Table of Contents
Survey of North American alternative listening devices: Characteristics and electroacoustic performances
Introduction
Hearing aids are amplifying devices currently prescribed for clinical management of individuals with hearing loss. They consist of a microphone, speaker, amplifier, and battery. Sounds are picked up by the microphone, and then amplified by the amplifier and delivered through the speaker [1]. A considerable amount of literature as shown the benefits of hearing aids to improve audibility, hearing-specific health-related quality of life, and general health-related quality of life [2]. However, hearing aids are used by less than 20% of adults with hearing loss [3]. Many factors can explain the underuse of hearing aids [4, 5, 6], such as:
- Lack of perceived effectiveness of hearing aids
- Stigma around hearing loss
- Complicated hearing aid delivery system
- High cost of hearing aids, typically around $3000–$6000
The Over the Counter (OTC) Hearing Aid Act that is part of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Reauthorization Act of 2017 has been offered as a solution to improve hearing aids accessibility. The OTC Act enables adults with mild to moderate hearing loss to access OTC hearing aids without consulting with a hearing aid dispenser. These devices can be bought in many big-box stores or online.
Alternative listening devices
We have chosen to use the terminology “alternative listening devices” to describe all electronic device, except prescribed hearing aids, that can be used to improve hearing. Similar terminology has been proposed by other research groups, such as connected hearing health technologies [7] and direct-to-consumer hearing devices [8]. These alternative listening devices include:
- Personal sound amplification products (PSAPs)
- Hearables
- smartphone applications
- over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids
Recently, a systematic review of scientific literature has concluded that given their availability and affordability, these alternative listening devices could be considered for patients with mild to moderate hearing loss [9].
It should be noted that over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids are currently not available in Quebec and Canada, given the current regulations governing the sale of hearing aids. However, PSAPs and hearables can be purchased there. Recently, the Ordre des orthophonistes et audiologistes du Québec issued a position statement on over-the-counter hearing aids, urging provincial and federal governments to legislate quickly to make them available. This position statement can be viewed here: https://www.ooaq.qc.ca/decouvrir/a-propos/enonce-position-appareils-auditifs-vente-libre/
Our research
We believe in providing up-to-date and scientifically valid information to hearing health professionals and consumers with hearing loss. Therefore, we have compiled information about alternative listening devices retrieved from several studies, as well as results obtained by our research team at CRITIAS and Laval University. This database can be used by consumers to make an informed choice regarding the selection of their hearing technologies, and by hearing health professionals to enable them to make appropriate recommendations to their patients regarding alternative listening devices.
Characteristics of alternative listening devices
In Table 1, we provide a summary of the characteristics of the alternative listening devices currently available on the North American market (Canada and USA). The following information is provided:
- Model: alternative listening device model’s name
- Manufacturer: alternative listening device manufacturer’s name
- Cost: cost of a pair (2) of alternative listening devices
- Type and medical classification: type of alternative listening devices (OTC, PSAP, hearable)
- Style: type of device model (ITE, in-the-ear; BTE, behind-the-ear; RITE; receiver-in-the-ear; Earbud)
- Volume control/range: can the device’s volume be adjusted? How?
- Feedback management: does the device have a feedback management algorithm?
- Battery: type of battery and estimated battery life
- Streaming capability: can the device be connected to a smartphone?
- Self-fitting: can the device be adjusted to the consumer’s hearing loss, and what type of prescription formula is used?
- Noise/speech processing: what noise or speech processing programs are available in the device?
- Warranty: warranty time provided by the manufacturer
Table 1. Characteristics of the alternative listening devices.
Electroacoustic analysis of alternative listening devices
In Table 2, we provide a summary of the alternative listening devices’ electroacoustic performances. Because prescribed hearing aids are governed by the ANSI S3.22 - Specification of Hearing Aid Characteristics standard [10], we have chosen to conduct the electroacoustic analysis by following this standard since these devices might be used by consumers with a mild to moderate hearing loss.
Please note that when the electroacoustic analysis was not conducted by our research team, the reference is provided in brackets. The following information is provided:
- Model: alternative listening device model’s name
- Manufacturer: alternative listening device manufacturer’s name
- OSPL90 Max: maximum output with a 90 dB SPL input with full on gain. The maximum OSPL90 output level shall not exceed 120 dB SPL [11].
- Frequency response: gain or amplification at various frequencies
- Frequency response smoothness: consistent gain performance across frequencies. No single peak in the one-third-octave frequency response shall exceed 12 dB [11].
- EIN: Equivalent internal noise
- THD: Total harmonic distortion in %
- Attack and Release time: time required for amplitude compression to activate or deactivate
A notation system is used to highlight the performances that do not meet (
) and meet (
) the criteria of the ANSI S3.22 (2014) [10] or ANSI/CTA 2051 (2017) [11] standards.
Table 2. Electroacoustic analysis of alternative listening devices
Notice
Before purchasing an alternative listening device, we highly recommend consulting an audiologist for a complete hearing evaluation and an overall needs assessment. In many cases, a prescribed hearing aid may be necessary.
To report any mistake or to add an alternative listening device to this database, kindly email Alexis Pinsonnault-Skvarenina, MPA, Ph.D., audiologist and researcher, at apinsonnault@critias.ca
Authors
1,2 Alexis Pinsonnault-Skvarenina, MPA, Ph.D.
3,4 Mathieu Hotton, MOA, Ph.D.
3 Béatrice Guay, audiology student
3 Émilie Morissette, audiology student
3 Anaïs Gros-Louis, audiology student
1 Valentin Pintat, ing.
1,2 Jérémie Voix, ing., Ph.D.
- 1 ÉTS-EERS Industrial Research Chair in In-Ear Technologies, École de technologie supérieure, Montréal, Canada
- 2 Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology, McGill University, Montréal, Canada
- 3 Département de réadaptation, Faculté de médecine, Université Laval, Québec, Canada
- 4 Centre interdisciplinaire de recherche en réadaptation et intégration sociale, CIUSSS de la Capitale-Nationale, Québec, Canada
Please cite as:
Pinsonnault-Skvarenina, A., Hotton, M., Guay, B., Morissette, E., Gros-Louis, A., Pintat, V., Voix, J. (2023). Survey of North American alternative listening devices: Characteristics and electroacoustic performances. ÉTS-EERS Industrial Research Chair in In-Ear Technologies. https://critias.ca/otc
References
- Popelka, G. R., and Gates, G. A. (1991). Hearing aid evaluation and fitting. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America, 24(2), 415–428.
- Ferguson, M. A., Kitterick, P. T., Chong, L. Y., Edmondson‐Jones, M., Barker, F., and Hoare, D. J. (2017). Hearing aids for mild to moderate hearing loss in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (9).
- Chien, W., and Lin, F. R. (2012). Prevalence of hearing aid use among older adults in the United States. Archives of internal medicine, 172(3), 292–293.
- McCormack, A., and Fortnum, H. (2013). Why do people fitted with hearing aids not wear them? International Journal of Audiology, 52(5), 360–368.
- Knudsen, L.V., Öberg, M., Nielsen, C., Naylor, G., and Kramer, S.E. (2010). Factors influencing help seeking, hearing aid uptake, hearing aid use and satisfaction with hearing aids: A review of the literature. Trends in Amplification, 14(3), 127–54.
- Pacala, J. T., and Yueh, B. (2012). Hearing deficits in the older patient:“I didn't notice anything”. Journal of the American Medical Association, 307(11), 1185–1194.
- Olson, A., Maidment, D. W., and Ferguson, M. A. (2022). Consensus on connected hearing health technologies and service delivery models in the UK: a Delphi review. International Journal of Audiology, 61(4), 344–351.
- Almufarrij, I., Munro, K. J., Dawes, P., Stone, M. A., and Dillon, H. (2019). Direct-to-consumer hearing devices: Capabilities, costs, and cosmetics. Trends in Hearing, 23, article 2331216519858301.
- Chen, C. H., Huang, C. Y., Cheng, H. L., Lin, H. Y. H., Chu, Y. C., Chang, C. Y., Lai, Y. H., Wang, M. C., and Cheng, Y. F. (2022). Comparison of personal sound amplification products and conventional hearing aids for patients with hearing loss: A systematic review with meta-analysis. EClinicalMedicine, 46, article 101378.
- American National Standards Institute and Acoustical Society of America. (2014). Specification of Hearing Aid Characteristics (ANSI/ASA S3.22). Retrieved from https://webstore.ansi.org/preview-pages/ASA/preview_ANSI+ASA+S3.22-2014.pdf
- American National Standards Institute and Consumer Technology Association. (2017). Personal sound amplification performance criteria (ANSI/CTA-2051). Retrieved from https://webstore.ansi.org/preview-pages/ANSI/preview_ANSI+CTA-2051-2017.pdf
- Chong-White, N., Mejia, J., Galloway, J., and Edwards, B. (2021). Evaluating Apple AirPods Pro with Headphone Accommodations as hearing devices. Hearing Review, 28(12), 8–11.
- Kim, G. Y., Kim, J. S., Jo, M., Seol, H. Y., Cho, Y. S., and Moon, I. J. (2022). Feasibility of personal sound amplification products in patients with moderate hearing loss: a pilot study. Clinical and Experimental Otorhinolaryngology, 15(1), 60–68.
- JABRA GN. (2022). ENHANCE PRO 10 Receiver-in-ear hearing aids user guide [Brochure].
- JABRA GN. (2022). Jabra Enhance Plus compliance assessment ANSI-CTA2051-2017 Tech Sheet A4 211022 [Brochure].
- EARGO. (2022). Eargo 6 user informational brochure [Brochure].
- SONY. (2022]. SONY E10 user guide [Brochure].
- SONY. (2022]. SONY C10 user guide [Brochure].
- Université Laval (2023). Electroacoustic performances tested in-house using Verifit2 by Audioscan Inc.
- CRITIAS. (2023). Electroacoustic performances tested in-house using SoundCheck by Listen Inc.




