Telephone vs. Voice Over IP Speech Comprehension in Hearing Aided Subjects.

NCT03005912 | Terminated

• 2 other identifiers: Bluetooth-Study2016-01935
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 10
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Despite modern hearing aids such as cochlear implants, speech comprehension during telephone conversation is challenging for hearing-impaired patients. On the one hand, conventional telephones transmit a limited spectrum of the acoustic signal compared to a normal conversation. On the other hand, lip reading during a phone call is generally not possible. As a result, speech comprehension during a telephone conversation is reduced. In previous studies, the authors demonstrated an improved speech comprehension for hearing-impaired patients using voice-over internet protocol (VoIP) telephony (Skype) compared to conventional telephony. New bluetooth-enabled hearing aids allow for direct transmission of the telephone signal to the hearing device. As the direct transmission is expected to improve signal-to-noise ratio, speech comprehension is tested in patients with bluetooth-enabled hearing aids for 4 different scenarios: 1. conventional telephony without bluetooth device 2. conventional telephony with bluetooth device 3. VoIP telephony without bluetooth device 4. VoIP telephony with bluetooth device

Conditions

Hearing-Impairment

Keywords

Speech Comprehension; Telephony; VoIP

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Speech comprehension scores

  Speech comprehension scores of the HSM-sentence test for each patient with and without bluetooth connection will be measured and compared in conventional and internet telephony.

  2 years

Secondary Outcomes (1)

• Subjective perception of speech sound quality

  2 years

Study Arms (4)

Conventional acoustic telephony

PLACEBO COMPARATOR

Telephone speech comprehension in hearing aided patients (Cochlear Implant or GN Resound hearing aid) for a conventional mobile phone call with acoustic transmission of the speech signal.

Device: Conventional acoustic telephony

Conventional bluetooth telephony

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Telephone speech comprehension in hearing aided patients (Cochlear Implant or GN Resound hearing aid) for a conventional mobile phone call with direct bluetooth transmission of the speech signal to the cochlear implant or hearing aid.

Device: Conventional bluetooth telephony

VoIP acoustic telephony

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Telephone speech comprehension in hearing aided patients (Cochlear Implant or GN Resound hearing aid) for a VoIP mobile phone call with acoustic transmission of the speech signal.

Device: VoIP acoustic telephony

VoIP bluetooth telephony

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Telephone speech comprehension in hearing aided patients (Cochlear Implant or GN Resound hearing aid) for a VoIP mobile phone call with direct bluetooth transmission of the speech signal to the cochlear implant or hearing aid.

Device: VoIP bluetooth telephony

Interventions

Conventional acoustic telephony DEVICE

Quantification of speech comprehension by means of the Hochmair-Schulz-Moser sentence test.

Conventional acoustic telephony

Conventional bluetooth telephony DEVICE

Quantification of speech comprehension by means of the Hochmair-Schulz-Moser sentence test.

Conventional bluetooth telephony

VoIP acoustic telephony DEVICE

Quantification of speech comprehension by means of the Hochmair-Schulz-Moser sentence test.

VoIP acoustic telephony

VoIP bluetooth telephony DEVICE

Quantification of speech comprehension by means of the Hochmair-Schulz-Moser sentence test.

VoIP bluetooth telephony

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years+
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Bluetooth enabled hearing aid (Nucleus 6 CI or a GN Resound hearing aid) compatible to the phone clip
• Use of hearing aid for ≥ 3 months.
• Native German speaker

You may not qualify if:

• Mentally or physically unfit to participate
• Vulnerable Person

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Insel Gruppe AG, University Hospital Bern: lead
• Cochlear: collaborator
• Stiftung Besser Hören: collaborator

Study Sites (1)

University Hospital

Bern, 3010, Switzerland

Location

Related Publications (26)

• Tyler RS, Baker LJ, Armstrong-Bednall G. Difficulties experienced by hearing-aid candidates and hearing-aid users. Br J Audiol. 1983 Aug;17(3):191-201. doi: 10.3109/03005368309107884.

  PMID: 6357328 BACKGROUND

• Cray JW, Allen RL, Stuart A, Hudson S, Layman E, Givens GD. An investigation of telephone use among cochlear implant recipients. Am J Audiol. 2004 Dec;13(2):200-12. doi: 10.1044/1059-0889(2004/025).

  PMID: 15903146 BACKGROUND

• Ito J, Nakatake M, Fujita S. Hearing ability by telephone of patients with cochlear implants. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999 Dec;121(6):802-4. doi: 10.1053/hn.1999.v121.a93864.

  PMID: 10580241 BACKGROUND

• Liu C, Fu QJ, Narayanan SS. Effect of bandwidth extension to telephone speech recognition in cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am. 2009 Feb;125(2):EL77-83. doi: 10.1121/1.3062145.

  PMID: 19206836 BACKGROUND

• Horng MJ, Chen HC, Hsu CJ, Fu QJ. Telephone speech perception by Mandarin-speaking cochlear implantees. Ear Hear. 2007 Apr;28(2 Suppl):66S-69S. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31803153bd.

  PMID: 17496651 BACKGROUND

• Fu QJ, Galvin JJ 3rd. Recognition of simulated telephone speech by cochlear implant users. Am J Audiol. 2006 Dec;15(2):127-32. doi: 10.1044/1059-0889(2006/016).

  PMID: 17182877 BACKGROUND

• Milchard AJ, Cullington HE. An investigation into the effect of limiting the frequency bandwidth of speech on speech recognition in adult cochlear implant users. Int J Audiol. 2004 Jun;43(6):356-62. doi: 10.1080/14992020400050045.

  PMID: 15457818 BACKGROUND

• Kepler LJ, Terry M, Sweetman RH. Telephone usage in the hearing-impaired population. Ear Hear. 1992 Oct;13(5):311-9. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199210000-00009.

  PMID: 1487091 BACKGROUND

• Rumeau C, Frere J, Montaut-Verient B, Lion A, Gauchard G, Parietti-Winkler C. Quality of life and audiologic performance through the ability to phone of cochlear implant users. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015 Dec;272(12):3685-92. doi: 10.1007/s00405-014-3448-x. Epub 2014 Dec 20.

  PMID: 25527411 BACKGROUND

• Cacciatore F, Napoli C, Abete P, Marciano E, Triassi M, Rengo F. Quality of life determinants and hearing function in an elderly population: Osservatorio Geriatrico Campano Study Group. Gerontology. 1999 Nov-Dec;45(6):323-8. doi: 10.1159/000022113.

  PMID: 10559650 BACKGROUND

• Dalton DS, Cruickshanks KJ, Klein BE, Klein R, Wiley TL, Nondahl DM. The impact of hearing loss on quality of life in older adults. Gerontologist. 2003 Oct;43(5):661-8. doi: 10.1093/geront/43.5.661.

  PMID: 14570962 BACKGROUND

• Gates GA, Cobb JL, Linn RT, Rees T, Wolf PA, D'Agostino RB. Central auditory dysfunction, cognitive dysfunction, and dementia in older people. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996 Feb;122(2):161-7. doi: 10.1001/archotol.1996.01890140047010.

  PMID: 8630210 BACKGROUND

• Barnett S, Franks P. Deafness and mortality: analyses of linked data from the National Health Interview Survey and National Death Index. Public Health Rep. 1999 Jul-Aug;114(4):330-6. doi: 10.1093/phr/114.4.330.

  PMID: 10501133 BACKGROUND

• Mantokoudis G, Kompis M, Dubach P, Caversaccio M, Senn P. How internet telephony could improve communication for hearing-impaired individuals. Otol Neurotol. 2010 Sep;31(7):1014-21. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e3181ec1d46.

  PMID: 20634771 RESULT

• Mantokoudis G, Dubach P, Pfiffner F, Kompis M, Caversaccio M, Senn P. Speech perception benefits of internet versus conventional telephony for hearing-impaired individuals. J Med Internet Res. 2012 Jul 16;14(4):e102. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1818.

  PMID: 22805169 RESULT

• Mantokoudis G, Dahler C, Dubach P, Kompis M, Caversaccio MD, Senn P. Internet video telephony allows speech reading by deaf individuals and improves speech perception by cochlear implant users. PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54770. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0054770. Epub 2013 Jan 24.

  PMID: 23359119 RESULT

• Wolfe J, Morais M, Schafer E. Improving Hearing Performance in Cochlear Nucleus 6 users with true wireless accessories. Cochlear Limited. 2015 May; D710887 ISS2

  RESULT

• Robier M, Bakhos D, Pawelczyk T, Lescanne E. Evaluation of benefit provided by the Cochlear Wireless Phone Clip. Cochlear Limited.2015 Dec; D785163 ISS1

  RESULT

• Martinez Basterra Z, Fernández de Pinedo M, Altuna Mariexcurrena X. Telephone speech recognition improvement in a noisy environment: use of a Bluetooth accessory. Cochlear Limited.2015 Dec; D785163 ISS1

  RESULT

• Kim MB, Chung WH, Choi J, Hong SH, Cho YS, Park G, Lee S. Effect of a Bluetooth-implemented hearing aid on speech recognition performance: subjective and objective measurement. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2014 Jun;123(6):395-401. doi: 10.1177/0003489414526847.

  PMID: 24687593 RESULT

• Marcrum SC. Wireless streaming with the Cochlear Wireless Phone Clip improves speech understanding and reduces listening effort during telephone use in noise. Cochlear Limited.2015 Dec; D785163 ISS1

  RESULT

• Gündüz B, Gökdoğan C, Orçan E, Fikret Çetik M, Tuncer Ü, Özdemiroğlu S. Hearing inventory with the Cochlear Wireless Phone Clip in experienced adult cochlear implant recipients at work and during daily life. Cochlear Limited.2015 Dec; D785163 ISS1

  RESULT

• Duke M, Wolfe J. Evaluation of speech recognition over the telephone with and without the Cochlear Wireless Phone Clip. Cochlear Limited.2015 Dec; D785163 ISS1

  RESULT

• Çiprut A, Derinsu U, Cesur S, Çiçek B, Özkan B, Yücel E. Speech intelligibility with the Cochlear Wireless Phone Clip in experienced cochlear implant recipients. Cochlear Limited.2015 Dec; D785163 ISS1

  RESULT

• Qian H, Loizou PC, Dorman MF. A phone-assistive device based on Bluetooth technology for cochlear implant users. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2003 Sep;11(3):282-7. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2003.816871.

  PMID: 14518792 RESULT

• Hochmair-Desoyer I, Schulz E, Moser L, Schmidt M. The HSM sentence test as a tool for evaluating the speech understanding in noise of cochlear implant users. Am J Otol. 1997 Nov;18(6 Suppl):S83.

  PMID: 9391610 RESULT

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Hearing Loss

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Hearing Disorders; Ear Diseases; Otorhinolaryngologic Diseases; Sensation Disorders; Neurologic Manifestations; Nervous System Diseases; Signs and Symptoms; Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms

Study Officials

• Georgios Mantokoudis, MD

  Attending physician

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: SUPPORTIVE CARE
• Intervention Model: CROSSOVER
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Oberarzt

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: June 26, 2016
• First Posted: December 30, 2016
• Study Start: April 1, 2017
• Primary Completion: May 11, 2018
• Study Completion: May 11, 2018
• Last Updated: May 21, 2018

Record last verified: 2018-05

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

CH (1)