Literature DB >> 11335077

Psychophysics of a prototype peri-modiolar cochlear implant electrode array.

L T Cohen1, E Saunders, G M Clark.   

Abstract

Psychophysical measurements were performed in three hearing-impaired adult subjects implanted with a CI22 cochlear prosthesis (Cochlear Ltd.) fitted with a developmental peri-modiolar electrode array. The array was manufactured with a curvature approximating that of the inner wall of the scala tympani but, after straightening and insertion, lay on average about half way between the inner and outer walls of the scala. All subjects were tested with bipolar stimulation; two were also tested with monopolar, employing the most basal electrode as the return. Maximum comfortable level and threshold reduced with decreasing distance of electrode from the modiolus, whereas dynamic range increased. The linearity of the loudness growth function did not vary significantly with electrode position but the function was more non-linear for lower maximum comfortable levels. Current level discrimination, normalized with respect to dynamic range, improved with decreasing distance of electrode from the modiolus in two subjects. Pitch varied regularly with insertion depth of the stimulated electrode for bipolar stimulation in two subjects and also for monopolar stimulation in one subject. Electrode discrimination was enhanced by closeness to the modiolus. Whereas the forward masking patterns for bipolar stimulation of electrodes close to the modiolus had a sharp double-peaked structure, those for monopolar stimulation were flatter and had a single peak.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11335077     DOI: 10.1016/s0378-5955(01)00248-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  23 in total

Review 1.  Cochlear implants and brain stem implants.

Authors:  Richard T Ramsden
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.291

2.  Multichannel place pitch sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients.

Authors:  Johan Laneau; Jan Wouters
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2004-05-27

3.  Monopolar intracochlear pulse trains selectively activate the inferior colliculus.

Authors:  Matthew C Schoenecker; Ben H Bonham; Olga A Stakhovskaya; Russell L Snyder; Patricia A Leake
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2012-06-22

4.  Modelling encapsulation tissue around cochlear implant electrodes.

Authors:  T Hanekom
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.602

5.  Effects of stimulation mode, level and location on forward-masked excitation patterns in cochlear implant patients.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu; Robert V Shannon
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-11-04

Review 6.  The development of the Nucleus Freedom Cochlear implant system.

Authors:  James F Patrick; Peter A Busby; Peter J Gibson
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-12

7.  Cochlear implant electrode configuration effects on activation threshold and tonotopic selectivity.

Authors:  Russell L Snyder; John C Middlebrooks; Ben H Bonham
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-10-11       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Psychophysical versus physiological spatial forward masking and the relation to speech perception in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Lisa J Stille
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Forward-masked spatial tuning curves in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  David A Nelson; Gail S Donaldson; Heather Kreft
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  A relation between electrode discrimination and amplitude modulation detection by cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Monita Chatterjee; Jian Yu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.