TL;DR: A hybrid BTE and CIC hearing aid has a BTE component worn behind the patient's ear and a CIC component which is worn in the bony portion of the ear canal as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: A hybrid BTE and CIC hearing aid has a BTE component which is worn behind the patient's ear and a CIC component which is worn in the bony portion of the patient's ear canal. The BTE and CIC components are connected together with a wire cable. Electroacoustic feedback is reduced or eliminated, allowing gain to be increased. The patient is not disturbed by the occlusion effect.
TL;DR: The results show that for a normal open ear canal, the sound pressure in the ear canal with BC stimulation is not significant for BC hearing, but with the ear Canal occluded, BC hearing is dominated by the sound Pressure in the outer ear canal for frequencies between 0.4 and 1.2 kHz.
Abstract: The ear canal sound pressure and the malleus umbo velocity with bone conduction (BC) stimulation were measured in nine ears from five cadaver heads in the frequency range 0.1 to 10 kHz. The measurements were conducted with both open and occluded ear canals, before and after resection of the lower jaw, in a canal with the cartilage and soft tissues removed, and with the tympanic membrane (TM) removed. The sound pressure was about 10 dB greater in an intact ear canal than when the cartilage part of the canal had been removed. The occlusion effect was close to 20 dB for the low frequencies in an intact ear canal; this effect diminished with sectioning of the canal. At higher frequencies, the resonance properties of the ear canal determined the effect of occluding the ear canal. Sectioning of the lower jaw did not significantly alter the sound pressure in the ear canal. The sound radiated from the TM into the ear canal was investigated in four temporal bone specimens; this sound is significantly lower than the sound pressure in an intact ear canal with BC stimulation. The malleus umbo velocity with air conduction stimulation was investigated in nine temporal bone specimens and compared with the umbo velocity obtained with BC stimulation in the cadaver heads. The results show that for a normal open ear canal, the sound pressure in the ear canal with BC stimulation is not significant for BC hearing. At threshold levels and for frequencies below 2 kHz, the sound in the ear canal caused by BC stimulation is about 10 dB lower than air conduction hearing thresholds; this difference increases at higher frequencies. However, with the ear canal occluded, BC hearing is dominated by the sound pressure in the outer ear canal for frequencies between 0.4 and 1.2 kHz.
TL;DR: An acoustical model using simplified ear anatomy was designed to predict the ear-canal sound pressure occlusion effect in humans and there was good resemblance between model predictions and ear- canalSound pressure measurements.
Abstract: An acoustical model using simplified ear anatomy was designed to predict the ear-canal sound pressure occlusion effect in humans. These predictions were compared perceptually as well as with ear-canal sound pressure occlusion effect measurements using a foam earplug with shallow insertion, a foam earplug with deep insertion into the bony part of the ear canal, and a circumaural earmuff. There was good resemblance between model predictions and ear-canal sound pressure measurements. It was also found that all occlusion positions, even deep ear-canal occlusion, produced noticeable occlusion effects. With the bone-conduction transducer at the forehead, the perceived occlusion effect was close to that obtained from ear-canal sound pressure data in the 0.3 to 2 kHz frequency range; when the stimulation was at the mastoid the difference between the perceived and measured ear-canal sound pressure occlusion effect was around 10 dB at frequencies below 1 kHz. Further, the occlusion effect was obtained in two clinical settings: with supra-aural earphones (TDH39), and insert earphones (CIR22). Although both transducers produced occlusion effects, insert earphones produced a greater effect than surpaaural earphones at the low frequencies.
TL;DR: Simulating with varying degrees of complexity the effects of both a hearing loss and a high-quality hearing aid programmed to compensate for that loss, and using normal-hearing participants to assess the processing, results suggest a disturbance rating of 3 may be considered as just acceptable.
Abstract: Objectives Open canal fittings are a popular alternative to close-fitting earmolds for use with patients whose low-frequency hearing is near normal. Open canal fittings reduce the occlusion effect but also provide little attenuation of external air-borne sounds. The wearer therefore receives a mixture of air-borne sound and amplified but delayed sound through the hearing aid. To explore systematically the effect of the mixing, we simulated with varying degrees of complexity the effects of both a hearing loss and a high-quality hearing aid programmed to compensate for that loss, and used normal-hearing participants to assess the processing. Design The off-line processing was intended to simulate the percept of listening to the speech of a single (external) talker. The effect of introducing a delay on a subjective measure of speech quality (disturbance rating on a scale from 1 to 7, 7 being maximal disturbance) was assessed using both a constant gain and a gain that varied across frequency. In three experiments we assessed the effects of different amounts of delay, maximum aid gain and rate of change of gain with frequency. The simulated hearing aids were chosen to be appropriate for typical mild to moderate high-frequency losses starting at 1 or 2 kHz. Two of the experiments used simulations of linear hearing aids, whereas the third used fast-acting multichannel wide-dynamic-range compression and a simulation of loudness recruitment. In one experiment, a condition was included in which spectral ripples produced by comb-filtering were partially removed using a digital filter. Results For linear hearing aids, disturbance increased progressively with increasing delay and with decreasing rate of change of gain; the effect of amount of gain was small when the gain varied across frequency. The effect of reducing spectral ripples was also small. When the simulation of dynamic processes was included (experiment 3), the pattern with delay remained similar, but disturbance increased with increasing gain. It is argued that this is mainly due to disturbance increasing with increasing simulated hearing loss, probably because of the dynamic processing involved in the hearing aid and recruitment simulation. Conclusions A disturbance rating of 3 may be considered as just acceptable. This rating was reached for delays of about 5 and 6 msec, for simulated hearing losses starting at 2 and 1 kHz, respectively. The perceptual effect of reducing the spectral ripples produced by comb-filtering was small; the effect was greatest when the hearing aid gain was small and when the hearing loss started at a low frequency.
TL;DR: An exemplary hearing aid system includes a receiver unit configured and positioned within the user's ear canal so as to minimize insertion loss and/or occlusion effect as discussed by the authors, where the receiver unit is placed within the ear canal to minimize the insertion loss.
Abstract: An exemplary hearing aid system includes a receiver unit configured and positioned within the user's ear canal so as to minimize insertion loss and/or occlusion effect.