BACKGROUND:

Different technological alternatives are nowadays offered to persons with a severe-to-profound high-frequency hearing loss (HFHL). However, benefits of those technologies are still not clear.

OBJECTIVE:

To explore the benefits provided by frequency-compression (FC) or frequency-transposition (FT) hearing aids (HAs), and the electric acoustic stimulation (EAS) cochlear implant, from the perspective of users with a HFHL.

METHODS:

A qualitative case study research design was selected. Ten adults with a HFHL who participated in a previous FC, FT and EAS trial were enrolled. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted. Participants were questioned about their experience with each technology. Data were analyzed using a qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS:

Participants reported better speech understanding in quiet and noisy situations, plus improved high-frequency sound detection with both HAs. Some participants mentioned lower levels of listening effort and fatigue and an improvement in self-confidence, which led to increased social participation. Most participants preferred FC or FT to their own HAs. The participant who received an EAS implant reported better performances with this technology.

CONCLUSIONS:

From the participants’ perspective, the three technologies can deliver greater benefits than conventional amplification for people with a severe-to-profound HFHL, but the EAS implant appears as potentially more beneficial than both HAs.