Literature DB >> 12401965

Speech perception in nucleus CI24M cochlear implant users with processor settings based on electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds.

Guido F Smoorenburg1, Christina Willeboer, Johannes E van Dijk.   

Abstract

Adjusting the speech processor of a cochlear implant, per electrode, to the individual's response is a laborious task that may interfere with a user-friendly start of implant-mediated hearing, particularly in children. This research concerns the possibility of processor adjustment based on a profile derived from measurements of the electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) thresholds across the electrode array, followed by adjustment of the overall level of the profile to the hearing threshold and maximum comfortable loudness level using live voice. The results for CVC word lists show that speech perception is quite insensitive to the threshold setting of the speech processor. On average, the speech score does not decrease by more than 10% when, with the new method, the threshold setting comes out so much lower that the dynamic range has doubled. In contrast, the speech score appears to be sensitive to an increase of the maximum high-frequency stimulation settings for the basal electrodes, resulting in lower scores at these higher settings. The correlation between the overall ECAP thresholds and conventionally measured subjective thresholds is weak (r = 0.64). However, the correlation between the slopes of these threshold curves is satisfactory (r = 0.82). The correlation between the ECAP thresholds and the maximum stimulation levels is poor, both with respect to overall level and slope (r = 0.39 and 0.36, respectively). Applicability of the ECAP threshold in processor adjustment could not be demonstrated in this study. Prediction of the most critical factor in speech perception, the slope of the maximum stimulation curve, from the ECAP thresholds is poor. However, considering habituation to the initial processor setting of at least 6 months, the small decrease in the CVC scores with the new setting suggests that a more user-friendly adjustment procedure can be developed. Copyright 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12401965     DOI: 10.1159/000066154

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Audiol Neurootol        ISSN: 1420-3030            Impact factor:   1.854


  29 in total

1.  Electrophysiological Correlates of Behavioral Comfort Levels in Cochlear Implantees: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  S Raghunandhan; A Ravikumar; Mohan Kameswaran; Kalyani Mandke; R Ranjith
Journal:  Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2013-10-16

2.  Electrically evoked electroretinograms and pupil responses in Argus II retinal implant wearers.

Authors:  H Christiaan Stronks; Michael P Barry; Gislin Dagnelie
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 2.379

Review 3.  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

4.  [Refractory behaviour of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve].

Authors:  A Morsnowski; B Charasse; L Collet; M Killian; J Müller-Deile
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.284

5.  Electrically evoked auditory steady state responses in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Michael Hofmann; Jan Wouters
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2009-12-22

Review 6.  [Audiologic rehabilitation of patients with cochlear implants].

Authors:  S Hoth; J Müller-Deile
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.284

7.  Comparison of electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds and loudness estimates for the stimuli used to program the Advanced Bionics cochlear implant.

Authors:  Eun Kyung Jeon; Carolyn J Brown; Christine P Etler; Sara O'Brien; Li-Kuei Chiou; Paul J Abbas
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.664

8.  TNRT profiles with the nucleus research platform 8 system.

Authors:  W K Lai; N Dillier; B P Weber; T Lenarz; R Battmer; B Gantz; C Brown; N Cohen; S Waltzman; M Skinner; L Holden; R Cowan; P Busby; M Killian
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.117

Review 9.  Cochlear implants: system design, integration, and evaluation.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng; Stephen Rebscher; William Harrison; Xiaoan Sun; Haihong Feng
Journal:  IEEE Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2008-11-05

10.  Imaging of electrode position in relation to electrode functioning after cochlear implantation.

Authors:  Gijs K A van Wermeskerken; Adriaan F van Olphen; Kees Graamans
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2009-03-24       Impact factor: 2.503

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.