprivation, age-related changes in the auditory system, or both, some individuals develop substantial interaural asymmetries in dichotic listening to speech (Jerger et al., 1990; Jerger & Jordan, 1992; Jerger et al., 1994; Jerger et al., 1995). Indeed, one ear may even 'interfere' with, or suppress, the other ear. And this ear (the one which causes the interference) is usually the left ear.

In these individuals, it may prove more useful to amplify only the right ear. In still other individuals conventional hearing aids may be less helpful in daily living than an assistive listening device. We are faced, then, with a dilemma. Do we aid both ears in order to prevent the effects of prolonged deprivation? Do we bow to the effects of aging and avoid amplifying an ear which may actually interfere with successful communication? Or do we resort to an assistive listening device? To me, the answer is clear. It is the audiologist's responsibility to determine what form of intervention is most appropriate for each individual patient.

This cannot be achieved by the blanket application of slogans and simplistic solutions based on the assumption that all hearing-impaired persons are alike. Rather, it can only be accomplished by careful assessment of the auditory capabilities of that particular patient.

How should such assessment be carried out?

Certainly not in the time-honored tradition of PB word lists. Before we can move forward in this area we are going to have to agree to retire the traditional, and now largely discredited, approach of testing 'word discrimination'. We need to take an entirely fresh approach to the problem; an approach based on modern concepts of 'ecological validity'.

In other words, if the testing procedure is meant to predict successful communication in everyday living, then the testing procedure must be in some way related to the listening problems encountered in everyday living. It remains to be shown, for example, that the ability to differentiate among nonsense syllables has relevance for understanding continuous speech from one direction in the presence of background noise from another direction.

It seems clear to me that techniques for evaluating the ability to understand speech via amplification should have at least the following characteristics:

  • Testing must be conducted in the sound field (rather than under earphones) so that the actual capabilities of the binaural system can be assessed in a situation of real-life listening.

  • Test stimuli must be embedded in ongoing speech.

  • The sentence should be the minimal linguistic unit of study.

  • Speech understanding must be evaluated against a background of speech and/or noise competition.

  • Speech targets and background competition should come from different directions.

  • Performance measures should include not only correct identification of target stimuli but the extent to which nontarget stimuli in the background competition intrude and interfere with successful performance.

  • Performance should be measured a) without amplification, b) with one ear aided conventionally, c) with both ears aided conventionally, and d) with one or both ears aided by an assistive listening device.


  • The ultimate recommendation should be based on a comparison among the results observed in these various conditions. Usually performance will be best in the both-ears-aided condition, and this will justify a binaural recommendation.

    But it may very well be the case, especially in elderly persons, that performance is at least as good, if not better, when only one ear is aided, or when an assistive listening device is included in the evaluation.

    The patient deserves, and the audiologist ought to require this information before specific amplification recommendations and purchases are made.

    After you have talked to audiologists for as many years as I have, you learn to anticipate two eternally predictable responses: 'I cannot possible spare the time to do all of that testing', and, 'Why bother with all that testing. I just let the patient decide what he/she likes best'.

    My reply is simply this. Make every effort to find the time! Because the hallmark of an audiologist is the extent to which the solution to the patient's hearing problem is based on quantifiable data derived from sound, scientifically valid principles, rather than the principle of least effort. Accountability demands no less from us.

    It is not the purpose of this paper to recommend a specific test or combination of tests. There are many pre-recorded test procedures commercially available that can be adapted to meet the recommendations listed above. Those who find none of these procedures to their liking are encouraged to develop their own techniques.

    The important thing is not which test you use, but how you do the testing. Begin with a firm determination to break from the past and do the testing properly instead of the way it has always been done. Gather up all your word lists and consign them to the flames. Resolve to bring the fresh light of a new dawn to hearing aid evaluation.

    For most hearing aid users a binaural fitting is usually the best choice. Indeed, it is important for preventing the effects of auditory deprivation on an unaided ear. But some individuals, especially in the elderly population, may actuallydo better with a different arrangement.

    It is the audiologist's responsibility to determine, quantitatively, what system of amplification is optimal for a particular patient. To do this the audiologist must evaluate hearing aid performance using modern techniques that are ecologically valid for predicting success in daily living.

    REFERENCES:

    Gatehouse S. (1992). The timecourse and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids. Acoust Soc Amer 92 :1258-1268.

    Gelfand, S. (1995). Long-term recovery and no recovery from the auditory deprivation effect with binaural amplification: six cases. J Amer Acad Audiol 6:141-149.

    Hurley RM. (1993). Monaural ear effect: case presentations. J Amer Acad Audiology 4: 285-295.

    Jerger J, Stach B, Johnson K, Loiselle L, Jerger S. (1990). Patterns of abnormality in dichotic listening. In: Jensen J, ed. Presbyacusis and other age related aspects. Copenhagen: Stougaard Jensen.

    Jerger J, Jordan C. (1992). Age-related asymmetry on a cued-listening task. Ear
    Hear 13: 272-277.

    Jerger J, Silman S, Lew HL, Chmiel R. (1993). Case studies in binaural interference: converging evidence from behavioral and electrophysiologic measures. J Amer Acad Audiol 4: 122-131.

    Jerger J, Chmiel R, Allen J, Wilson A. (1994). Effects of age and gender on dichotic sentence identification. Ear Hear 15: 274-286.

    Jerger J, Alford B, Lew H, Rivera V, Chmiel R. (1995). Dichotic listening, event-related potentials, and interhemispheric transfer in the elderly. Ear Hear 16:482-498.

    Silman S. (1995). Binaural interference in multiple sclerosis: Case Study. J Amer Acad Audiol 6: 193-196.

    Silman S, Silverman C, Emmer M, Gelfand S. (1992). Adult onset auditory
    deprivation. J Amer Acad Audiol 3:390-396.

    Silverman C, Silman S. (1990). Apparent auditory deprivation from monaural amplification and recovery with binaural amplification. J Amer Acad Audiol 1:
    175-180.

    This article originally appeared on www.audiologyjournal.com. Audiology Online (www.audiologyonline.com) has acquired the Audiology Journal. This paper has been re-edited and updated and appears here as a courtesy to our readers for educational and informational purposes. We are grateful to the author and to Audiology Journal for allowing us (Audiology Online) to re-publish this updated version of this article here. Respectfully, Douglas L. Beck Au.D. Editor-In-Chief, Audiology Online.

    Sennheiser Forefront - March 2024

    james jerger

    James Jerger, PhD

    Distinguished Scholar in Residence



    Related Courses

    Empowerment and Behavioral Insights in Client Decision Making, presented in partnership with NAL
    Presented by Simon Alperstein, MSc BE, Paola Incerti, MAudiology, AAudA
    Recorded Webinar
    Course: #37124Level: Intermediate1 Hour
    Behavioral Insights can be used to understand and support hearing health decision-making, particularly in the appointment setting. An overview of empowering the individual's first awareness of hearing loss to hearing aid fitting and then to becoming an active hearing aid user will be covered.

    Adult Assessments in Hearing Healthcare: Working Across the Continuum
    Presented by Camille Dunn, PhD, Susan Good, AuD, MBA, Alejandra Ullauri, AuD, MPH, Ted McRackan, MD, MSCR, Donna L. Sorkin, MA, Rene Gifford, PhD
    Recorded Webinar
    Course: #38660Level: Intermediate5 Hours
    This five-course series on adult assessments in hearing health is intended to stimulate collaborative approaches for hearing health professionals, regardless of what hearing technologies they typically provide. Ideally, professionals will support patients in their long-term hearing loss journey, facilitating transitions when appropriate and a comfortable sense of the range of ways hearing loss can be addressed throughout one’s hearing journey.

    Innovative Audiologic Care Delivery
    Presented by Rachel Magann Faivre, AuD, Lori Zitelli, AuD, Heather Malyuk, AuD, Ben Thompson, AuD
    Recorded Webinar
    Course: #38661Level: Intermediate4 Hours
    This four-course series highlights the next generation of audiology innovators and their pioneering approaches to meeting unmet audiologic needs in their communities and beyond. This peer-to-peer educational series highlights researchers, clinicians, and business owners and their pioneering ideas, care delivery models, and technologies which provide desperately needed niche services and audiologic care.

    Adult Perceptions of Hearing Status and Options: Professionals Facilitating a Life-long Hearing Journey, in partnership with American Cochlear Implant Alliance
    Presented by Donna L. Sorkin, MA
    Recorded Webinar
    Course: #38407Level: Intermediate1 Hour
    Adults with severe-to-profound hearing loss utilizing hearing aids are typically not benefitting sufficiently from traditional amplification and often would benefit from hearing implants. This course will review ways hearing care professionals can support adult patients who may benefit from implants (either now or in the future) by presenting information on the cochlear implant (CI) option early in an individual’s hearing journey. A CI is not a last resort, but rather a means for those who fall within the guidelines to experience hearing improvement, rather than continued decline.

    Current Topics in Audiology Treatment, in Partnership with Thieme Publishers
    Presented by Jason Galster, PhD
    Recorded Webinar
    Course: #32010Level: Introductory1 Hour
    This course will review current topics in audiology treatment that are detailed in the upcoming book by Thieme publishers. Editor Dr. Jason Galster will provide a tour of content focused on the treatment of hearing loss through amplification, implantable solutions, and a variety of additional techniques.

    Our site uses cookies to improve your experience. By using our site, you agree to our Privacy Policy.