PURPOSE: Electric acoustic stimulation (EAS) relies on the preservation of low-frequency hearing and adequate amplification of these frequencies. EAS has been achieved by fitting the cochlear implant (CI) speech processor together with an ipsilateral in-the-ear hearing aid. This study will evaluate the outcomes when CI/EAS users upgrade to a new combination of hearing aid and speech processor in 1 device (DUET). METHOD: Nine EAS patients participated in this study. Before switchover and after 2 and 8 months of DUET device use, they were assessed using monosyllables and sentences in quiet and in noise. Additionally, a questionnaire, the Abbreviated Profile for Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), was used to evaluate subjective impressions. RESULTS: All subjects performed equally well, or even better, after switchover. This was also demonstrated over time. The participants with EAS before switchover performed equally afterwards, while those who used CI only did markedly better with the new device, especially in noisy conditions. Slight preference for the new system was also demonstrated with the APHAB. CONCLUSION: All subjects showed benefit in noise; CI-only users before switchover particularly benefited from the new hearing system. Those who applied EAS before switchover performed equally well. The DUET allows individuals better access to EAS. Copyright 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.
PURPOSE: Electric acoustic stimulation (EAS) relies on the preservation of low-frequency hearing and adequate amplification of these frequencies. EAS has been achieved by fitting the cochlear implant (CI) speech processor together with an ipsilateral in-the-ear hearing aid. This study will evaluate the outcomes when CI/EAS users upgrade to a new combination of hearing aid and speech processor in 1 device (DUET). METHOD: Nine EASpatients participated in this study. Before switchover and after 2 and 8 months of DUET device use, they were assessed using monosyllables and sentences in quiet and in noise. Additionally, a questionnaire, the Abbreviated Profile for Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB), was used to evaluate subjective impressions. RESULTS: All subjects performed equally well, or even better, after switchover. This was also demonstrated over time. The participants with EAS before switchover performed equally afterwards, while those who used CI only did markedly better with the new device, especially in noisy conditions. Slight preference for the new system was also demonstrated with the APHAB. CONCLUSION: All subjects showed benefit in noise; CI-only users before switchover particularly benefited from the new hearing system. Those who applied EAS before switchover performed equally well. The DUET allows individuals better access to EAS. Copyright 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.
Authors: Guilherme Machado de Carvalho; Alexandre C Guimaraes; Alexandre S M Duarte; Eder B Muranaka; Marcelo N Soki; Renata S Zanotello Martins; Walter A Bianchini; Jorge R Paschoal; Arthur M Castilho Journal: Int J Otolaryngol Date: 2013-03-17