Skip to content
HearingTracker
Log in

Audiograms (aided and unaided)

This topic is closed.

37 replies13.2k viewsLast reply

Jump
Link to this topic

I have a set of Vivatone outside the ear aids. My audiologist tells me that there is no way to get an with the aids in to compare to the unaided audiogram. So, to me at least, I can’t tell how much correction the aids provide. I do hear better, but I really would like to compare a before/after set of audiograms.

11 people in this conversation8 min readJump to latest
Edited

varifies what the aids are actually doing at eardrum level.

Some aids have a built in feature but I don’t know about vivatone. You could do soundfeild testing but from what I have gathered is that is not always 100% accurate. Perhaps an audi can better answer.

I have aided and unaided for myself and both of my daughters. In fact we just had an aided one for my 11 month old done yesterday. The unaided ones are soundfield in the booth, so it is not ear specific. My loss is profound in some ranges, so it is always interesting for me to be in the booth with the girls and see them responding to some sounds that I cannot hear, even with my aids in (neither of their losses is as bad as mine, at least not yet).

In reply to @JennyB

@JennyB said:

REM varifies what the aids are actually doing at eardrum level.

Some aids have a built in audiogram feature but I don’t know about vivatone. You could do soundfeild testing but from what I have gathered is that is not always 100% accurate. Perhaps an audi can better answer.

Thanks for the reply. Can you answer two more questions, please?

  1. What are the procedures?
  2. Can REM be done by an audiologist, or must it be done by a physician?
@walterb said:

Thanks for the reply. Can you answer two more questions, please?

  1. What are the REM procedures?
  2. Can REM be done by an audiologist, or must it be done by a physician?

is done by an audiologist to varify the fit on the aids. A small probe micorophone is inserted into the ear along with the aid. A series of sounds at variouse volumes are played and the microphone picks up what the aid is delivering at the eardrum level and a machiene records this for the audiologist. If the sound is too much, or too little, the audiologist should then adjust the hearing aid and re-do REM.

So if he/she doesn’t have the equipment, guess he accurately can’t do the …so if you really want to know, you will have to try different routes (another audi, etc.)

With all due respect, isn’t the real issue whether or not the aids are helping you hear, and in particular discriminate speech. The only way to test that IMNSHO is to wear the aids in your daily living. If you aren’t asking people to repeat themselves, etc., etc., and the aids are comfortable, then what difference does the , which measures what the aid is outputting at the eardrum, or an aided really matter?

Similarly, just because I can read the 20/20 line on a Snellen eye chart that measurement alone doesn’t tell me much about my overall eye health and visual acuity.

Better fine-tuning?? Not sure what “tricks of the trades” each audiologist uses…if an audi has a trick that works better than the or similar, then it will be good. If that fails, then I suppose other measures will have to suffix, IMHO

In reply to @jay_man2

Of course, each of us has an opinion. When the hearing aid folks are getting ready to sell a person some hearing aids, the primary piece of evidence for need is the . They say, “Look, you are not hearing/hearing these frquencies at these levels.” As a consumer, I want to see them use evidence that compares, so that I can see what the differences are. Otherwise, to me at least, we have an industry that is quite anxious to sell instruments, but not interested in knowing the level of performance or effiency those instruments provide.

Edited

Bravo!! I would think it’ll benefit the audiologist to have the settings as good as possible, then there will be less visits to adjust the aids and more time to spare to attend to newer patients…so better equipment is needed.

However, newer equipment costs money…and when the manufacturers update their aids and replace software that need newer equipment, I suppose that makes it a little harder on the bottom line. I think the initial expense is beneficial for the newer generation of hearing aids to come…

Some audi’s, IMHO, especially the older generation, might be less likely to want to change to the newer technology, as the computer age is harder to digest. I’ve had people I’ve worked with want to quit their jobs, because their required learning systems were computer-based. They were not ready to go online to learn a new procedure, so they were ready to say “I quit!!”.

I, for one, wonder if my audiologist is up to speed with today’s technologies. I really think she is making an attempt, as she is tolerant of my needs and is eager to learn the newer technologies (It was her idea to try the Phonak Naida) . I give her kudos for trying that demanding task!!

My audi re-did the Hearing in noise test (Hint) and speech in noise test (Sint) and compared the unaided versus aided scores to show me how the aids were working.

I’m surprised that your audiologist could not do an aided . As long as they have speakers in their booth, you simply test through the speakers with and without the hearing aids in place. Before and , that was the standard method.

Active discussions

What the forum has been talking about this week.