Literature DB >> 16938779

Benefits of bilateral cochlear implants and/or hearing aids in children.

Ruth Y Litovsky1, Patti M Johnstone, Shelly P Godar.   

Abstract

This study evaluated functional benefits from bilateral stimulation in 20 children ages 4-14, 10 use two CIs and 10 use one CI and one HA. Localization acuity was measured with the minimum audible angle (MAA). Speech intelligibility was measured in quiet, and in the presence of 2-talker competing speech using the CRISP forced-choice test. Results show that both groups perform similarly when speech reception thresholds are evaluated. However, there appears to be benefit (improved MAA and speech thresholds) from wearing two devices compared with a single device that is significantly greater in the group with two CI than in the bimodal group. Individual variability also suggests that some children perform similarly to normal-hearing children, while others clearly do not. Future advances in binaural fitting strategies and improved speech processing schemes that maximize binaural sensitivity will no doubt contribute to increasing the binaurally-driven advantages in persons with bilateral CIs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16938779      PMCID: PMC2644458          DOI: 10.1080/14992020600782956

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Audiol        ISSN: 1499-2027            Impact factor:   2.117


  34 in total

1.  Sound localization in bilateral users of MED-EL COMBI 40/40+ cochlear implants.

Authors:  P Nopp; P Schleich; P D'Haese
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Exploring the benefits of bilateral cochlear implants.

Authors:  Richard J M van Hoesel
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.854

3.  Cochlear implant speech recognition with speech maskers.

Authors:  Ginger S Stickney; Fan-Gang Zeng; Ruth Litovsky; Peter Assmann
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Spectral subtraction-based speech enhancement for cochlear implant patients in background noise.

Authors:  Li-Ping Yang; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 1.840

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 perception in noise with implant and hearing aid.

Authors:  M Armstrong; P Pegg; C James; P Blamey
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1997-11

7.  Developmental changes in the precedence effect: estimates of minimum audible angle.

Authors:  R Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Sound localization precision under conditions of the precedence effect: effects of azimuth and standard stimuli.

Authors:  R Y Litovsky; N A Macmillan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Should children who use cochlear implants wear hearing aids in the opposite ear?

Authors:  T Y Ching; C Psarros; M Hill; H Dillon; P Incerti
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 10.  Trends in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2004
View more
  59 in total

1.  Clinical selection criteria for a second cochlear implant for bimodal listeners.

Authors:  Yang-soo Yoon; You-Ree Shin; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.311

2.  Spatial release from masking in children with normal hearing and with bilateral cochlear implants: effect of interferer asymmetry.

Authors:  Sara M Misurelli; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Spatial release from masking in children with bilateral cochlear implants and with normal hearing: Effect of target-interferer similarity.

Authors:  Sara M Misurelli; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Speech intelligibility in free field: spatial unmasking in preschool children.

Authors:  Soha N Garadat; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Comparison of speech recognition and localization performance in bilateral and unilateral cochlear implant users matched on duration of deafness and age at implantation.

Authors:  Camille C Dunn; Richard S Tyler; Sarah Oakley; Bruce J Gantz; William Noble
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Speech recognition by bilateral cochlear implant users in a cocktail-party setting.

Authors:  Philipos C Loizou; Yi Hu; Ruth Litovsky; Gongqiang Yu; Robert Peters; Jennifer Lake; Peter Roland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Restoration of spatial hearing in adult cochlear implant users with single-sided deafness.

Authors:  Ruth Y Litovsky; Keng Moua; Shelly Godar; Alan Kan; Sara M Misurelli; Daniel J Lee
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-04-14       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Cochlear implantation in nontraditional candidates: preliminary results in adolescents with asymmetric hearing loss.

Authors:  Jamie H Cadieux; Jill B Firszt; Ruth M Reeder
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.311

9.  Spoken word recognition in toddlers who use cochlear implants.

Authors:  Tina M Grieco-Calub; Jenny R Saffran; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.297

10.  Effect of age at onset of deafness on binaural sensitivity in electric hearing in humans.

Authors:  Ruth Y Litovsky; Gary L Jones; Smita Agrawal; Richard van Hoesel
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.