Electrical audio signal processing systems and devices – Hearing aids – electrical – Specified casing or housing
Reexamination Certificate
1999-12-10
2002-09-24
Kuntz, Curtis (Department: 2643)
Electrical audio signal processing systems and devices
Hearing aids, electrical
Specified casing or housing
C381S322000, C381S323000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06456720
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention pertains to hearing aids. More particularly, the present invention pertains to flexible circuit board assemblies for use in hearing aids.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The modem trend in the design and implementation of hearing devices is focusing to a large extent on reducing the physical size of the hearing device. Miniaturization of hearing device components is becoming increasingly feasible with rapid technological advances in the fields of power supplies, sound processing electronics and micro-mechanics. The demand for smaller and less conspicuous hearing devices continues to increase as a larger portion of our population ages and faces hearing loss. Those who face hearing loss also encounter the accompanying desire to avoid the stigma and self consciousness associated with this condition. As a result, smaller hearing devices, which are cosmetically less visible, but more sophisticated, are increasingly sought after.
Hearing device technology has progressed rapidly in recent years. First generation hearing devices were primarily of the Behind-The-Ear (BTE) type, where an externally mounted device was connected by an acoustic tube to a molded shell placed within the ear. With the advancement of component miniaturization, modem hearing devices rarely use this Behind-The-Ear technique, focusing primarily on one of several forms of an In-The-Canal hearing device. Three main types of In-The-Canal hearing devices are routinely offered by audiologists and physicians. In-The-Ear (ITE) devices rest primarily in the concha of the ear and have the disadvantages of being fairly conspicuous to a bystander and relatively bulky and uncomfortable to wear. Smaller In-The-Canal (ITC) devices fit partially in the concha and partially in the ear canal and are less visible but still leave a substantial portion of the hearing device exposed. Recently, Completely-In-The-Canal (CIC) hearing devices have come into greater use. As the name implicates, these devices fit deep within the ear canal and are essentially hidden from view from the outside.
In addition to the obvious cosmetic advantages these types of in-the-canal devices provide, they also have several performance advantages that larger, externally mounted devices do not offer. Placing the hearing device deep within the ear canal and close to the tympanic membrane (ear drum) improves the frequency response of the device, reduces distortion due to jaw extrusion, reduces the occurrence of occlusion effects and improves overall sound fidelity. Earlier generation hearing devices function primarily by sound amplification and are typically not altered to user's particular hearing impairment. Modern electronics improvements allow specific sound processing schemes to be incorporated into the hearing device. Similarly, custom programming can be incorporated into the hearing device circuitry allowing a truly custom device for any particular user.
The shape and structure (morphology) of the ear canal varies from person to person. However, certain characteristics are common to all individuals. When viewed in the transverse plane, the path of the ear canal is extremely irregular, having several sharp bends and curves. The overall cross section of the ear canal generally constricts as you move deeper into the ear canal. It is these inherent structural characteristics that create problems for the acoustic scientist and the hearing device designer.
For general discussion purposes, the ear canal can be broken into three main segments. The external and medial segments are both surrounded by a relatively soft cartilaginous tissue. The external segment is largely visible from the outside and represents the largest cavity of the ear canal. The innermost segment of the ear canal, closest to the tympanic membrane, is surrounded by a denser bony material and is covered with only a thin layer of soft tissue. The presence of this bony material allows for little expansion to occur in this region compared with the cartilaginous regions of the ear canal. In addition to being surrounded by cartilage rather than bone, these areas are covered with a substantially thicker tissue layer. Since there is less cushion, pressure exerted by a hearing device on the inner bony region of the canal can lead to discomfort and/or pain, especially when a deep insertion technique is used.
Since the morphology of the ear canal varies so greatly from person to person, hearing aid manufacturers and audiologists use custom manufactured devices in order to precisely fit the dimensions of a user's ear canal. This technique frequently requires impressions of the user's ear canal to be taken. The resulting mold is then used to fabricate a rigid hearing device shell. This process is both expensive and time consuming and the resulting rigid device shell does not perform well during the deformations of the ear canal that occur during normal jaw movement. In order to receive a properly fit hearing device, the user typically has to make several trips to the audiologist for reshaping and resizing. Even after the best possible fit is obtained, the rigid shell rarely provides comfortable hearing enhancement at all times.
Because the resulting hearing aid device shell is typically formed from a hard acrylic material, discomfort to the user is increased when worn for extended periods of time. The inability of the hard shell to conform to normal ear canal deformations can cause it to become easily dislodged from its proper position. Consequently, the quality of the hearing enhancement suffers. Furthermore, due to the added manufacturing costs, it is desirable to utilize a hearing device that is at least partially formed from an off-the-shelf or pre-formed component readily available to the audiologist or physician.
While the performance of CIC hearing devices are generally superior to other larger and less sophisticated devices, several problems remain. Complications typically arise due to the small size of CIC hearing devices and the depth that they are inserted into a user's ear canal.
Because a CIC hearing device forms an essentially air tight seal between the tip of the hearing device and the wall of the ear canal, discomfort to a user is common. This acoustic seal prevents the equalization of pressure between the internal chamber formed between the tympanic membrane and the hearing device, and the outside environment. Due to the sensitivity of the tympanic membrane, even small pressure differentials can cause severe discomfort. Additionally, since the acoustic seal is formed by pressure exerted by the hearing device, this can also lead to discomfort.
Due to their small size and positioning within the ear canal, CIC hearing devices can cause handling problems, making insertion and removal by a user difficult and cumbersome, and can often lead to damage to the hearing device. In the larger, BTE, or ITC hearing devices, the size of the device usually makes it unnecessary to incorporate a retrieval mechanism into its structure, i.e., the wearer normally will not have any difficulty grasping the device in order to remove it. But in smaller hearing devices, such as a CIC device, retrieval cords and other extraction tools become a necessary addition in order to allow for easy and safe removal by the user.
Manufacturing problems may also arise when dealing with CIC hearing devices. The increased complexity of the sound processing electronics and the frequent need to fit all working components into a single housing, causes physical layout problems for the designer and manufacturer. The need to combine various hearing device elements, i.e., integrated circuits, receiver, microphone, capacitors, wiring, etc. into a single small space ultimately adds to the complexity of the manufacturing operation and the overall cost of the device. It is desirable to simplify the layout of the hearing device components and the manufacturing process to accommodate these complex systems. Designing the hearing device to minimize manual procedures during assembly is
Brimhall Owen D.
Collotzi Craig M.
Ellis Carl E.
Pauley Jerry L.
Kuntz Curtis
Lyon & Lyon LLP
Ni Suhan
Sonic Innovations
LandOfFree
Flexible circuit board assembly for a hearing aid does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Flexible circuit board assembly for a hearing aid, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Flexible circuit board assembly for a hearing aid will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2873272