瞳孔测量法反映AzBio句子中作为说话者函数的聆听努力

文献信息

中文摘要

背景： 瞳孔测量法，即瞳孔大小的量化，反映了与聆听努力相关的多种过程，并且即使单词识别能力很高，也对许多认知需求敏感。然而，研究中使用临床测试来检查聆听努力并不常见，这增加了听力学家寻求将这些信息应用于临床实践的障碍。AzBio句子提供了一个独特的机会，可以使用临床测试来对患者报告的一个常见问题进行分类：某些说话者比其他说话者更难理解。
目的： 这项探索性研究的目的是通过使用瞳孔测量法来解析条件（即安静与10人嘈杂语噪声）、听力状况和说话者对聆听努力的影响。
研究设计： 参与者内横断面设计。
研究样本： 招募了51名成年人参与这项前瞻性研究。22名参与者没有听力损失，29名参与者的三频率（1000、2000和4000 Hz）纯音平均值大于20 dB HL但小于70 dB HL。在听力损失的参与者中，18人佩戴助听器。
数据收集与分析： 当参与者聆听并复述由四位不同说话者（Male1、Male2、Female1和Female2）说出的AzBio句子时，使用远程眼动仪测量瞳孔扩张的变化。使用线性混合效应模型和生长曲线分析（GCA）对瞳孔扩张进行统计分析。
结果： 未佩戴助听器的听力损失参与者的峰值瞳孔扩张最大。当参与者在10人嘈杂语噪声中聆听Male1时，峰值扩张也最大。GCA表明，两位男性说话者的平均瞳孔直径均大于女性说话者，并且无听力损失参与者的瞳孔扩张线性增长率显著较慢。
结论： 这项研究表明，尽管单词识别能力很高，但未助听的听力损失和特定的男性说话者在参与者聆听AzBio句子时增加了聆听努力。
临床相关性声明： 这些结果将对有兴趣了解聆听努力如何在临床实践中导致患者报告困难的临床医生感兴趣。

英文摘要

BACKGROUND: Pupillometry, or the quantification of pupil size, reflects a variety of processes involved in listening effort and is sensitive to many cognitive demands even when word recognition abilities are high. However, it is uncommon for studies to use clinical tests to examine listening effort, which increases barriers for audiologists seeking to apply this information to their clinical practice. The AzBio sentences present a unique opportunity to use a clinical test to categorize a common concern reported by patients: certain talkers are more difficult to understand than others.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this exploratory study was to parse the effects of condition (i.e., quiet vs. 10-talker babble), hearing status, and talker on listening effort by using pupillometry.
RESEARCH DESIGN: Within-participants cross-sectional design.
STUDY SAMPLE: Fifty-one adults were recruited for this prospective study. Twenty-two participants had no hearing loss, and 29 exhibited a three-frequency (1000-, 2000-, and 4000-Hz) pure tone average greater than 20 decibels hearing level (dB HL) but less than 70 dB HL. Of the participants with hearing loss, 18 wore hearing aids.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Changes in pupil dilation were measured using a remote eye tracker as participants listened to and repeated back AzBio sentences spoken by four distinct talkers: Male1, Male2, Female1, and Female2. Statistical analyses were performed on pupil dilation using linear mixed effects modeling and growth curve analysis (GCA).
RESULTS: Peak pupil dilation was largest for the participants with hearing loss who did not wear hearing aids. Peak dilations were also largest when participants listened to Male1 in 10-talker babble. GCA demonstrated that mean pupil diameter was larger for both male talkers than for the female talkers, and the linear growth rate of pupil dilation was significantly slower for participants without hearing loss.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that despite high word recognition abilities, unaided hearing loss and specific male talkers increased listening effort when participants listened to AzBio sentences.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: These results will be of interest to clinicians who are interested in learning about how listening effort contributes to patient-reported difficulties in clinical practice.