Logo Medical Science Monitor

Call: +1.631.470.9640
Mon - Fri 10:00 am - 02:00 pm EST

Contact Us

Logo Medical Science Monitor Logo Medical Science Monitor Logo Medical Science Monitor

18 November 2022: Review Articles

A Systematic Review of the Literature Between 2009 and 2019 to Identify and Evaluate Publications on the Effects of Age-Related Hearing Loss on Speech Processing

Andrea Cristina de Oliveira Einchner 1ABCDEF , Caroline Donadon 2CDEF* , Piotr Henryk Skarżyński 345AEG , Milaine Dominici Sanfins 67ABCDEF

DOI: 10.12659/MSM.938089

Med Sci Monit 2022; 28:e938089

Table 3 Characteristics of selected studies.

ArticleSampleAudiological assessmentStimuli presentationComplementary assessmentResults
Jain et al 2019 []11 SG: 40 ONH, 60–80 years, mean age 63±2.95 yearsCG: 52 YNH, 20–40 years, mean age 30±5.15 yearsNative speakers of KannadaFormal education ≥10 yearsONH: pure-tone thresholdsBioLogic Navigator ProQuiet and noise condition (ipsilateral pink noise at +10 dB SNR)SIN test with sentences in KannadaAuditory digit sequencingAuditory digit spanSpatial selective attention taskThe older adults performed significantly more poorly than the younger adults on the quick speech perception in noise test and various cognitive measuresThere was a significant deterioration in brainstem encoding of speech with agingFundamental frequency of the speech auditory brainstem response correlated with speech perception in noise
Heidari et al 2018 []3 SC: 32 NH elderly, over 60 years, mean age: 68.9±6.3 years, 17 MCG: 32 young NH subjects, 18–25 years, mean age: 21.43±1.74 years, 16 M.Persian native speakersRight-handedSG: pure tone average ≤25 dB HL in 0.5–4 kHz; thresholds of each of 4 frequencies ≤40 dB HL; maximum mean difference as 5 dB HLCG: pure tone averageBioLogic Navigator ProQuiet conditionMMSESIN testSSQ questionnaireThe score of the SIN test was lower among the elderly people as compared with young people in signal-to-noise ratios of 0 and -10 based on Iranian version of the SSQ questionnaire (p
Ansari et al 2017 []12 SG: 25 geriatric people with NH, 60–75 years, mean age 66.1±6.2 yearsCG: 25 young adults with NH, 18–25 years, mean age: 21.3±3.2 yearsRight-handedPure tone thresholds ≤25 dB HL in 0.25–8 kHzNormal middle-ear functionNormal click-evoked ABRIHS SmartEPQuiet and noise conditions (ipsilateral Gaussian noise at +5 dB SNR)The older group had significantly smaller amplitudes and longer latencies for the onset and offset responses in noisy conditionsStimulus-to-response times were longer and the spectral amplitude of the sustained portion of the stimulus was reducedThe overall stimulus level caused significant shifts in latency across the entire speech-evoked auditory brainstem response in the older group
Anderson et al 2013 []13 SG: 15 HI adults, ages 60–71 years, mean age: 64.07±3.39 yearsCG: 15 NH adults, ages 61–68 years, mean 64.07±2.09 yearsSG: thresholds from 0.125–2 kHzBioLogic Navigator ProCG: quiet and noise conditionSG: unamplified stimulus presented in quiet; amplified stimulus presented in quiet; unamplified stimulus presented in noise; amplified stimulus presented in noiseNoise condition: ipsilateral, pink noise at +10 dB SNRIn the HI group, there was a disruption in the balance of envelope-to-fine structure representation compared with the normal hearing groupThis imbalance may underlie the difficulty experienced by individuals with sensorineural hearing loss when trying to understand speech in background noise
Clinard and Tremblay 2013 []2 34 adults aged 22–77 yrs., 30 M.Approximately 5 subjects per age decadeMonolingual native-English speakersRight-handedNH sensitivity: thresholds ≤25 dB HL at 0.25–8 kHzNormal middle-ear functionFFR elicited by 500 ms tone-burst stimuli (Neuroscan SynAmps2)FFR elicited by consonant-vowel syllable (BioLogic Navigator Pro)Quiet conditionThe neural representation of simple (tone) and complex (/da/) stimuli declines with advancing ageTone-FFR phase coherence decreased as chronological age increasedTransient onset and offset response amplitudes were smaller, and offset responses were delayed with ageSustained responses at the onset of vowel periodicity were prolonged in latency and smaller in amplitude as age increasedFFT amplitude of consonant-vowel FFR fundamental frequency did not significantly decline with increasing age
Vander et al 2011 []14 SG: 18 ONH adults, 61–78 years, 17 FCG: 19 YNH, 20–26 years, 13 FNH sensitivity: thresholds ≤25 dB HL at 0.25–8 kHzNormal click-evoked ABRBioLogic Navigator ProQuiet environmentOlder adults also had significantly smaller onset and offset responses for the S-ABR, with significantly delayed offset latencies in response to this synthetic consonant-vowel syllableThe remaining significant S-ABR effects were decreased amplitude at the onset and significantly delayed offset responses in the older group
SG – study group; ONH – older normal-hearing adults; CG – control group; YNH – young with normal hearing; dB SNR – decibel signal-to-noise ratio; dB HL – decibel hearing level; kHz – kilohertz; ABR – Auditory brainstem response; SIN – speech-in-noise test; NH – normal hearing; M – male; PTA – pure tone audiometry; HI – hearing impaired; F – female; IHS – Intelligent Hearing Systems; MMSE – Mini-Mental State Examination; SSQ – Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale Questionnaire.

Your Privacy

We use cookies to ensure the functionality of our website, to personalize content and advertising, to provide social media features, and to analyze our traffic. If you allow us to do so, we also inform our social media, advertising and analysis partners about your use of our website, You can decise for yourself which categories you you want to deny or allow. Please note that based on your settings not all functionalities of the site are available. View our privacy policy.

Medical Science Monitor eISSN: 1643-3750
Medical Science Monitor eISSN: 1643-3750