Literature DB >> 16220284

[A multicentre comparative study of the ESPrit and the Nucleus 22].

K Berger1, H Bagus, H Michels, J Roth, B Voss, T Klenzner.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cochlear implant recipients often report additional difficulty in comprehension of speech in noisy conditions and of softly spoken speech. The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate and compare the performance advantages offered by the ear level ESPrit 3G for experienced Nucleus Mini 22 cochlear implantees. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight German-speaking implanted subjects, who had had experience with either the Spectra 22 or the ESPrit 22 for at least 6 months, were evaluated with their current processor and the ESPrit 3G (on microphone, M, and whisper, W, settings) following a 4-week trial. Freiburger monosyllabic words (FMW) were used at soft and conversational levels in quiet conditions and Oldenburger sentences (OLSA) were used in noisy conditions to compare performance. Subjective impressions of sound quality and user aspects were evaluated and combined with data from 31 English-speaking subjects from a parallel study.
RESULTS: In comparison to the previously worn processor, statistically significantly superior performance (p<0.001) was observed at soft and conversational levels in quiet conditions for FMW in 15 subjects when using the W setting and in noisy conditions for the OLSA in 21 subjects when using the M setting (p<0.001). The ESPrit 3G was preferred by 86% of subjects (51/59).
CONCLUSION: The ESPrit 3G for Nucleus 22 users has the potential to further improve speech understanding in quiet conditions at soft intensity levels and also in noisy conditions at conversational levels relative to the currently worn speech processor, the Spectra 22 or the ESPrit 22, for the majority of subjects. Subjectively, together with the improvement in sound quality, the majority of subjects also reported improved ease of use and wearer comfort.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16220284     DOI: 10.1007/s00106-005-1325-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HNO        ISSN: 0017-6192            Impact factor:   1.284


  16 in total

1.  [Cochlear implant management today].

Authors:  Joachim Müller
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  Speech understanding in quiet and noise in bilateral users of the MED-EL COMBI 40/40+ cochlear implant system.

Authors:  Joachim Müller; F Schön; J Helms
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 3.  [Current developments in cochlear implantation].

Authors:  R Laszig; A Aschendorff; J Schipper; T Klenzner
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 1.284

4.  Binaural benefits for adults who use hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears.

Authors:  Teresa Y C Ching; Paula Incerti; Mandy Hill
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Effects of noise and spectral resolution on vowel and consonant recognition: acoustic and electric hearing.

Authors:  Q J Fu; R V Shannon; X Wang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Speech understanding in quiet and in noise with the CIS speech-coding strategy (MED EL Combi-40) compared to the MPEAK and SPEAK strategies (Nucleus).

Authors:  J Kiefer; J Müller; T Pfenningdorff; F Schön; J Helms; C von Ilberg; W D Baumgartner; W Gstoettner; K Ehrenberger; W Arnold; K Stephan; W Thumfart; S Baur
Journal:  Adv Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  1997

7.  The nucleus 24 contour cochlear implant system: adult clinical trial results.

Authors:  Aaron J Parkinson; Jennifer Arcaroli; Steven J Staller; Patti L Arndt; Anne Cosgriff; Kiara Ebinger
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Effects of noise on speech discrimination in cochlear implant patients.

Authors:  J Müller-Deile; B J Schmidt; H Rudert
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl       Date:  1995-09

9.  Evaluation of a portable two-microphone adaptive beamforming speech processor with cochlear implant patients.

Authors:  R J van Hoesel; G M Clark
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Speech perception performance in experienced cochlear-implant patients receiving the SPEAK processing strategy in the Nucleus Spectra-22 cochlear implant.

Authors:  A J Parkinson; W S Parkinson; R S Tyler; M W Lowder; B J Gantz
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 2.297

View more
  5 in total

1.  [Influence of "novel" speech processors on the speech perception performance of cochlear implant users].

Authors:  I Baljić
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  [Discrimination of musical pitch with cochlear implants].

Authors:  S Haumann; R Mühler; M Ziese; H von Specht
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 1.284

3.  Speech comprehension across multiple CI processor generations: Scene dependent signal processing.

Authors:  Matthias Hey; Britta Böhnke; Alexander Mewes; Patrick Munder; Stefan J Mauger; Thomas Hocke
Journal:  Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol       Date:  2021-06-15

4.  Speech audiometry and data logging in CI patients : Implications for adequate test levels.

Authors:  M Hey; T Hocke; P Ambrosch
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.284

5.  [Speech audiometry and data logging in CI patients : Implications for adequate test levels. German version].

Authors:  M Hey; T Hocke; P Ambrosch
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.284

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.