Literature DB >> 1397761

Performance over time with a nucleus or Ineraid cochlear implant.

N Tye-Murray1, R S Tyler, G G Woodworth, B J Gantz.   

Abstract

This investigation determined whether the audiological performance of cochlear implant users varied with experience. Thirteen Nucleus and 14 Ineraid subjects were evaluated at 1, 9, and 18 mo after cochlear implant connection. Ten Nucleus and five Ineraid subjects were tested at 30 mo. On average, the ability of the subjects to recognize words and phonemes in an audition-only condition improved during the first 9 mo, as did their ability to recognize spondees in noise. The phoneme scores continued to improve during the next 9 mo. Environmental sound recognition improved gradually; significant improvement from the 1 mo scores was not noted until 18 mo. About half of the subjects who demonstrated poor word recognition at 1 mo showed significantly improved percent word correct scores by 18 mo. The Nucleus and Ineraid subjects did not differ in their patterns of change over time. An information transmission analysis performed on the subjects' consonant confusion matrices showed relatively little change for the nasality and place features during the first 18 mo, and relatively large change for the voice, duration, and frication features. Most improvement in the feature scores occurred during the first 9 mo.

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1397761     DOI: 10.1097/00003446-199206000-00010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  12 in total

1.  Modelling encapsulation tissue around cochlear implant electrodes.

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

2.  Relative contributions of spectral and temporal cues for phoneme recognition.

Authors:  Li Xu; Catherine S Thompson; Bryan E Pfingst
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Perceptual learning of spectrally degraded speech and environmental sounds.

Authors:  Jeremy L Loebach; David B Pisoni
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  The Relationship Between Environmental Sound Awareness and Speech Recognition Skills in Experienced Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Michael S Harris; Lauren Boyce; David B Pisoni; Valeriy Shafiro; Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 2.311

5.  Change in Speech Perception and Auditory Evoked Potentials over Time after Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Postlingually Deaf Adults.

Authors:  Suzanne C Purdy; Andrea S Kelly
Journal:  Semin Hear       Date:  2016-02

6.  Perception of environmental sounds by experienced cochlear implant patients.

Authors:  Valeriy Shafiro; Brian Gygi; Min-Yu Cheng; Jay Vachhani; Megan Mulvey
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  The production of English inflectional morphology, speech production and listening performance in children with cochlear implants.

Authors:  L J Spencer; N Tye-Murray; J B Tomblin
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Relationships between speech production and speech perception skills in young cochlear-implant users.

Authors:  N Tye-Murray; L Spencer; E Gilbert-Bedia
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Nonlinguistic Outcome Measures in Adult Cochlear Implant Users Over the First Year of Implantation.

Authors:  Ward R Drennan; Jong Ho Won; Alden O Timme; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  How Does Quality of Life Relate to Auditory Abilities? A Subitem Analysis of the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire.

Authors:  Kara J Vasil; Jessica Lewis; Terrin Tamati; Christin Ray; Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 1.664

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.