Sensory SystemsSensory SystemsСенсорные системы0235-00923034-5936The Russian Academy of Sciences68213110.31857/S0235009225010044UUTRBAСЛУХОВАЯ СИСТЕМАResearch ArticleTemporal characteristics of speech in patients with moderately severe chronic postlingual sensorineural hearing loss without the use of hearing aids and with hearing prostheticsВременные характеристики речи пациентов с постлингвальной сенсоневральной тугоухостью III степени без использования слуховых аппаратов и при слухопротезированииArutyunyanK. S.АрутюнянК. С.
Russian Federation
ig-andreeva@mail.ruGolovanovaL. E.ГоловановаЛ. Е.
Russian Federation
ig-andreeva@mail.ruZaytsevaL. G.ЗайцеваЛ. Г.
Russian Federation
ig-andreeva@mail.ruAndreevaI. G.АндрееваИ. Г.
Russian Federation
ig-andreeva@mail.ruSechenov Institute of Evolutionary Physiology and Biochemistry of the Russian Academy of SciencesИнститут эволюционной физиологии и биохимии им. И.М. Сеченова Российской академии наукCity Gerontology CenterГородской гериатрический центрSaint Petersburg Research Institute of Ear, Throat, Nose and SpeechСанкт-Петербургский научно-исследовательский институт уха, горла, носа и речиMechnikov North-Western State Medical UniversityСеверо-Западный государственный медицинский университет им. И. И. Мечникова05042025391384703062025Copyright ©; 2025, Russian Academy of SciencesCopyright ©; 2025, Российская академия наук2025Russian Academy of SciencesРоссийская академия наукhttps://journals.eco-vector.com/0235-0092/article/view/682131

Postlingually deaf patients, unlike those who lost their hearing at an early age, retain previously formed control based on a direct connection between hearing and speech. At the same time, patients with hearing impairment show changes in the speech production compared to those who hear normally, which are caused by a deterioration in the feedback of auditory communication. To what extent the auditory control that is impaired in sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) can be compensated for with hearing aids remains a little-studied question. A study of the effect of restored auditory control on articulatory motor skills with adequate hearing aids has been conducted. A comparison of the durations of stressed vowels and individual words in speech uttered with and without a hearing aid was performed in 12 speakers (6 of them men) with moderately severe chronic SNHL. For stressed vowels [a], [i], [u], which make up the vertices of the vowel triangle for the Russian language, in all positions – the beginning, middle and end of the word, a significant decrease in their duration was revealed when wearing hearing aids compared to speaking without them. In most cases, the duration of stressed vowels varied by about 10%, and the duration of individual words containing such vowels by 5%. A decrease in the duration of stressed vowels and individual words can be an objective indicator for evaluating the effectiveness of auditory prosthetics to restore auditory feedback and normalize speech motor skills.

У постлингвально оглохших пациентов, в отличие от потерявших слух в раннем возрасте, сохраняется сформированный ранее контроль на основе прямой связи слуха и речи. Вместе с тем при нарушении слуха у пациентов выявляются изменения в процессе речепродукции по сравнению с нормально слышащими, которые обусловлены ухудшением обратной слуховой связи. Насколько нарушенные при тугоухости механизмы слухового контроля могут быть скомпенсированы при слухопротезировании, остается малоизученным вопросом. Проведено исследование влияния восстановленного слухового контроля на артикуляционную моторику при адекватном слухопротезировании. Выполнено сравнение длительностей ударных гласных и отдельных слов в речи, произнесенной в слуховом аппарате и без него, у 12 дикторов (из них 6 мужчин) с хронической сенсоневральной тугоухостью (СНТ) III степени. Для ударных гласных [a], [i], [u], составляющих вершины треугольника гласных для русского языка, во всех положениях – начале, середине и конце слова, выявили достоверное снижение их длительности при надетых слуховых аппаратах по сравнению с говорением без них. В большинстве случаев длительность ударных гласных изменялась примерно на 10%, а длительность отдельных слов, содержащих такие гласные, – на 5%. Снижение длительности ударных гласных звуков и отдельных слов может являться объективным показателем для оценки эффективности слухопротезирования по восстановлению слухоречевой обратной связи и нормализации моторики речи.

audiomotor controlfeedback controlspeechvoicesensorineural hearing lossслухоречевой контрольхарактеристики речислухопротезированиесенсоневральная тугоухостьПравительство Российской ФедерацииGovernment of the Russian Federation075-00263-25-00Batalin S.V. O dvuh podhodah k opisaniyu dlitel’nostej zvukovyh segmentov v zavisimosti ot ih pozicii vo fraze. Lingua mobilis. 2012. T. 3(36). S. 43–56. (In Russian).Баталин С.В. О двух подходах к описанию длительностей звуковых сегментов в зависимости от их позиции во фразе. Lingua mobilis. 2012. Т. 3(36). С. 43-56.Boboshko M.Yu., Riekhakajnen E.I. Rechevaya audiometriya v klinicheskoj praktike. 2019. SPb.: Dialog. (In Russian).Бобошко М.Ю., Риехакайнен Е.И. Речевая аудиометрия в клинической практике. СПб.: Диалог. 2019.Bondarko L.V. Phonetics of the modern russian language. 1998. SPB. S.-Peterburg. Univer. (In Russian).Бондарко Л.В. Фонетика современного русского языка. 1998. СПб. С.-Петербург. Универ.Lunichkin A.M., Andreeva I.G., Zaitseva L.G., Gvozdeva A.P., Ogorodnikova E.A. Changes in the spectral characteristics of vowels in Russian speech on a noise background. Acoustical Physics. 2023. V. 69(3). P. 357–366. DOI: 10.1134/S1063771023600237 (in Russian).Луничкин А. М., Андреева И. Г., Зайцева Л. Г., Гвоздева А. П., Огородникова Е. А. Изменение спектральных характеристик гласных звуков в русской речи на фоне шума. Акустический Журнал. 2023. Т. 69 (3). С. 340-350. DOI: 10.31857/S032079192110018.Lunichkin A.M., Shtin K.S. Rol’ sluhovoj obratnoj svyazi v kontrole golosa pri normal’nom i snizhennom sluhe. Sensornye sistemy. 2023. T.37 (4). S. 285–300. DOI: 10.31857/S0235009223040042 (In Russian).Луничкин А.М., Штин К.С. Роль слуховой обратной связи в контроле голоса при нормальном и сниженном слухе. Сенсорные системы. 2023. Т.37 (4). С. 285-300. DOI: 10.31857/S0235009223040042.Shtin K.S., Lunichkin A.M., Gvozdeva A.P., L. Golovanova L.E., Andreeva I.G. Spectral characteristics of cardinal vowels as indicators of the auditory speech feedback control in patients with moderate and moderately severe chronic postlingual sensorineural hearing loss. Journal of Evolutionary Biochemistry and Physiology. 2023. V.59(4). P. 596-606. DOI: 10.31857/S0869813923040106 (in Russian).Штин К.С., Луничкин А.М., Гвоздева А.П., Голованова Л.Е., Андреева И.Г. Спектральные характеристики кардинальных гласных звуков как показатели слухоречевой обратной связи у пациентов с постлингвальной хронической сенсоневральной тугоухостью II и III степени. Российский физиологический журнал. 2023. Т. 109. № 4. С. 489-501. DOI: 10.31857/S0869813923040106.Alghamdi N., Maddock S., Marxer R., Barker J., Brown G. J. A corpus of audio-visual Lombard speech with frontal and profile views. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2018. V. 143(6). P. EL523-EL529. DOI: 10.1121/1.5042758.Belz M., Rasskazova O., Krivokapić J., Mooshammer C. Interaction between phrasal structure and vowel tenseness in German: an acoustic and articulatory study. Lang Speech. 2023. V. 66(1). P. 3–34. DOI: 10.1177/00238309211064857.Burnett T. Early pitch-shift response is active in both steady and dynamic voice pitch control. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2002. V. l (12). P. 1058–1063. DOI: 10.1121/1.1487844.Burnett T. Early pitch-shift response is active in both steady and dynamic voice pitch control. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2002. V. l (12). P. 1058-1063. DOI: 10.1121/1.1487844.Callan D. An auditory-feedback-based neural network model of speech production that is robust to developmental changes in the size and shape of the articulatory system. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research. 2000. V. 43 (3). P. 721–736. DOI: 10.1044/jslhr.4303.721.Calvert D., Silverman S. Speech and deafness: A text for learning and teaching. In: 1st ed. Washington: Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf. 1975.Coelho A., Brasolotto A., Bahmad F. Development and validation of the protocol for the evaluation of voice in subjects with hearing impairment. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology. 2019. V. 86(6). P. 748–762. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2019.05.007.Coelho A., Brasolotto A., Bahmad F. Development and validation of the protocol for the evaluation of voice in subjects with hearing impairment. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology. 2019. V. 86(6). P. 748-762. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2019.05.007.Coelho A., Medved D., Brasolotto A. Hearing loss and Voice. In: Update on Hearing Loss. InTech. 2015. DOI: 10.5772/61217.Das B., Chatterjee I., Kumar S. Laryngeal aerodynamics in children with hearing impairment versus age and height matched normal hearing peers. ISRN Otolaryngology. 2013. DOI: 10.1155/2013/394604.Garnier M., Henrich N., Dubois D. Influence of sound immersion and communicative interaction on the Lombard effect. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2010. V. 53(3). P. 588–608. DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0138).Garnier M., Henrich N., Dubois D. Influence of sound immersion and communicative interaction on the Lombard effect. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2010. V. 53(3). P. 588-608. DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0138).Gautam A., Naples J., Eliades S. Control of speech and voice in cochlear implant patients. Laryngoscope. 2019. V. 129(9). P. 2158–2163. DOI: 10.1002/lary.27787.Gramming P., Sundberg J., Ternström S., Leanderson R., Perkins W. H. Relationship between changes in voice pitch and loudness. Journal of voice. 1988. V. 2 (2). P. 118–126. DOI: 10.1016/S0892-1997(88)80067-5.Guenter F. Neural control of speech. London, England. The MIT Press. 2016. 420 p.Higgins M., Carney A., Schulte L. Physiological assessment of speech and voice production of adults with hearing loss. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1994. V. 37(3). P. 510–521. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3703.510.Jones J. Perceptual calibration of F0 production: evidence from feedback perturbation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2000. V.108 (3). P. 1246–2151. DOI: 10.1121/1.1288414.Kuk F., Lau C., Korhonen P., Crose B. Speech intelligibility benefits of hearing AIDS at various input levels. Journal of American Academy of Audiology. 2015. V. 26(3). P. 275–288. DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.26.3.7.Lee G. Variability in voice fundamental frequency of sustained vowels in speakers with sensorineural hearing loss. Journal of Voice. 2012. V. 26(1). P. 24–29. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.10.003.Lee G. Variability in voice fundamental frequency of sustained vowels in speakers with sensorineural hearing loss. Journal of Voice. 2012. V. 26(1). P. 24-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2010.10.003.Lee G., Liu C., Lee S. Effects of hearing aid amplification on voice F0 variability in speakers with prelingual hearing loss. Hearing Research. 2013. V. 302. P. 1–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2013.04.010.Lee S., Yu J., Fang T., Lee G. Vocal fold nodules: a disorder of phonation organs or auditory feedback? Clinical Otolaryngology. 2019. V. 44(6). P. 975–982. DOI: 10.1111/coa.13417.Lee S., Yu J., Fang T., Lee G. Vocal fold nodules: a disorder of phonation organs or auditory feedback? Clinical Otolaryngology. 2019. V. 44(6). P. 975-982. DOI: 10.1111/coa.13417.Liss J., Utianski R., Lansford K. Crosslinguistic application of English-centric rhythm descriptors in motor speech disorders. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2013. V. 65(1). P. 3–19. DOI: 10.1159/000350030.Martony J. Studies on the speech of the deaf. In: 1st ed. Stockholm: Speech Transmission Laboratory. Royal Institute of Technology; 1965.Ngo T., Kubo R., Morikawa D., Akagi M. Acoustical analyses of tendencies of intelligibility in Lombard speech with different background noise levels. Journal of Signal Processing. 2017. V. 21. P. 171–174. DOI: 10.2299/jsp.21.171.Ngo T., Kubo R., Morikawa D., Akagi M. Acoustical analyses of tendencies of intelligibility in Lombard speech with different background noise levels. Journal of Signal Processing. 2017. V. 21. P. 171-174. DOI: 10.2299/jsp.21.171.Nober E., Nober L. Effects of hearing loss on speech and language in the postbabbling stage. In: Jaffe B, editor. Hearing loss in children. Baltimore: Iniversity Park Press. 1977. P. 630–642.Nober E., Nober L. Effects of hearing loss on speech and language in the postbabbling stage. In: Jaffe B, editor. Hearing loss in children. Baltimore: Iniversity Park Press. 1977. P. 630-642.Osberger M. Speech intelligibility in the hearing impaired: Research and clinical implications. In: Intelligibility in Speech Disorders. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. 1992. P. 233–264.Osberger M. Speech intelligibility in the hearing impaired: Research and clinical implications. In: Intelligibility in Speech Disorders. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. 1992. P. 233-264.Osberger M., McGarr N. Speech production characteristics of the hearing impaired. In: Lass N, editor. Speech and Language: Advances In Basic Science and Research. New York: Academic Press. 1982.Patel R., Schell K. The influence of linguistic content on the Lombard effect. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2008. V. 51. P. 209–220 DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/016).Perkell J. The sensorimotor control of speech production. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium of Measurement, Analysis and Modeling of Human Function. Hokkaido University. Japan, Sapporo. 2001. P. 359–365.Perkell J. The sensorimotor control of speech production. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium of Measurement, Analysis and Modeling of Human Function. Hokkaido University. Japan, Sapporo. 2001. P. 359-365.Schenk B., Baumgartner W., Hamzavi J. Changes in vowel quality after cochlear implantation. ORL: journal for otorhinolaryngolists and its related specialties. 2003. V. 65(3). P. 184–188. DOI: 10.1159/000072257.Schenk B., Baumgartner W., Hamzavi J. Effect of the loss of auditory feedback on segmental parameters of vowels of postlingually deafened speakers. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2003. V. 30(4). P. 333–339. DOI: 10.1016/s0385-8146(03)00093-2.Schenk B., Baumgartner W., Hamzavi J. Effect of the loss of auditory feedback on segmental parameters of vowels of postlingually deafened speakers. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2003. V. 30(4). P. 333-339. DOI: 10.1016/s0385-8146(03)00093-2.Selleck M., Sataloff R. The impact of the auditory system on phonation: a review. Journal of Voice. 2014. V. 28(6). P. 688–693. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2014.03.018.Sivasankar M. Voice responses to change in pitch of voice or tone auditory feedback. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2005. V. l17 (2). P. 850–1857. DOI: 10.1121/1.1849933.Sivasankar M. Voice responses to change in pitch of voice or tone auditory feedback. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2005. V. l17 (2). P. 850-1857. DOI: 10.1121/1.1849933.Stevens K., Nickerson R., Rollins A. Assessment of nasalization in the speech of deaf children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1976. V. 19(2). P. 393-416. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.1902.393.Stowe L., Lauren M., Edward J. Evidence that the Lombard effect is frequency-specific in humans. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2013. V. 134 (1). P. 640–647. DOI: 10.1121/1.4807645.Stowe L., Lauren M., Edward J. Evidence that the Lombard effect is frequency-specific in humans. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2013. V. 134 (1). P. 640-647. DOI: 10.1121/1.4807645.Subtelny J., Whitehead R., Samar V. Spectral study of deviant resonance in the speech of woman who are deaf. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1992. V. 35. P. 574–579. DOI: 10.1044/jshr.3503.574.Szkiełkowska A., Myszel K. Acoustic voice parameters in hearing-impaired, school-aged children. Research study outcomes. Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. 2021. V. 3(3). DOI: 10.31579/2692-9562/034.Villacorta V. Sensorimotor adaptation to feedback perturbations of vowel acoustics and its relation to perception. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 2007. V. 122 (4). P. 2306-2319. DOI: 10.1121/1.2773966.