Literature DB >> 15891645

Sound localization and sensitivity to interaural cues in bilateral users of the Med-El Combi 40/40+cochlear implant system.

F Schoen1, J Mueller, J Helms, P Nopp.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate sound localization in subjects bilaterally implanted with MED-EL COMBI 40/40+ cochlear implants. In addition, the sensitivity to interaural cues was assessed.
METHODS: In the localization test (11 subjects), CCITT noise (500 ms, original and HRTF-filtered, 70/75/80 dB sound pressure level) was presented from one of seven loudspeakers between -90 degrees and 90 degrees azimuth. The subject had to indicate which loudspeaker the noise was presented from. Sensitivity to interaural level differences (ILD) was assessed by performing localization tests (4 subjects) with the loudness of the two speech processors unbalanced to various degrees. To investigate the subjects' sensitivity to interaural time differences (ITD), lateralization was measured (7 subjects) as a function of the time difference between two Gaussian-like pulses, each directed to one of the subject's speech processor microphones by way of headphones.
RESULTS: The judgments of all subjects significantly correlated with the positions of the loudspeakers. The scatter in the judged azimuth measured by the standard deviation of the responses was on average 27.5 degrees . Unbalanced loudness of the speech processors produced a bias in azimuth toward the speech processor with the louder volume setting. The mean rate of shift was 1.4 degrees per unit on the Wuerzburg loudness scale. Six of seven subjects showed a significant sensitivity to ITDs with the approximate time difference required for complete lateralization being 1,200 micros on an average. The one subject not showing a sensitivity to ITDs performed worst in the localization test.
CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral cochlear implantation can restore spatial hearing in cochlear implant users. Both ILDs and ITDs are used by bilateral cochlear implant users in sound localization with ILDs appearing to be the dominant cue.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15891645     DOI: 10.1097/01.mao.0000169772.16045.86

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otol Neurotol        ISSN: 1531-7129            Impact factor:   2.311


  22 in total

1.  Current and planned cochlear implant research at New York University Laboratory for Translational Auditory Research.

Authors:  Mario A Svirsky; Matthew B Fitzgerald; Arlene Neuman; Elad Sagi; Chin-Tuan Tan; Darlene Ketten; Brett Martin
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.664

2.  A longitudinal study in adults with sequential bilateral cochlear implants: time course for individual ear and bilateral performance.

Authors:  Ruth M Reeder; Jill B Firszt; Laura K Holden; Michael J Strube
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-06-01       Impact factor: 2.297

Review 3.  MED-EL Cochlear implants: state of the art and a glimpse into the future.

Authors:  Ingeborg Hochmair; Peter Nopp; Claude Jolly; Marcus Schmidt; Hansjörg Schösser; Carolyn Garnham; Ilona Anderson
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2006-12

4.  Evidence that cochlear-implanted deaf patients are better multisensory integrators.

Authors:  J Rouger; S Lagleyre; B Fraysse; S Deneve; O Deguine; P Barone
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-04-02       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Neural and behavioral sensitivity to interaural time differences using amplitude modulated tones with mismatched carrier frequencies.

Authors:  Deidra A Blanks; Jason M Roberts; Emily Buss; Joseph W Hall; Douglas C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2007-07-27

6.  Models of brainstem responses to bilateral electrical stimulation.

Authors:  H Steven Colburn; Yoojin Chung; Yi Zhou; Andrew Brughera
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2008-10-22

7.  The use of interaural time and level difference cues by bilateral cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Justin M Aronoff; Yang-Soo Yoon; Daniel J Freed; Andrew J Vermiglio; Ivan Pal; Sigfrid D Soli
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  The importance of being flexible.

Authors:  Ingeborg Hochmair
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 53.440

Review 9.  [Bilateral cochlear implants].

Authors:  J Müller
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 1.284

10.  Auditory motion tracking ability of adults with normal hearing and with bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Keng Moua; Alan Kan; Heath G Jones; Sara M Misurelli; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.