Examples described herein relate to methods and systems of hearing aid fitting, particularly for administration by a non-expert, including self-fitting by a consumer. This application is related to U.S. Pat. No. 8,467,556, titled, “CANAL HEARING DEVICE WITH DISPOSABLE BATTERY MODULE,” U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/424,242, titled, “BATTERY MODULE FOR PERPENDICULAR DOCKING INTO A CANAL HEARING DEVICE,” filed Mar. 19, 2012, all of which are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety for any purpose. This application is also related to the following concurrently filed U.S. Patent Applications: Ser. No. 61/847,026, titled. “HEARING PROFILE TEST SYSTEM AND METHOD,” listing Adnan Shennib as the sole inventor; Ser. No. 61/847,029, titled, “INTERACTIVE HEARING AID FITTING SYSTEM AND METHODS,” listing Adnan Shennib as the sole inventor; and Ser. No. 61/847,032, titled, “ONLINE HEARING AID FITTING SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR NON-EXPERT USER,” listing Adnan Shennib as the sole inventor; all of which applications are incorporated herein by reference, in their entirety, for any purpose.
Current hearing aid fitting methods and instrumentations are generally costly and too complex for use by consumers and non-expert operators. The methods generally require administration by a hearing professional in a clinical setting. For example an audiometer is typically required to produce an audiogram report, which forms the basis of hearing assessment and prescriptions in conventional fitting methods. Other instruments used may include a hearing aid analyzer, and a real-ear measurement (REM) instrument. A specialized sound-proof room, sometimes referred to as a sound room, is also generally required for conducting part or all of the fitting process. The fitting prescription from an audiogram report may be determined from a generic fitting formula, such as NAL or POGO, or from a proprietary formula, generally provided by the manufacturer of the hearing aid being fitted. The computations for the prescription are generally limited to hearing professional use, and the resultant prescriptions may vary considerably depending on the formula used, sometimes by as much as 20 decibels due to various factors including personal preferences.
Characterization and verification of a hearing aid prescription are generally conducted by presenting test sounds to the microphone of the hearing device, referred to herein generally as a microphonic or acoustic input. The hearing aid may be worn in the ear during the fitting process, for what is referred to as “real ear” measurements. Or it may be placed in a test chamber for characterization by a hearing aid analyzer. The stimulus used for testing is typically tonal sound but may be a speech spectrum noise or other speech-like signal such as “digital speech.” Natural or real-life sounds are generally not employed in determination of a hearing aid prescription. Hearing aid users are generally asked to return to the clinic following real-life listening experiences to make the necessary adjustments. If real-life sounds are used in a clinical setting, a calibration procedure involving probe tube measurements with REM instruments is generally required. Regardless of the particular method used, conventional fittings generally require clinical settings to employ specialized instruments for administration by trained hearing professionals. The term “hearing aid,” used herein, refers to all types of hearing enhancement devices, including medical devices prescribed for the hearing impaired, and personal sound amplification products (PSAP) generally not requiring a prescription or a medical waiver. The device type or “style” may be any of invisible in the canal (IIC), in-the-canal (ITC), in the ear (ITE), a receiver in the canal (RIC), or behind the ear (BTE). A canal hearing device refers herein to any device partially or fully inserted in the ear canal.
Programmable hearing aids generally rely on adjustments of the electroacoustic settings programmed within, referred to herein generally as “fitting parameters”. Similar to hearing assessments and hearing aid prescriptions, the programming of a hearing aid generally requires specialized programming instruments and the intervention of a hearing professional to deal with complexities related to fitting parameters and programming thereof, particularly for an advanced programmable hearing aid, which may comprise over 15 adjustable parameters, and in some cases over 50 parameters.
For the aforementioned reasons among others, the fitting process for a programmable hearing device is generally not self-administered by the consumer. Instead, a licensed dispensing professional is typically involved for conducting at least one part of the fitting process, which may include hearing evaluation, hearing aid recommendation and selection, fitting prescription, fitting parameter adjustments and programming into the hearing device. This process often requires multiple visits to a dispensing office to incorporate the user's subjective listening experience after the initial fitting. Conventional fitting processes are generally too technical and cumbersome for self-administration, or for administration by a non-expert person. As a result, the cost of a professionally dispensed hearing aid, including clinician effort and the specialized instruments used in clinical settings, can easily reach thousands of dollars, and that cost is almost double for a pair of hearing aids. The high cost of hearing devices thus remains a major barrier preventing many potential consumers from acquiring a hearing aid, which typically costs under $100 to manufacture.
Disclosed herein are example systems and methods for hearing aid fitting by a non-expert person without resorting to clinical settings and particularly suited for self-fitting by a hearing impaired consumer. The method includes delivering a sequence of calibrated test audio signals, corresponding to multiple suprathreshold test sound segments, directly to an input of a programmable hearing aid in-situ and allowing the consumer to adjust hearing aid parameters based on perceptual assessment. In some embodiments, the test sound segments are obtained from natural sound recordings such as speech and environmental sounds, with each test sound segment comprising a unique combination of sound level and frequency characteristics. The sound segments define a “fitting soundscape” representing a practical range of sounds within the normal human auditory range, with each sound segment corresponding to one or more fitting parameters of the programmable hearing aid. The sound segments are selected to expose the programmable hearing aid to the dynamic and frequency ranges of sound in order to tune the fitting parameters by the subjective response of the consumer, thus eliminating objective assessments and the clinical instrumentations associated thereto used in conventional hearing aid fitting. In some embodiments, the test sound segments include a relatively low level sound, a relatively loud sound, a relatively low frequency sound, a relatively high frequency sound, of which at least two are speech segments, and an environmental sound. The test audio signals are generally produced from digital audio files, and collectively define the “fitting soundscape,” relevant for hearing aid parameters, and within the broader “human auditory soundscape”. The fitting soundscape essentially represents the range of sound amplitudes and frequencies experienced by an individual in normal daily listening situations. In one embodiment, the test sound levels are at least 20 dB above the threshold of normal (unimpaired) hearing.
The fitting method disclosed herein generally involves instructing the hearing aid consumer to listen to the output of the programmable hearing device in-situ, while presenting calibrated test audio signals representing natural sounds to an input of the hearing aid. The consumer may be offered controls to adjust hearing aid parameters using consumer friendly controls with familiar and generally non-technical terms such as volume, loudness, audibility, clarity, etc.
In one embodiment, the fitting system includes a computing system (e.g. a personal computer), a handheld device in communication with the computing device, and a fitting software application executed by the fitting system. The handheld device includes an audio generator configured to deliver test audio signals to the non-acoustic input of the hearing device in-situ. The handheld device may also include a programming interface configured to deliver programming signals to the programmable hearing device in-situ. The handheld device may be provided with USB or other connectivity for interfacing with a broad range of personal computing devices, including for example smartphones and tablet computers.
Systems and methods disclosed herein may be implemented to allow consumers to interactively develop their own “prescription” and program it into their own programmable hearing devices, using perceptual assessment and corresponding controls, without dealing with prescriptive formulae, specialized fitting instruments, and visits to clinical settings. The test audio signals are automatically presented by the disclosed fitting system at predetermined levels to the input of the hearing device, preferably electrically or wirelessly, thus eliminating calibration processes associated with sound delivery to the microphone of a hearing aid. Similarly, a programming signal for adjusting hearing aid parameters by the fitting system may be presented electrically or wirelessly at an output of a programming circuit housed within the handheld device.
Examples of fitting systems disclosed herein allow the consumer to interactively manipulate hearing aid parameters based on the perceptual assessment of hearing aid output with test sound segments presented as test audio signals to hearing aid input. The process is repeated for each test segment until all corresponding fitting parameters are adjusted according to the personal preference of the consumer, or best options available according to instructions presented thereto. In some embodiments, the test audio segments are selected with minimal overlap in amplitude and frequency characteristics, thus minimizing the overlap in parameter optimization, and expediting the fitting process for a non-expert user.
In one aspect of the fitting system and method thereof, the consumer may administer the fitting at a reasonably quiet environment, such as in a home or office. This “home fitting” aspect substantially reduces the cost of hearing aid acquisition and eliminates the hassles and inconvenience associated with multiple visits to a professional dispenser setting. In one embodiment, the fitting process is web-based, with a fitting software application hosted by a remote server and executed by a computing system (e.g. personal computer) at the consumer side, in communication with the remote server.
The above objectives, features, aspects and attendant advantages of the present invention will become apparent from the following detailed description of various embodiments, including the best mode presently contemplated of practicing the invention, when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:
Certain details are set forth below to provide a sufficient understanding of embodiments of the invention. Some embodiments, however, may not include all details described herein. In some instances, some well-known structures may not be shown, in order to avoid unnecessarily obscuring the described embodiments of the invention.
The present disclosure describes example systems and methods, as shown in
Another aspect of the disclosure is the concept of fitting a soundscape 75 (
In one embodiment, the relatively soft level speech sounds are presented within the range of 40-55 dB SPL, the relatively loud level speech sounds are presented within 75-85 dB SPL, a relatively very loud environmental sound is presented at approximately 90 dB SPL, a relatively soft background sound, such as fan noise, may be presented within 30-45 dB SPL, and broad band environmental sound, such as music or TV sounds, is presented within the range of 60-70 dB SPL for final level adjustment or balance adjustments across a pair of hearing aids during a binaural fitting.
Systems for providing realistic listening scenarios by acoustically coupling sound from a speaker to the microphone of the hearing device are known in the art. In addition to requiring an external speaker, these known fitting methods typically involve a REM incorporating calibrated probe tube microphones. To provide realistic listening scenarios, some of these systems rely on a complex setup to measure individual head related transfer function. Thus, these known systems and methods are generally limited to clinical and research settings.
Referring again to
In one embodiment, as shown in
In the electrical input embodiments of
To mitigate the effects of room noise in certain room environments, a microphone 35 may be incorporated, such as within the handheld device 30, to generally sense sound 5 present in the vicinity of the consumer 1. The hearing aid fitting process may then be adjusted according to the noise condition. For example, by delaying the presentation of test stimuli during a noise burst in the room, or by halting the test process in the presence of excessive noise.
The computing system employed by the fitting system 100 generally includes one or more processing unit(s), which may be implemented using one or more processors, and memory loaded or encoded with executable instructions for executing a fitting application to adjust fitting parameters 80. The executable instructions for fitting parameter adjustment, when executed, may cause the processing unit(s) to perform computations and programming of fitting parameter adjustments described herein. The handheld fitting device 20 may also include a processing unit such as a microcontroller, memory with executable instructions for delivery of test audio signals and programming signals to the programmable hearing device.
Using various embodiments of the fitting system 100, consumers may interactively develop their own “prescriptions” and program into their programmable hearing devices, relying on the subjective assessment of hearing aid output 55 and without dealing with prescriptive formulae or specialized fitting instruments or relying on professionals and clinical settings. The test audio signals 21 are automatically generated by the fitting system and presented directly to an input of the hearing device at a predetermined level, for example electrically to an electrical input 51, or wirelessly by a wireless audio signal 28 (
The fitting system 100 may allow the consumer 1 to manipulate hearing aid parameters 80 indirectly by user controls 90, based on the subjective response to hearing aid output 55 presented in the ear 2. The process of presenting audio signals and programming according to the subjective assessment of the consumer is repeated for each test audio segment until all corresponding fitting parameters 80 are adjusted according to the instructions provided to the consumer for each sound segment. In the preferred embodiments, the test audio segments 30 are selected with minimal overlap in the combination of level 40 and frequency characteristics, thus minimizing the overlap in parameter optimization and expediting the fitting process for administration by a non-expert user, including for self-administration.
The fitting system 100 and method allows the dispensing of a hearing aid and administering the fitting process at a non-clinical environment, such as in a home or an office. The hearing aid may be delivered to the consumer's home, by mail for example. This “home fitting” aspect substantially reduces the cost of hearing aid acquisition and eliminates hassles and inconvenience associated with multiple visits to professional settings. In one embodiment, the fitting process may be conducted online, with a fitting software application hosted by a remote server for execution by a personal computer 10 connected online to the server.
Another aspect of the present disclosure is to present real-life scenarios with a set of audio segments 30 selected specifically to expose the range of hearing aid parameters 80 within a hearing device 50 for their adjustment by a non-expert user using subjective assessment without clinical instrumentation. Natural sound recordings may be filtered by an audio processor application, for example Audacity® for Windows, to enhance and tailor the spectral characteristics of a natural sound recording to a corresponding set of fitting parameters. For example, a loud male speech segment S1 may be presented at a signal level corresponding to sound pressure level 41 of approximately 80 dB SPL. A calibration constant associated with sound level calibration for each sound segment is stored in the memory of the fitting system 100. In some embodiments, relatively loud speech signals may be presented in the range of 75-85 dB SPL.
In a preferred embodiment, the fitting software application is browser-based as shown in
Although examples of the invention have been described herein, variations and modifications of this exemplary embodiment and method may be made without departing from the true spirit and scope of the invention. Thus, the above-described embodiments of the invention should not be viewed as exhaustive or as limiting the invention to the precise configurations or techniques disclosed. Rather, it is intended that the invention shall be limited only by the appended claims and the rules and principles of applicable law.
This application claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. 119 of the earlier filing date of U.S. Provisional Application 61/847,007 entitled “METHOD OF HEARING AID FITTING USING AUDIO SEGMENTS WITHIN RELEVANT HUMAN SOUNDSCAPE,” filed Jul. 16, 2013. The aforementioned provisional application is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety, for any purpose.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4759070 | Voroba | Jul 1988 | A |
5197332 | Shennib | Mar 1993 | A |
5327500 | Campbell | Jul 1994 | A |
5553152 | Newton | Sep 1996 | A |
5645074 | Shennib et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5659621 | Newton | Aug 1997 | A |
5701348 | Shennib et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5785661 | Shennib et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
6137889 | Shennib et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6212283 | Fletcher et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6319207 | Naidoo | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6359993 | Brimhall | Mar 2002 | B2 |
6367578 | Shoemaker | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6379314 | Horn | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6428485 | Rho | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6447461 | Eldon | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6473513 | Shennib et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6522988 | Hou | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6546108 | Shennib et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6674862 | Magilen | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6724902 | Shennib et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6840908 | Edwards et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6937735 | DeRoo et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6940988 | Shennib et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6978155 | Berg | Dec 2005 | B2 |
7016511 | Shennib | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7037274 | Thoraton et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7113611 | Leedom et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7215789 | Shennib et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7260232 | Shennib | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7298857 | Shennib et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7310426 | Shennib et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7321663 | Olsen | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7403629 | Aceti et al. | Jul 2008 | B1 |
7424123 | Shennib et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7424124 | Shennib et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7580537 | Urso et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7664282 | Urso et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7854704 | Givens et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7945065 | Menzl et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
8073170 | Kondo et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8077890 | Schumaier | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8155361 | Schindler | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8184842 | Howard et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8243972 | Latzel | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8284968 | Schumaier | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8287462 | Givens et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8379871 | Michael et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8396237 | Schumaier | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8447042 | Gurin | May 2013 | B2 |
8467556 | Shennib et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8503703 | Eaton et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
20010008560 | Stonikas et al. | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20020027996 | Leedom et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020085728 | Shennib et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20030007647 | Nielsen et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030078515 | Menzel et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20050094822 | Swartz | May 2005 | A1 |
20050226447 | Miller, III | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050245991 | Faltys et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050259840 | Gable et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050283263 | Eaton et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060291683 | Urso et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070076909 | Roeck et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070237346 | Fichtl et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080240452 | Burrows et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080273726 | Yoo et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20100040250 | Gebert | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100119094 | Sjursen et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100145411 | Spitzer | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100239112 | Howard et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100268115 | Wasden et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100284556 | Young | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110058697 | Shennib et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110190658 | Sohn et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110200216 | Lee et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20120051569 | Blamey et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120130271 | Margolis et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120177212 | Hou et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120177235 | Solum | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120183164 | Foo et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120183165 | Foo et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120189140 | Hughes | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120213393 | Foo et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120215532 | Foo et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120302859 | Keefe | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20130177188 | Apfel et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130243229 | Shennib et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20150023512 | Shennib | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150023534 | Shennib | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150025413 | Shennib | Jan 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2008109594 | May 2008 | JP |
1020050114861 | Dec 2005 | KR |
9907182 | Feb 1999 | WO |
2010091480 | Aug 2010 | WO |
2011128462 | Oct 2011 | WO |
2015009559 | Jan 2015 | WO |
2015009561 | Jan 2015 | WO |
2015009564 | Jan 2015 | WO |
2015009569 | Jan 2015 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Nov. 3, 2010 for PCT Appl. No. PCT/US2010/048299. |
“Lyric User Guide”, http://www.phonak.com/content/dam/phonak/b2b/C—M—tools/Hearing—Instruments/Lyric/documents/02-gb/Userguide—Lyric—V8—GB—FINAL—WEB.pdf, Jul. 2010. |
“Methods for Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index”, American National Standards Institute, Jun. 6, 1997. |
“Specification for Audiometers”, American National Standards Institute, Nov. 2, 2010. |
“User Manual—2011”, AMP Personal Audio Amplifiers. |
Abrams, “A Patient-adjusted Fine-tuning Approach for Optimizing the Hearing Aid Response”, The Hearing Review, pp. 1-8, Mar. 24, 2011. |
Asha, “Type, Degree, and Configuration of Hearing Loss”, American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; Audiology Information Series, May 2011, pp. 1-2. |
Convery, et al., “A Self-Fitting Hearing Aid: Need and Concept”, http://tia.sagepubl.com, Dec. 4, 2011, pp. 1-10. |
Franks, “Hearing Measurements”, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Jun. 2006, pp. 183-232. |
Kiessling, “Hearing aid fitting procedures—state-of-the-art and current issues”, Scandinavian Audiology, 2001, 57-59, vol. 30, Suppl 52. |
Nhanes, “Audiometry Procedures Manual”, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, Jan. 2003, pp. 1-105. |
Traynor, “Prescriptive Procedures”, www.rehab.research.va.gov/mono/ear/travnor.htm, Jan. 1999, pp. 1-16. |
World Health Organization, “Deafness and Hearing Loss”, www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs300/en/index.html, Feb. 2013, pp. 1-5. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/046323 dated Oct. 10, 2014. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/046350 mailed Nov. 6, 2014. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/046316 mailed on Nov. 3, 2014. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2014/046335 dated Nov. 3, 2014. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150023535 A1 | Jan 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61847007 | Jul 2013 | US |