臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究之目的為透過主客觀評估方式，評估聽損者使用數位遠端無線麥克風系統與動態調頻系統之差異，客觀評估透過台灣地區漢語語音噪音下聽辨測試（MHINT-T），評估感音神經性聽損者於安靜及噪音聆聽情境下的聽辨表現；主觀評估使用助聽設備聲音品質量表，一共有六題，評估聽損者使用兩組設備在音質、自然度、清晰度、舒適度、雜訊與使用自信心面項間的差異。
本研究透過博士聽力所及聽損者群組招募的方式，招募12位平均年齡為37.91歲受試者，右耳平均聽閾為63.96 dB HL（SD=18.84），左耳為63.23 dB HL（SD=14.82）。
客觀評估研究結果呈現出受試者於安靜聆聽情境單獨使用助聽器（HA only）、助聽器搭配動態調頻系統（HA+FM）、助聽器搭配數位遠端無線麥克風系統（HA+digital RM）的語句聽辨閾，HA only平均音量為44.21 dBA（SD=4.72），HA+FM平均音量為42.78 dBA（SD=5.27），HA+digital RM平均音量為42.62 dBA（SD=5.45），三組結果未達到顯著差異。於噪音聆聽情境HA only、HA+FM、HA+digital RM 50%辨識得分訊噪比，HA only平均訊噪比為3.90 dB（SD=4.08），HA+FM平均訊噪比-8.75 dB（SD=2.97），HA+digital RM平均訊噪比為-10.45 dB（SD=3.71），三組結果達到顯著差異。
客觀評估研究結果顯示使用HA+FM與HA+digital RM兩款設備，在音質、自然度、舒適度、自信心面項中無顯著差異（P >.05），在清晰度面項、噪音面項及總分部份HA+digital RM>HA+FM具有顯著差異。
本研究發現受試者佩戴著聽器搭配使用遠端無線麥克風系統，在噪音聆聽環境中能有效提升聽辨表現，尤其是數位遠端無線麥克風系統，能夠有效提升語音訊噪比。但在安靜聆聽情境下，單獨佩戴助聽器或搭配此兩項遠端無線麥克風設備，皆沒有顯著的差異。除了客觀測試外，在助聽設備聲音品質量表中，清晰度面項、雜訊面項及總分數位遠端無線麥克風系統也較調頻系統佳。
綜合上述結果推論，聽損者使用數位遠端無線麥克風系統除了能夠有效提升聽辨表現外，在使用上的清晰度、雜訊、整體聆聽感受上也較調頻系統佳。

The goal of this study was to compare the speech recognition between digital remote microphone and adaptive FM system in combination with hearing aids for hearing-impaired patients by using subjective and objective measurements. The objective measures employed was Mandarin Hearing in Noise Test for use in Taiwan (MHINT-T) in quiet and noise while subjective measurement was a sound quality scale which consists of six questions including sound quality, naturalness, clarity, comfort, noise and self-confidence.
In this study, 12 participants with an average age of 37.91 years were enrolled. The average hearing threshold was 63.96 dB HL (SD=18.84) for the right ear and 63.23 dB HL (SD =14.82) for the left. ALL subjects received MHINT-T under 3 conditions: use hearing aid only (HA only), a hearing aid with a dynamic frequency modulation system (HA+FM), and a hearing aid with a digital remote microphone (HA+digital RM). In the quiet listening situation. The averaged speech reception threshold are : 44.21 dBA (SD=4.72) for HA only, 42.78 dBA (SD=5.27) for HA+ FM, and 42.62 dBA (SD=5.45) for HA+digital RM respectively. There is no significant differences among 3 groups. In the noise listening situation, the average RTS is -3.90 dB (SD=4.08) for HA only, -8.75 dB (SD = 2.97) for HA +FM, -10.45dB (SD=3.71) for HA + digital FM. The difference reaches statistical significance (HA+digital RM better than HA+ FM and HA only). The results of objective evaluation showed that there were no significant differences in sound quality, naturalness, comfort, and self-confidence between HA+FM and HA+digital RM (P >.05), in terms of clarity and noise. The total score of HA+digital RM is significantly higher than HA+FM.
This study showed that the subject wearing hearing aid with a remote microphone can effectively improve the listening performance under noisy listening environment, especially the digital remote microphone, which can significantly improve the signal-to-noise ratio. However, in quiet, there is no significant difference in wearing a hearing aid alone or with these two remote microphone devices. In addition to the objective measures, the digital remote microphone has a better clarity, noise, and the total score is than the frequency modulation system based on the subjective questionnaire.
In summary, the digital RM in combination with hearing aid offers the best perforation of speech in noise for these patients with hearing loss. The effectiveness is better than traditional FM plus hearing aid and hearing aid alone. However, the benefit of the remote microphone system (digital RM or FM) was not shown in the quiet listening conditions.

中 文 摘 要.....................................................................i
英 文 摘 要.....................................................................iii
圖 次.............................................................................vii
表 次.............................................................................viii
第一章 緒論....................................................................1
第一節 研究動機.............................................................1
第二節 研究目的.............................................................3
第二章 文獻探討.............................................................5
第一節 遠端無線麥克風系統台灣現況..............................5
第二節 感音神經性聽損者在噪音聆聽環境之溝通問題......8
第三節 動態調頻系統使用效益........................................10
第四節 數位遠端麥克風系統與動態增益調頻系統之差異..13
第五節 遠端無線麥克風驗配模式....................................16
第三章 研究方法............................................................21
第一節 研究對象............................................................21
第二節 研究工具............................................................22
第三節 研究設計與流程................................ .................24
第四節 計分方式............................................................32
第五節 資料處理與統計分析...........................................33
第四章 研究結果............................................................34
第一節 研究對象資料統計結果.......................................34
第二節 台灣地區漢語語音噪音下聽辨測試之表現............36
第三節 助聽設備聲音品質量表之表現.............................40
第四節 研究結果總述.....................................................45
第五章 討論...................................................................46
第一節 客觀效益評估結果..............................................46
第二節 主觀效益評估結果..............................................49
第三節 研究限制與建議..................................................50
第六章 結論...................................................................51
參考文獻.......................................................................52
附錄..............................................................................60
附錄一 助聽設備聲音品質量表.......................................60
附錄二 研究審查核可證明..............................................61
附錄三 受試者知情同意書.............................................62
附錄四 受試者基本資料空白表.......................................66
附錄五 單音語音均衡字彙表WS-A1................................67
附錄六 臺灣地區華語噪音下語音聽辨測驗.....................68
附錄七 受試者客觀評估詳細數據................................... 72

一、中文文獻

彭康政（2017）。單側感音神經性聽損者之噪音下華語語句聽辨表現與自覺聽障程度之相關性。（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺北護理健康大學聽語障礙科學研究所，臺北市。

特殊教育法（2002年5月9日）。

林寬齊（2010）。助聽器方向性麥克風和多頻道噪音抑制結合於噪音下語音聽辨之效用。（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺北護理健康大學聽語障礙科學
研究所，臺北市。

黃銘緯（1995）。台灣地區噪音下漢語語音聽辨測試。（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺北護理健康大學聽語障礙科學研究所，臺北市。

曲威光（2014）。雲端通訊與多媒體產業。出版地點：全華圖書。

鄭靜宜（2011）。語音聲學─說話聲音的科學。臺北：心理。

施婉婷（2014）。非線性頻率壓縮及非線性高頻壓縮對高頻聽損者華語語音聽辨之影響。（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺北護理健康大學聽語障礙科學
研究所，臺北市。

王老得、張蓓莉（1981）。中國語音均衡字彙表臨床應用之研究。耳鼻喉科醫學會雜誌, 16(1), 9-20。

國立臺灣師範大學國音教材編輯委員會（2008）。國音聲母。收於作者。國音學（修訂第八版，頁111）。臺北市：正中。

二、英文文獻

American Academy of Audiology. (2011). AAA clinical practice guidelines: Remote microphone hearing assistance technologies for children and youth birth–21 years. Retrieved from https://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/HAT_Guidelines_Supplement_A.pdf_53996ef7758497.54419000.pdf (Original work published 2008)

American Speech Language Hearing Association (2002). Guidelines for Fitting and Evaluation of FM Systems. ASHA Desk Reference.
Anderson, K. L., & Goldstein, H. (2004). Speech perception benefits of FM and infrared devices to children with hearing aids in a typical classroom. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 35(2), 169-184.

Anderson, K. L., Goldstein, H., Colodzin, L., & Iglehart, F. (2005). Benefit of S/N enhancing devices to speech perception of children listening in a typical classroom with hearing aids or a cochlear implant. Journal of Educational Audiology, 12, 14-28.

Bamford, J., Hostler, M., & Pont, G. (2005). Digital signal processing hearing aids, personal FM systems, and interference: Is there a problem?. Ear and hearing, 26(3), 341-349.

Boothroyd, A., & Medwetsky, L. (1992). Spectral distribution of/s/and the frequency response of hearing aids. Ear and hearing, 13(3), 150-157.

Brons, I., Houben, R., & Dreschler, W. A. (2013). Perceptual effects of noise reduction with respect to personal preference, speech intelligibility, and listening effort. Ear and hearing, 34(1), 29-41. doi:10.1097/AUD.0b013e31825f299f

Brons, I., Houben, R., & Dreschler, W. A. (2014). Effects of noise reduction on speech intelligibility, perceived listening effort, and personal preference in hearing-impaired listeners. Trends in hearing, 18(1), 1-1. doi:10.1177/2331216514553924

Cameron, S., Glyde, H., & Dillon, H. (2012). Efficacy of the LiSN & Learn auditory training software: randomized blinded controlled study.
Audiology research, 2(1). doi:10.4081/audiores.2012.e15

Chisolm, T. H., Noe, C. M., McArdle, R., & Abrams, H. (2007). Evidence for the use of hearing assistive technology by adults: The role of the FM system. Trends in amplification, 11(2), 73-89. doi:10.1177/1084713807300879

Crandell C, Smaldino J. (2000) Room acoustics and amplification. In: Valente M, Roser R, Hosford-Dunn H, eds. Audiology: Treatment Strategies. New York: Thieme.

Dalton, D. S., Cruickshanks, K. J., Klein, B. E., Klein, R., Wiley, T. L., & Nondahl, D.M. (2003). The impact of hearing loss on quality of life in older adults. The Gerontologist, 43(5), 661-8.

Dillon, H. (2012). Hearing Aids. Turramurra. New South Wales, Austrailia: Boomerang Press.

Dubno, J. R., Dirks, D. D., & Morgan, D. E. (1984). Effects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise. The Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America, 76(1), 87-96. doi:10.1121/1.391011

Etymotic Research. (2005). BKB-SINTM speech-in-noise test version 1.03 [CD]. Elk Grove Village, IL: Etymotic Research.

Gallun, F. J., Diedesch, A. C., Kampel, S. D., & Jakien, K. M. (2013). Independent impacts of age and hearing loss on spatial release in a complex auditory environment. Frontiers in neuroscience, 7, 252. doi:10.3389/fnins.2013.00252

Kates, J. M. (2010). Understanding compression: Modeling the effects of dynamic-range compression in hearing aids. International journal of audiology, 49(6), 395-409. doi: 10.3109/14992020903426256

Killion, M. C. (1997). SNR Loss: “I can hear what people say, but I can’t understand them.” The Hearing Review, 4(12), 8, 10, 12, &14.

Killion, M. C., Niquette, P. A., Gudmundsen, G. I., Revit, L. J., & Banerjee, S. (2004). Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(4), 2395-2405. doi:10.1121/1.1784440

Kochkin, S. (1993). MarkeTrak III: The billion dollar opportunity in the hearing instruments market. The Hearing Journal, 46(10), 35-39.

Kochkin, S. (2010). MarkeTrak VIII: Consumer satisfaction with hearing aids is slowly increasing. The Hearing Journal, 63(1), 19-20. doi: 10.1097/01.HJ.0000366912.40173.76

Lewis, D., & Eiten, L. (2004). Assessment of advanced hearing instrument and FM technology. In D. A. Fabry & C. DeConde Johnson (Eds.), ACCESS: Achieving Clear Communication Employing Sound Solutions—2003. Proceedings of the First International FM Conference (pp. 167–174). Warrenville, IL:Phonak AG.

Lewis, M. S., Crandell, C. C., Valente, M., & Horn, J. E. (2004). Speech perception in noise: Directional microphones versus frequency modulation (FM) systems. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 15(6), 426-439. doi:10.3766/jaaa.15.6.4

Moore, B. C. (2007). Cochlear hearing loss: physiological, psychological and technical issues. (pp.28). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.

Moore, B. C., Glasberg, B. R., Stoev, M., Füllgrabe, C., & Hopkins, K. (2012). The influence of age and high-frequency hearing loss on sensitivity to temporal fine structure at low frequencies (L). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131(2), 1003-1006.

Nilsson, M. J., Soli, S. D., & Gelnett, D. J. (1996). Development of the sharing in noise test for children (HINT-C). House Ear Institute.

Nilsson, M., Soli, S. D., & Sullivan, J. A. (1994). Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95(2), 1085-1099. doi:10.1121/1.408469

Schafer, E. C., & Thibodeau, L. M. (2006). Speech recognition in noise in children with cochlear implants while listening in bilateral, bimodal, and FM-system arrangements. American Journal of Audiology, 15(2), 114-126. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2006/015)

Schafer, E., & Thibodeau, L. (2004). Speech recognition abilities of adults using cochlear implants with FM systems. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 15, 678–691. doi:10.3766/jaaa.15.10.3

Stelmachowicz, P. G., Pittman, A. L., Hoover, B. M., & Lewis, D. E. (2002). Aided perception of/s/and/z/by hearing-impaired children. Ear and Hearing, 23(4), 316-324.

Stelmachowicz, P. G., Pittman, A. L., Hoover, B. M., Lewis, D. E., & Moeller, M. P. (2004). The importance of high-frequency audibility in the speech and language development of children with hearing loss. Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, 130(5), 556-562. doi:10.1001/archotol.130.5.556

Thibodeau, L. (2010). Benefits of adaptive FM systems on speech recognition in noise for listeners who use hearing aids. American Journal of Audiology, 19(1), 36-45. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2010/09-0014)

Thibodeau, L. (2014). Comparison of speech recognition with adaptive digital and FM remote microphone hearing assistance technology by listeners who use hearing aids. American Journal of Audiology, 23(2), 201-210. doi:10.1044/2014_AJA-13-0065

Wolfe, J., Duke, M. M., Schafer, E., Jones, C., Mülder, H. E., John, A., & Hudson, M. (2015). Evaluation of performance with an adaptive digital remote microphone system and a digital remote microphone audio-streaming accessory system. American journal of audiology, 24(3), 440-450. doi:10.1044/2015_AJA-15-0018

Wolfe, J., Morais, M., Neumann, S., Schafer, E., Mülder, H. E., Wells, N., ... & Hudson, M. (2013). Evaluation of speech recognition with personal FM and classroom audio distribution systems. Journal of Educational Audiology, 19.

Wong, L. L., & Soli, S. D. (2005). Development of the Cantonese hearing in noise test (CHINT). Ear and hearing, 26(3), 276-289.

Wong, L. L., Soli, S. D., Liu, S., Han, N., & Huang, M. W. (2007). Development of the Mandarin hearing in noise test (MHINT). Ear and hearing, 28(2), 70S-74S. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31803154d0