Literature DB >> 11545227

Effects of electrode configuration and stimulus level on rate and level discrimination with cochlear implants.

D J Morris1, B E Pfingst.   

Abstract

Recent studies have demonstrated that speech perception with cochlear implants can be significantly affected by electrode configuration. Contrary to expectations, broader configurations (monopolar or broad bipolar) produced equal or better speech recognition compared with narrower configurations (narrow bipolar or common ground). One hypothesis that would account for these results is that broader configurations excite larger populations of neurons providing a more robust representation of information on each channel of the prosthesis. It is known that the number of neurons excited by an electrical stimulus increases considerably as the stimulus level increases. Furthermore, many types of discrimination improve as a function of stimulus level. If the discrimination improvements seen with increasing stimulus level are due to increasing the size of the neural population carrying the signal, and if broadening the electrode configuration also increases the size of the activated neural population, then one would expect level and electrode configuration to affect discrimination in similar ways. To test this hypothesis, we studied several types of discrimination as a function of level and electrode configuration in four nonhuman primates with cochlear implants. We tested electrode configurations that produced current fields ranging from very restricted (tripolar) to broad (parallel monopolar). For each configuration, pulse-rate discrimination, amplitude-modulation-frequency discrimination, and level discrimination were tested at current levels spanning much of the psychophysical dynamic range. Results showed large effects of current level on discrimination in many cases. However, effects of electrode configuration at comparable levels within the dynamic range were smaller or absent. Furthermore, the effect of level on discrimination was independent of electrode configuration in most cases even though the rate of spread of neural activation with level is expected to depend on electrode configuration. Possible interpretations of these results are that (1) the current level adjustments necessary to achieve comparable loudness for the various configurations significantly countered any effects of electrode configuration on the size of the activated neural population, or (2) the effects of level on discrimination do not result from its effects on the spatial extent of neural activation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11545227      PMCID: PMC2504544          DOI: 10.1007/s101620010022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol        ISSN: 1438-7573


  11 in total

1.  Multichannel place pitch sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients.

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

2.  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

3.  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

4.  Effects of stimulation rate, mode and level on modulation detection by cochlear implant users.

Authors:  John J Galvin; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2005-09

5.  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

6.  Psychophysical assessment of stimulation sites in auditory prosthesis electrode arrays.

Authors:  Bryan E Pfingst; Rose A Burkholder-Juhasz; Teresa A Zwolan; Li Xu
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2007-11-28       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Simulating the effect of spread of excitation in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Mohamed Bingabr; Blas Espinoza-Varas; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2008-05-10       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Modeling the electrode-neuron interface of cochlear implants: effects of neural survival, electrode placement, and the partial tripolar configuration.

Authors:  Joshua H Goldwyn; Steven M Bierer; Julie Arenberg Bierer
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-05-24       Impact factor: 3.208

9.  Relationship between gap detection thresholds and loudness in cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  Soha N Garadat; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-12-17       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Estimating health of the implanted cochlea using psychophysical strength-duration functions and electrode configuration.

Authors:  Soha N Garadat; Deborah J Colesa; Donald L Swiderski; Yehoash Raphael; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2021-11-27       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.