(PP312) Electroacoustic Comparison of Two Hybrid Devices: Signia Active and Apple Airpods

Abstract: Consumer electronics companies have brought non-custom amplification devices to market. Given the mass appeal of consumer electronic devices, many of these amplifiers could be appealing to persons with hearing loss. By far the most common consumer electronic device on the market today is the Apple Airpod. With it's Listen Live feature the Airpod can be turned into an amplifier. Concurrently, Signia launched a fully featured hearing aid that looks like a consumer audio device. The aim of this clinical research is to use objective electroacoustic measure to compare these two devices. Results will guide audiologists on candidacy requirements of each.

Summary: 

Less than 20 percent of people who would benefit from a hearing aid wear one, even though untreated hearing loss can lead to additional health problems. Among the reasons for low hearing aid uptake rates are high prices and a  negative stigma associated with hearing loss.

A few years ago, Apple introduced on their AirPods a feature called Live Listen that uses the iPhone as a microphone. It is believed that Live Listen could benefit adults with mild hearing loss who use AirPods paired with a smartphone. More recently, Apple introduced another feature called Noopl, a directional system that reduces background noise when the talker of interest is spatially separated from background noise. Compared to traditional hearing aids AirPods with Live Listen + Noopl are less expensive than hearing aids, but they do not have many of the advanced features found on traditional hearing aids, such as automatic feedback reduction and multiple types of digital noise reduction.

 

While AirPods with Live Listen + Noopl enhance hearing, they do not replace a modern hearing aid. The aim of this poster is to demonstrate the electroacoustic differences between Airpods and an Instant-fit hearing aid, called the Signia Active. Using standard hearing aid test box procedures (Verifit), data will show the objective electroacoustic similarities and differences between these two devices.

 

Methods

Methods

1. Both devices adjusted for mild sloping to moderate hearing loss

A. Hearing aid programmed using conventional first-fit methods

B. Airpod adjusted to gain settings using app  for mild-HF mod HL

 

2. Verifit 2 test box used to make following comparative measures in 2 cc coupler:

A. Noise floor/internal noise

B. Gain and frequency response

             C.  Maximum Power Output (MPO) 

             D. Directivity (Airpods with and without Noopl)

E. Gain reduction from digital noise reduction

 

Results and Discussion

 

For each of measure listed above, a side-by-side comparison will be conducted.

Results of this side-by-side comparison will be discussed relative to current APSO clinical standards.

Differences between the two device’s electroacoustic performance will be discussed, including patient candidacy, cost-benefit considerations of each device and other key clinical variables.