P A Busby1, G M Clark. 1. Department of Otolaryngology, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to determine whether electrode discrimination by early-deafened subjects using the Cochlear Limited prosthesis varied at different locations on the electrode array, was influenced by the effects of auditory deprivation and experience with electric stimulation, and was related to speech perception. DESIGN: Difference limens for electrode discrimination were measured in 16 early-deafened subjects at three positions on the array: electrodes 18 (apical), 14 (mid), and 8 (basal). Electrodes were stimulated using random variations in current level to minimize the influence of loudness cues. Assessed were correlations between the difference limens, subject variables related to auditory deprivation (age at onset of deafness, duration of deafness, and age at implantation) and auditory experience (duration of implant use and the total time period of auditory experience), and speech perception scores from two closed-set and two open-set tests. RESULTS: The average difference limens across the three positions were less than two electrodes for 75% of subjects, with average limens between 2 and 6.5 electrodes for the remaining 25% of subjects. Significant differences across the three positions were found for 69% of subjects. The average limens and those at the basal position positively correlated with variables related to auditory deprivation, with larger limens for subjects implanted at a later age and with a longer duration of deafness. The average limens and those at the apical position negatively correlated with closed-set speech perception scores, with lower scores for subjects with larger limens, but not with open-set scores. Speech scores also negatively correlated with variables related to auditory deprivation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings showed that early-deafened subjects were generally successful in electrode discrimination although performance varied across the array for over half the subjects. Discrimination performance was influenced by the effects of auditory deprivation, and both electrode discrimination and variables related to auditory deprivation influenced closed-set speech perception.
OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to determine whether electrode discrimination by early-deafened subjects using the Cochlear Limited prosthesis varied at different locations on the electrode array, was influenced by the effects of auditory deprivation and experience with electric stimulation, and was related to speech perception. DESIGN: Difference limens for electrode discrimination were measured in 16 early-deafened subjects at three positions on the array: electrodes 18 (apical), 14 (mid), and 8 (basal). Electrodes were stimulated using random variations in current level to minimize the influence of loudness cues. Assessed were correlations between the difference limens, subject variables related to auditory deprivation (age at onset of deafness, duration of deafness, and age at implantation) and auditory experience (duration of implant use and the total time period of auditory experience), and speech perception scores from two closed-set and two open-set tests. RESULTS: The average difference limens across the three positions were less than two electrodes for 75% of subjects, with average limens between 2 and 6.5 electrodes for the remaining 25% of subjects. Significant differences across the three positions were found for 69% of subjects. The average limens and those at the basal position positively correlated with variables related to auditory deprivation, with larger limens for subjects implanted at a later age and with a longer duration of deafness. The average limens and those at the apical position negatively correlated with closed-set speech perception scores, with lower scores for subjects with larger limens, but not with open-set scores. Speech scores also negatively correlated with variables related to auditory deprivation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings showed that early-deafened subjects were generally successful in electrode discrimination although performance varied across the array for over half the subjects. Discrimination performance was influenced by the effects of auditory deprivation, and both electrode discrimination and variables related to auditory deprivation influenced closed-set speech perception.
Authors: Lina A J Reiss; Christopher W Turner; Sue A Karsten; Sheryl R Erenberg; Jessica Taylor; Bruce J Gantz Journal: J Acoust Soc Am Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 1.840