- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT04146272
A Comparison of a New Acoustic Feedback Canceller in Hearing Aids With the Current System
A Comparative, Controlled Clinical Investigation of a New Acoustic Feedback Cancellation Strategy in Comparison With the Currently Marketed System
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Detailed Description
The amplification of sounds with a hearing aid is the most common treatment for hearing loss. Benefits of amplification and accessories used with it outweigh any risks in mild to profound hearing-impaired subjects. Hearing aids provide a benefit for people with only a mild sensorineural hearing loss. However, often people are counselled to wait to purchase hearing aids until their hearing loss becomes more significant. The benefits are obtainable for both unilateral and bilateral fittings and are both short term and durable on long term.
Acoustic feedback is a critical problem to all hearing aids. The acoustic coupling between the hearing aid receiver and the microphone occurs when an endless loop is formed so that the microphone is re-amplifying sound from its own receiver. The higher the amplification of the system, the more unstable it becomes and the more likely an acoustic feedback will occur. When this happens the hearing aid user and those around them hear a loud whistling noise. A common method used to combat this problem is feedback cancellation, more specifically adaptive feedback cancellation. The goal of feedback cancellation is to quickly identify feedback path changes and make adjustments to preserve the stability of the system while maintaining a high sound quality and still providing a high stable gain compared to the gain achieved without an active feedback reduction.
For this study, the Sponsor will carry out testing with participants who have hearing loss to validate the performance of the new feedback cancelling algorithm. Studies have investigated the advantages and disadvantages of different feedback cancellation techniques. However, it is accepted by professionals that having a feedback system is better than not using feedback cancellation. The Sponsor has used an adaptive feedback cancellation algorithm since 2010. For the current study the new adaptive algorithm will be compared to the current algorithm implemented in the hearing aids that are certified by the European Conformity and sold on the market. The aim is to determine if less feedback is experienced using the new system in comparison to the old system.
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Bern, Switzerland, 3018
- Bernafon
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- All classifications of hearing loss (sensorineural, conductive, mixed)
- Conductive and mixed hearing loss must be approved for amplification by a physician
- All shapes of hearing loss (flat, sloping, reverse slope, notch)
- Severity ranging from mild to profound
- German speaking
- Ability and willingness to sign the consent form
Exclusion Criteria:
- Contraindications for amplification
- Active ear disease
- New hearing aid users
- Inability to follow the procedures
- Reduced mobility that makes then unable to attend study Appointments
- Uncooperative so that it's not possible to get a valid audiogram
- A strongly reduced dexterity
- Central hearing disorder
- Sponsor employees
- Family members of Sponsor employees
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: TREATMENT
- Allocation: RANDOMIZED
- Interventional Model: CROSSOVER
- Masking: SINGLE
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
---|---|
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Moderate Hearing loss current Mermaid first, then new
Participants were randomized to wear the current Mermaid hearing aid that uses the current feedback cancellation first for 10 days.
Then they wore the new Mermaid Hearing aid for another 10 days.
|
The current hearing aid used to treat hearing loss.
The new hearing aid used to treat hearing loss with an upgraded feedback cancellation system.
|
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Moderate Hearing loss new Mermaid first, then current
Participants were randomized to wear the new Mermaid hearing aid that uses the new feedback cancellation first for 10 days.
Then they wore the current Mermaid Hearing aid for another 10 days.
|
The current hearing aid used to treat hearing loss.
The new hearing aid used to treat hearing loss with an upgraded feedback cancellation system.
|
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Severe hearing loss current Power first, then new
Participants were randomized to wear the current power hearing aid that uses the current feedback cancellation first for 10 days.
Then they wore the new power Hearing aid for another 10 days.
|
The current power hearing aid used to treat strong hearing loss.
The new power hearing aid used to treat strong hearing loss with an upgraded feedback cancellation system.
|
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: Severe hearing loss new Power first, then current
Participants were randomized to wear the new power hearing aid that uses the new feedback cancellation first for 10 days.
Then they wore the current power Hearing aid for another 10 days.
|
The current power hearing aid used to treat strong hearing loss.
The new power hearing aid used to treat strong hearing loss with an upgraded feedback cancellation system.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Change in Live Feedback Test Scores From Day 10 to Day 20
Time Frame: 10 days, 20 days
|
In the lab, subjects will have the hearing aid placed in their ear.
They will rate on a visual analogue scale whether feedback occurs and if so, how much annoyance it causes.
The scale has a minimum of 0 and a maximum of 10.
A lower score is a better answer.
It will be tested in two conditions, aided with the current Hearing aid, and aided with the new Hearing aid at 10 and 20 days.
The difference between the scores from day 10 and day 20 was calculated by subtracting day 20 ("new hearing aid") from day 10 ("current hearing aid") after both sessions of testing were completed and reported as the mean difference for the group.
Regardless of the arm assignment, participants wore the same hearing aids for the lab test on days 10 and 20.
|
10 days, 20 days
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Word Recognition - Aided
Time Frame: 20 days
|
Subjects will indicate on a touch screen which word that they heard through the loud speaker.
The touch screen will give 5 possible answer choices that includes the correct choice and 4 other words that rhyme with the actual word.
The test is run in the aided condition with the current Hearing aid and with the new Hearing aid.
The test is scored by the percentage of words that they answer correctly.
0 percent is the lowest score possible and 100 percent is the highest.
A higher percentage indicates a better score.
|
20 days
|
Sound Quality Rating
Time Frame: 20 days
|
The subjects will complete a questionnaire that asks them to rate the quality of different aspects of the hearing aid including sound quality, own voice quality, and the sound quality when in a noisy environment. The scale is from 1 to 5 with 1 being the minimum and 5 being the maximum. A higher score indicates better quality. The questionnaire will be answered for two conditions, aided with the current Hearing aid and aided with the new Hearing aid. The difference between the scores for each condition will be calculated and reported as the mean difference across both arms (moderate hearing loss and severe hearing loss). The difference is not calculated over time points but at the end of the field trial and the assignment order of the hearing aid (new first or current first) does not bear an impact. |
20 days
|
Word Recognition - Unaided
Time Frame: 10 days
|
This measurement is made without any hearing aids.
Subjects will indicate on a touch screen which word that they heard through the loud speaker.
The touch screen will give 5 possible answer choices that includes the correct choice and 4 other words that rhyme with the actual word.
The test is run in the unaided condition.
The test is scored by the percentage of words that they answer correctly.
0 percent is the lowest score possible and 100 percent is the highest.
A higher percentage indicates a better score.
The scores are not dependent on the assignment order of the hearing aids (new or current first) as the measurement is made without hearing aids and a score calculated for each group (moderate or severe hearing loss) and not for each arm.-
|
10 days
|
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
---|---|---|
Number of Participants Reporting an Adverse Event
Time Frame: 0, 10, and 20 days
|
The safety of the hearing aids will be rated by the number of adverse events reported by subjects.
The minimum score is Zero and the maximum is not defined but is likely not more than 20.
A lower number of adverse Events indicates a better outcome.
The Outcome will be reported as the sum of Adverse Events reported across time frames.
|
0, 10, and 20 days
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Babara Simon, AuD, Sponsor/Bernafon
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (ACTUAL)
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Completion (ACTUAL)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (ACTUAL)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- BF004-1901
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Hearing Loss
-
University of California, San FranciscoPatient-Centered Outcomes Research InstituteRecruitingHearing Loss | Hearing Loss, Sensorineural | Hearing Loss, Bilateral | Hearing Loss, Conductive | Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced | Hearing Loss, Unilateral | Hearing Loss, Mixed | Hearing Disorders in ChildrenUnited States
-
Oticon MedicalRecruitingEar Diseases | Hearing Loss, Conductive | Hearing Loss Mixed | Hearing Disability | Conductive Hearing Loss | Conductive Hearing Loss, Bilateral | Conductive Hearing Loss, UnilateralUnited Kingdom
-
MED-EL Elektromedizinische Geräte GesmbHCompletedHearing Loss | Hearing Loss, Sensorineural | Hearing Loss, Bilateral | Hearing Loss, Conductive | Hearing Loss, Unilateral | Hearing Loss, MixedAustria, Germany, United Kingdom
-
Oticon MedicalNot yet recruitingSensorineural Hearing Loss, Bilateral | Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Severe | Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Profound
-
Manchester University NHS Foundation TrustUniversity of ManchesterCompletedCochlear Hearing Loss | Sensorineural Hearing Loss, BilateralUnited Kingdom
-
Oticon MedicalCompletedConductive Hearing Loss | Conductive and Sensori-neural Hearing Loss in the Same Ear | Unilateral, Profound Sensori-neural Hearing LossUnited States
-
Frequency TherapeuticsCompletedHearing Loss, Sensorineural | Presbycusis | Noise Induced Hearing Loss | Sudden Hearing LossUnited States
-
Frequency TherapeuticsCompletedHearing Loss, Sensorineural | Noise Induced Hearing Loss | Sudden Hearing LossUnited States
-
Otologic Pharmaceutics, Inc.CompletedHearing Loss | Sensorineural Hearing Loss | Noise-Induced Hearing LossUnited States
-
Otologics LLCUnknownMixed Conductive and Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Bilateral
Clinical Trials on Hearing Aid Mermaid Current
-
Northwestern UniversityNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD)Completed
-
Sonova AGCompletedHearing Loss, Sensorineural | Hearing Loss, BilateralCanada
-
Sonova AGWestern UniversityRecruiting
-
Sonova AGCompletedHearing Loss, Sensorineural | Hearing Loss, BilateralCanada
-
Sonova AGCompleted
-
Sonova AGCompleted
-
Education University of Hong KongChinese University of Hong KongCompletedTinnitus, Subjective | Hearing ImpairmentHong Kong
-
Sonova AGCompletedHearing Loss | Normal HearingSwitzerland