From Fitting Targets to Speech-in-Noise Testing: A New Audiology Workflow Integration
A recent audiology-software update points to a practical industry question: how can clinics connect a hearing-aid fitting decision with a measure of speech understanding in noise? On October 7, 2026, Auditdata announced that its Measure platform would include the Oldenburg Matrix Sentence Test, adding it to a workflow that already includes the NAL-NL3 fitting system. The announcement is about professional audiology software—not a new Tomore product or an OTC self-fitting feature.
What was announced
Auditdata says the Oldenburg Matrix Sentence Test became available in Measure starting with release 6.6.0. The company also says the test joins the NAL-NL3 fitting system in the same software environment. NAL-NL3 is a prescriptive fitting system developed by Australia’s National Acoustic Laboratories for hearing-care professionals. The Matrix test, developed by Hörzentrum Oldenburg, is a repeatable speech-audiometry method that assesses speech recognition in quiet and in background noise.
These tools have different roles. A fitting prescription helps a professional set amplification targets based on a person’s hearing profile. A speech-in-noise measure examines how the person understands speech under a particular test condition. Putting both into one platform may make it easier for clinics to move between those steps, but the integration itself does not establish a clinical outcome or prove that a particular device is best.
Why pairing these tools matters to clinics
A fitting prescription and a listening measure answer different questions
Audiograms and fitting targets are important, but they do not describe every listening situation a person may find difficult. Speech-in-noise testing can add a structured measure of performance in one challenging condition. A clinic may use such information alongside the person’s history, goals, device verification and follow-up—not as a stand-alone verdict.
The practical value of a connected workflow depends on how professionals interpret results, explain limitations and use the information to guide an individual care plan. A test result is not the same as a guarantee that everyday conversation will become easy.
Repeatability and language coverage are implementation considerations
The Matrix test uses short, structured sentences and is designed for repeatable speech testing in noise. Hörzentrum Oldenburg lists versions in multiple languages. Auditdata’s announcement says the initial Measure version includes 15 languages. For multi-site practices and international providers, a software buyer may want to verify the supported languages, test protocol, calibration requirements, staff training, data handling and reporting behavior for the specific release in use.
What manufacturers and channel partners should take from it
- Define the workflow boundary. Identify which steps belong to clinical assessment, fitting, verification and follow-up, and which are outside the product’s intended use.
- Ask how results are interpreted. Confirm that teams receive guidance on test conditions and limitations rather than treating a single score as a universal measure of real-world benefit.
- Check interoperability and version control. Validate supported devices, software versions, protocols, languages and reporting outputs before promising a workflow to customers.
- Keep evidence attached to claims. A fitting formula, a speech-in-noise test and a product-performance claim are different things. Each requires its own accurate description and supporting evidence.
Keep clinical fitting and OTC pathways distinct
NAL-NL3 and the Measure integration described here belong to a professional fitting and testing workflow. They should not be presented as features of an OTC hearing aid unless a specific product has that feature and its labeling supports the claim. OTC devices are intended for adults with perceived mild-to-moderate hearing loss and follow a different consumer-use pathway from prescription fitting by a hearing-care professional.
For hearing-aid manufacturers and brand owners, the broader lesson is to describe the intended user, workflow and evidence clearly. A clinical fitting system may inform product development or provider practice, but its availability does not by itself validate an OTC product or establish a benefit claim for any particular model.
A workflow signal, not a universal outcome claim
The announcement reflects continued investment in bringing assessment and fitting tools together for professional care. Its significance will depend on how clinics implement the workflow and how they combine test results with individual needs and device verification. Suppliers can use the news as a prompt to review their own product documentation, compatibility plans and customer education—without implying an affiliation with Auditdata, NAL or Hörzentrum Oldenburg.
For product teams reviewing core performance requirements, Tomore’s overview of maximum output and compression in digital hearing aids explains several device-level considerations that remain separate from clinical test software.
This article is for industry education. It does not provide clinical advice, endorse a third-party product, or claim that a specific fitting or test guarantees an individual outcome.