NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures
- PMID: 11214977
NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures
Abstract
A new procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids (National Acoustic Laboratories' nonlinear fitting procedure, version 1 [NAL-NL1]) is described. The rationale is to maximize speech intelligibility while constraining loudness to be normal or less. Speech intelligibility is predicted by the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII), which has been modified to account for the reduction in performance associated with increasing degrees of hearing loss, especially at high frequencies. Prescriptions are compared for the NAL-NL1, desired sensation level [input/output], FIG6, and a threshold version of the Independent Hearing Aid Fitting Forum procedures. For an average speech input level, the NAL-NL1 prescriptions are very similar to those of the well-established NAL-Revised, Profound procedure. Compared with the other procedures, NAL-NL1 prescribes less low-frequency gain for flat and upward sloping audiograms. It prescribes less high-frequency gain for steeply sloping high-frequency hearing losses. NAL-NL1 tends to prescribe less compression than the other procedures. All procedures differ considerably from one another for some audiograms.
Similar articles
-
Comparing NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 in Hearing Aids Fit to Children with Severe or Profound Hearing Loss: Goodness of Fit-to-Targets, Impacts on Predicted Loudness and Speech Intelligibility.J Am Acad Audiol. 2015 Mar;26(3):260-74. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.26.3.6. J Am Acad Audiol. 2015. PMID: 25751694
-
Comparing loudness normalization (IHAFF) with speech intelligibility maximization (NAL-NL1) when implemented in a two-channel device.Ear Hear. 2001 Dec;22(6):501-15. doi: 10.1097/00003446-200112000-00006. Ear Hear. 2001. PMID: 11770672
-
A comparison of gain for adults from generic hearing aid prescriptive methods: impacts on predicted loudness, frequency bandwidth, and speech intelligibility.J Am Acad Audiol. 2011 Jul-Aug;22(7):441-59. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.22.7.5. J Am Acad Audiol. 2011. PMID: 21993050
-
NAL-NL2 empirical adjustments.Trends Amplif. 2012 Dec;16(4):211-23. doi: 10.1177/1084713812468511. Epub 2012 Nov 30. Trends Amplif. 2012. PMID: 23203416 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Fitting hearing aids to adults using prescriptive methods: an evidence-based review of effectiveness.J Am Acad Audiol. 2005 Jul-Aug;16(7):448-60. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.16.7.5. J Am Acad Audiol. 2005. PMID: 16295232 Review.
Cited by
-
Measuring the Influence of Noise Reduction on Listening Effort in Hearing-Impaired Listeners Using Response Times to an Arithmetic Task in Noise.Trends Hear. 2021 Jan-Dec;25:23312165211014437. doi: 10.1177/23312165211014437. Trends Hear. 2021. PMID: 34027725 Free PMC article.
-
Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials Reveal Changes in Audibility with Nonlinear Frequency Compression in Hearing Aids for Children: Clinical Implications.Semin Hear. 2016 Feb;37(1):25-35. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1570332. Semin Hear. 2016. PMID: 27587920 Free PMC article.
-
Predictors of Hearing-Aid Outcomes.Trends Hear. 2017 Jan-Dec;21:2331216517730526. doi: 10.1177/2331216517730526. Trends Hear. 2017. PMID: 28929903 Free PMC article.
-
Audiologist-driven versus patient-driven fine tuning of hearing instruments.Trends Amplif. 2012 Mar;16(1):49-58. doi: 10.1177/1084713811424884. Epub 2011 Dec 4. Trends Amplif. 2012. PMID: 22143874 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Open Versus Closed Hearing-Aid Fittings: A Literature Review of Both Fitting Approaches.Trends Hear. 2016 Feb 15;20:2331216516631741. doi: 10.1177/2331216516631741. Trends Hear. 2016. PMID: 26879562 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical