Funding for hearing loops

[matt_h]

A few years ago I had a research student survey counter type loop systems in Derby. Around 49 were tested, and of those (from memory) about 10 worked well enough to help someone with hearing loss. The others were either non functioning, had vital parts missing or were installed in such a hostile magnetic noise environment that it was impossible to use them. A few shops were concerned enough to say "I'll let the manager know it's not working". Some were of the opinion that as long as there was a "we have a loop" sticker in the window, that was all that mattered.

 

Taking this OT for a moment, we have counter top loops at all of our tills/information counters. The only trouble is that anytime one of our volunteers who is a hearing aid user is anywhere near one they unplug it, or stuff it in the cupboard (unfortunately it's quite a lot of them!).

 

They tell us that the counter top units are more hindrance than they are help. It's not entirely clear, but when questioning them it appears that the aids are being tuned to amplify the "problem" frequencies for each individual at the input stage rather than the output, receiving the loop signal tends to leave them with a mush that's even harder to listen to than letting their hearing aid "tune" the room for them individually. I've spent a good part of the last year in long discussions with many of them about how best to assist hearing aid users if the counter top units aren't helping. However they all seem to be convinced that there is little or no benefit to fitting loops, although most suggest that 5 - 10 years ago they would have been of the opposite opinion, and that their aids are sufficient to cope with 99% of situations. They all hate IR systems where fitted in their local library's or in theatres they visit, and those that attend church have now had their church loops switched off.

 

For the moment we are persevering with the counter top units, as everybody has had to recognise that not every visitor will have been fitted with a new hearing aid or has the same impairment as the users we are talking to. Our existing users are allowed to turn the loop off whilst working near one, but have agreed to make sure that they turn it back on when they move away or notice a visitor struggling. Although if anybody has any suggestions please share! We're in a Grade 1 listed building, so making alterations is complicated and lengthy at the best of times!

 

Perhaps it would be worth the talking to the end users and discovering what their real needs are first. In this way funding can be sought for the most appropriate equipment and doesn't end up a in a useless mess on the floor, as in Simon's example, or shoved in a cupboard in mine. You never know, it may turn out to be a much cheaper exercise than you first thought!

 

Sorry, this doesn't help you with sourcing additional funding!

[dbuckley]

Even if the "right" kit is specificed, there's no guarantee it will be installed sensibly.

 

I always get leery when I see Simon responding in threads about assisted listening systems, after reading this previous thread posting.

[Simon Lewis]

Matt,

 

Although it's always a little difficult to translate into technical terms what aid users mean, I believe there are a few points to consider.

 

Older, analogue aids applied gain, but would high pass the signal to a greater or lesser degree as most hearing loss is either high frequency (presbycusis) or a mid to high frequency notch (usually from noise induced hearing loss).

Digital systems introduced two "advantages" - 1) the users hearing loss would be determined and the gain applied would be based on an inverse of the hearing loss. 2) Multiband compression would be applied so that a constant level could be achieved. On paper, this provided great benefits, but not every digital aid user liked it, (especially if they had used analogue). Many struggled with the automatic nature of the aid, whilst audiologists claimed the holy grail had been found (and the profit margins of the aid manufacturers soared).

Most counter systems have the microphone incorrectly placed. They get pushed out of the way, put close to a noisy machine, have too much gain so all the background noise is amplified or are simply not needed (things work better face to face).

Few if any counter systems are designed for the seller to use them - the mic will not be placed correctly, so it's unlikely that the seller will hear themselves correctly. I can understand why they would turn them off - it's not designed to work that way round.

 

Going back to Kevin's school, I would have pursued greater use of the 1:1 FM systems for student's use, as these are far more likely to be working on a day to day basis. They could be supplemented by a loop (as long as his steel retractable seating doesn't absorb field strength too much) or IR (subject to line of sight etc.

 

Simon