Purpose This study compared the performance of three amplification devices hypothesized to improve speech communication in individuals with hypophonia (HP), as well as to identify individuals' device preferences. Method Twenty-two individuals with HP and their primary communication partners participated in a cross-over design study comparing three different speech amplification devices: a wired portable amplifier (Device A), a wireless stationary amplifier (Device B), and a one-way personal communication system (Device C). Participants attended one laboratory visit followed by 1-week trial periods with each device. At the first visit, HP participants completed speech tasks with and without the devices, in quiet and in noise. Following the in-laboratory test period, participants trialed each device at home for approximately 1 week per device. Following completion of the study, participants indicated whether or not they would like to continue using a device. Results Overall, in the presence of noise, all three devices demonstrated significant improvements in speech-to-noise levels and speech intelligibility compared to no device. A clear device hierarchy emerged such that the personal communication device (Device C) was associated with significantly better speech outcomes compared to the other two devices. The majority of participants elected to continue using a device at the completion of the study. Device preferences, however, did not clearly reflect the objective device hierarchy that was found for the objective speech measures. Each of the three devices was selected as a preferred device by at least three participants at the completion of the study. Conclusion Results from this study demonstrated clear differences in device performance in three distinct forms of amplification devices for individuals with HP. Findings suggest that amplification device use may be beneficial for this clinical population and underscore the potential to improve device availability and device selection criteria in future research. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12735875

中文翻译：

---

语音放大和个人通讯设备治疗发声障碍的比较

目的这项研究比较了三种扩音设备的性能，这些扩音设备被假设可以改善发声障碍 (HP) 患者的语音交流，并确定个人的设备偏好。 方法HP 及其主要通信合作伙伴的 22 名人员参与了一项交叉设计研究，比较了三种不同的语音放大设备：有线便携式放大器（设备 A）、无线固定放大器（设备 B）和单向个人放大器通信系统（设备C）。参与者参观了一次实验室，然后对每种设备进行了为期 1 周的试用。在第一次访问时，惠普参与者在使用和不使用设备、安静和噪音的情况下完成了语音任务。实验室测试期结束后，参与者在家中试用每台设备大约 1 周。研究完成后，参与者表示他们是否愿意继续使用设备。 结果总体而言，在存在噪声的情况下，与没有设备相比，所有三种设备在语音噪声水平和语音清晰度方面均表现出显着改善。出现了清晰的设备层次结构，使得个人通信设备（设备 C）与其他两种设备相比具有明显更好的语音结果。大多数参与者选择在研究完成后继续使用设备。然而，设备偏好并没有清楚地反映为客观语音测量找到的客观设备层次结构。在研究完成时，这三种设备中的每一种都被至少三名参与者选为首选设备。 结论这项研究的结果表明，针对 HP 患者，三种不同形式的放大设备的设备性能存在明显差异。研究结果表明，放大设备的使用可能对该临床人群有益，并强调了在未来研究中提高设备可用性和设备选择标准的潜力。 补充材料 https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12735875