Comparison of two digitally programmable hearing aids

The purpose of this project was to compare the Widex Quattro and the Ensoniq Sound Selector hearing instruments as to benefits (real and perceived) and overall convenience. It is the premise of the Ensoniq designers that a high fidelity (wide band) hearing aid is adequate for all listening condition...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Journal of the American Academy of Audiology Vol. 3; no. 2; p. 101
Main Authors:	Ricketts, T A, Bentler, R A
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	United States 01-03-1992
Subjects:	Adult Auditory Threshold - physiology Equipment Design Hearing Aids Hearing Loss, Sensorineural - physiopathology Hearing Loss, Sensorineural - rehabilitation Humans Patient Satisfaction Software Speech Intelligibility Speech Perception - physiology Surveys and Questionnaires
Online Access:	Get more information
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	The purpose of this project was to compare the Widex Quattro and the Ensoniq Sound Selector hearing instruments as to benefits (real and perceived) and overall convenience. It is the premise of the Ensoniq designers that a high fidelity (wide band) hearing aid is adequate for all listening conditions due to its exact reproduction of sound. Conversely, it is the premise of the Quattro designers that a hearing aid user needs access to multiple frequency responses (memories) for optimal benefit in different communicative situations. Subjective measures showed little differentiation between the two instruments, except for the Ease of Communication subtest of the Profile of Hearing Aid Performance (PHAP). New users rated the Quattro as performing better, while experienced users rated the Ensoniq significantly better. Objective measures indicated some differences in the performance of the two instruments, although these results may be related to the fitting strategies employed.
ISSN:	1050-0545