Training Listening Skills With the Inclusion of Cognitive Control (TRAILS)

April 18, 2024 updated by: Astrid Van Wieringen, PhD, Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven
Participating in spoken conversation constitutes a multitasking situation with concurrent demands on sensorimotor (auditory, postural) and cognitive functioning (memory, updating, task switching and inhibition). As aging affects multisensory integration and cognitive control, these higher-order processes are likely to put accumulating constraints on listening as adults grow older. By training listening skills (not solely auditory skills), the investigators aim at improving overall communication and quality of life. Moreover, the investigators aim at freeing up cognitive resources in the listen task: the better one gets at a certain domain specific task, the less one needs to draw from other resources and, the more resources are free for another concurrent task. The interdisciplinary approach will inform us about ideal audiological rehabilitation or intervention approaches. Pre-posttests comprise behavioral measures to evaluate listening skills and transfer towards non-trained measures. The training is tablet-based and can be performed at home.

Study Overview

Status

Active, not recruiting

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Goals of the study:

  • Investigate transfer of listening skills to non-trained listening.
  • To develop evidence-based guidelines for clinical audiological rehabilitation.
  • Investigate if the inclusion of cognitive control frees up cognitive resources to use for another concurrent task.
  • Inform about retention following listening training

All participants will be assessed 4 times, with a 4-week interval in between. Participants in the first arm will perform the training during the first two weeks. 4 weeks after training ended and 8 weeks after training ended, retention of training gains will be assessed. Participants in the second arm will perform the delayed training. This is to control for procedural learning effects. After 4 weeks they will start training for 4 weeks. After training retention of training gains will be assessed after 4 weeks. The third arm will start with active control training (listening to stories) for 4 weeks, followed by training for 4 weeks. After these 8 weeks, retention was measured 4 weeks later. Participants are randomly allocated to a group. The efficacy of training will be determined with a within-subject design (i.e. baseline session outcomes will be compared to the final session outcomes of the randomized control trial.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

60

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Vlaams Brabant
      • Leuven, Vlaams Brabant, Belgium, 3001
        • KU Leuven, Experimental ORL, Dept Neurosciences

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

55 years to 80 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria

  • Clients who experience listening and communication difficulties.
  • Clients must not undergo any audiological rehabilitation (auditory training/hearing aid fitting) during the study.
  • Able to operate the training programme as an app on a tablet (e.g. clients have sufficient eyesight to see the exercises; clients must be able to operate the programme).
  • At least 18 years old.
  • Dutch-speaking, as all training material and counselling questions will be presented in Dutch.

Exclusion Criteria (all groups):

  • Severely visually impaired
  • Motorically impaired
  • Cognitively impaired

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Immediate training group
Participants in this group will train immediately for 4 weeks. Afterwards, they will not train for the 8 remaining weeks.
Auditory skills with the inclusion of cognitive control.
Experimental: Delayed Training Group
Participants in this group will receive delayed training after 4 weeks of no training.
Auditory skills with the inclusion of cognitive control.
Experimental: Active control group
Participants in this group will perform an active control for 4 weeks, followed by 4 weeks of training.
Auditory skills with the inclusion of cognitive control.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Speech in noise intelligibility
Time Frame: 0 weeks
LIST (Leuven intelligibility sentences test) sentences presented in speech-weighted noise. Participants are required to repeat sentences in noise. The Leuven Intelligibility Sentences Test (LIST) was specifically designed for speech perception in noise assessment in CI users. The test has high test-retest reliability and a steep slope making it very sensitive to small improvements in performance. An improvement of 2dB results in a clinically relevant improvement in speech discrimination in noise. Therefore, the primary endpoint to validate the active training will be an improvement of 2dB on speech perception in noise.
0 weeks
Speech in noise intelligibility
Time Frame: 4 weeks
LIST (Leuven intelligibility sentences test) sentences presented in speech-weighted noise. Participants are required to repeat sentences in noise. The Leuven Intelligibility Sentences Test (LIST) was specifically designed for speech perception in noise assessment in CI users. The test has high test-retest reliability and a steep slope making it very sensitive to small improvements in performance. An improvement of 2dB results in a clinically relevant improvement in speech discrimination in noise. Therefore, the primary endpoint to validate the active training will be an improvement of 2dB on speech perception in noise.
4 weeks
Speech in noise intelligibility
Time Frame: 8 weeks
LIST (Leuven intelligibility sentences test) sentences presented in speech-weighted noise. Participants are required to repeat sentences in noise. The Leuven Intelligibility Sentences Test (LIST) was specifically designed for speech perception in noise assessment in CI users. The test has high test-retest reliability and a steep slope making it very sensitive to small improvements in performance. An improvement of 2dB results in a clinically relevant improvement in speech discrimination in noise. Therefore, the primary endpoint to validate the active training will be an improvement of 2dB on speech perception in noise.
8 weeks
Speech in noise intelligibility
Time Frame: 12 weeks
LIST (Leuven intelligibility sentences test) sentences presented in speech-weighted noise. Participants are required to repeat sentences in noise. The Leuven Intelligibility Sentences Test (LIST) was specifically designed for speech perception in noise assessment in CI users. The test has high test-retest reliability and a steep slope making it very sensitive to small improvements in performance. An improvement of 2dB results in a clinically relevant improvement in speech discrimination in noise. Therefore, the primary endpoint to validate the active training will be an improvement of 2dB on speech perception in noise.
12 weeks
phoneme identification in noise
Time Frame: 0 weeks
The consonant identification task in noise consisted of 12 Dutch/Flemish vowels presented in an /a/ context. Stimuli were produced by a female speaker. In order not to obtain 100% at the start, stimuli were presented in speech-weighted noise.
0 weeks
phoneme identification in noise
Time Frame: 4 weeks
The consonant identification task in noise consisted of 12 Dutch/Flemish vowels presented in an /a/ context. Stimuli were produced by a female speaker. In order not to obtain 100% at the start, stimuli were presented in speech-weighted noise.
4 weeks
phoneme identification in noise
Time Frame: 8 weeks
The consonant identification task in noise consisted of 12 Dutch/Flemish vowels presented in an /a/ context. Stimuli were produced by a female speaker. In order not to obtain 100% at the start, stimuli were presented in speech-weighted noise.
8 weeks
phoneme identification in noise
Time Frame: 12 weeks
The consonant identification task in noise consisted of 12 Dutch/Flemish vowels presented in an /a/ context. Stimuli were produced by a female speaker. In order not to obtain 100% at the start, stimuli were presented in speech-weighted noise.
12 weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
The temporal modulation Transfer function
Time Frame: 0 weeks
With this task, we measure the modulation threshold that listeners need to distinguish between unmodulated and modulated noise, which is related to speech understanding.
0 weeks
The temporal modulation Transfer function
Time Frame: 4 weeks
With this task, we measure the modulation threshold that listeners need to distinguish between unmodulated and modulated noise, which is related to speech understanding.
4 weeks
The temporal modulation Transfer function
Time Frame: 8 weeks
With this task, we measure the modulation threshold that listeners need to distinguish between unmodulated and modulated noise, which is related to speech understanding.
8 weeks
The temporal modulation Transfer function
Time Frame: 12 weeks
With this task, we measure the modulation threshold that listeners need to distinguish between unmodulated and modulated noise, which is related to speech understanding.
12 weeks
Dual-task listening postural control
Time Frame: 0 weeks
This task aims at identifying the ability to perform two tasks simultaneously. Participants will perform a listening-posture dual-task, where they have to maintain their balance while listening and repeating heard sentences.
0 weeks
Dual-task listening postural control
Time Frame: 4 weeks
This task aims at identifying the ability to perform two tasks simultaneously. Participants will perform a listening-posture dual-task, where they have to maintain their balance while listening and repeating heard sentences.
4 weeks
Dual-task listening postural control
Time Frame: 8 weeks
This task aims at identifying the ability to perform two tasks simultaneously. Participants will perform a listening-posture dual-task, where they have to maintain their balance while listening and repeating heard sentences.
8 weeks
Dual-task listening postural control
Time Frame: 12 weeks
This task aims at identifying the ability to perform two tasks simultaneously. Participants will perform a listening-posture dual-task, where they have to maintain their balance while listening and repeating heard sentences.
12 weeks
Stroop task
Time Frame: 0 weeks
The Stroop task assesses inhibitory control by requiring participants to identify the color in which a symbol or word is presented while ignoring the word's meaning. Participants were asked to respond to the color of the word while ignoring the written word, which is a color itself.
0 weeks
Stroop task
Time Frame: 4 weeks
The Stroop task assesses inhibitory control by requiring participants to identify the color in which a symbol or word is presented while ignoring the word's meaning. Participants were asked to respond to the color of the word while ignoring the written word, which is a color itself.
4 weeks
Stroop task
Time Frame: 8 weeks
The Stroop task assesses inhibitory control by requiring participants to identify the color in which a symbol or word is presented while ignoring the word's meaning. Participants were asked to respond to the color of the word while ignoring the written word, which is a color itself.
8 weeks
Stroop task
Time Frame: 12 weeks
The Stroop task assesses inhibitory control by requiring participants to identify the color in which a symbol or word is presented while ignoring the word's meaning. Participants were asked to respond to the color of the word while ignoring the written word, which is a color itself.
12 weeks
EAS (Effort Assessment Scale)
Time Frame: 0 weeks
EAS is a validated scale to measure listening effort. The EAS consists of 6 items that are scored by the client on a 10-point scale, no effort to lots of effort. The EAS questions were translated to Dutch for this study.
0 weeks
EAS (Effort Assessment Scale)
Time Frame: 4 weeks
EAS is a validated scale to measure listening effort. The EAS consists of 6 items that are scored by the client on a 10-point scale, no effort to lots of effort. The EAS questions were translated to Dutch for this study.
4 weeks
SSQ12 (Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale)
Time Frame: 0 weeks
The SSQ12 is a short version of the validated Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale. This short form was developed for use in clinical research and rehabilitation settings. Participants score each questions on a ruler (visual analogue scale) from 0 to 10. Questions were translated to Dutch.
0 weeks
SSQ12 (Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale)
Time Frame: 4 weeks
The SSQ12 is a short version of the validated Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale. This short form was developed for use in clinical research and rehabilitation settings. Participants score each questions on a ruler (visual analogue scale) from 0 to 10. Questions were translated to Dutch.
4 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Astrid van Wieringen, PhD, KU Leuven

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

April 3, 2023

Primary Completion (Actual)

February 5, 2024

Study Completion (Estimated)

June 30, 2024

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 15, 2023

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 9, 2023

First Posted (Actual)

March 13, 2023

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

April 19, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 18, 2024

Last Verified

April 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • S63310

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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 Disability

Clinical Trials on Listen training

3
Subscribe