She initially set the amplification to 80% of Target for the first week. She bumbed it up to 90% on week 2. This week I have my next appointment. I know that she’s planning on doing a certain tests as well but I don’t know the specifics. The REM may very well be incorporated into her plan but I don’t know. I will certainly be bringing it up as it seems like a must for a successful trial, whether it’s done up front or after a break in period. I know that she wanted me to slowly adapt to the new experience and not be overwhelmed with too much aplification at once.
It’s a fair guess to say that you were probably underprescribed at the outset, but that’s always going to be an issue as the full prescription level EVEN WITH REM is unlikely to sound like your normal hearing in the better ear.
Actually, just from a point of comparison, you’re always going to be a better than any measurement system, as you know the level that is right for any given sound from your better ear. Most hearing aids don’t restore normal loudness growth anyway as it tends to be too overpowering for the wearer.
Also there’s no point in having an Opn1 monaurally over a 2 or 3 as you’ll not benefit from any of the binaural features and sound management. The other feature differences are marginal - especially as you’ll already be processing the noise management in your head via your better ear.
I agree itwas over simplified. REM targets are the most evidence way we have to start any hearing aid fitting. But of course are not the be all end all of a fitting. Most new users of course can’t handle their “targets” as you put it - I call it a prescription because that is what it is (NAL and DSL are prescriptions). It is the prescription we know to be the best place to start or work towards.
Great points! These little devices are expensive. I don’t want to pay a premium for features that don’t apply. The device is effective in picking up more sound and it does make a difference. Unfortunately so far it has performed poorly in the area that is most crucial for me which is understanding speech. I realize that nothing is going to compare to the natural sound I get from my right ear. The only time I’ve been able to confirm that it works for speech understanding has been when I’ve tested it using my over the hear Bose headphones. I only place the headphone on my bad ear. With the hearing aid off I can’t understand what’s being said at all. With the hearing aid on it is certainly loud enough AND I can make out the words. That is the only time I could understand speech and confirm that my good ear isn’t picking it up. In most real world outdoor situations I’d have to turn my head most of the time even with the hearing aid on.
Remember that you were given an OPN1 that wouldn’t do better than the less expensive OPN3. Consider what that says. Was the fitter trying to give you what works or what cost most? If the latter, are they the person to do business with over the next several years.
Does your audiologist have other brands that you might demo? Might be worth a try.
The Opn “open” paradigm is a monaural strategy. The Opn has binaural features, but unlike other manufacturers where the binaural features are removed at lower levels, the Opn’s are still there, they are just less effective.
For some manufacturers the only difference between the top level and the next level down are binarual features that will do nothing for a unilateral fitting. This isn’t The case with the Opn.