Literature DB >> 19052929

1-year results using the Opus speech processor with the fine structure speech coding strategy.

Dominik Riss1, Christoph Arnoldner, Sonja Reiss, Wolf-Dieter Baumgartner, Jafar-Sasan Hamzavi.   

Abstract

CONCLUSION: In contrast to the Tempo+ the new Opus speech processor stimulates with the new fine structure programming (FSP) speech coding strategy and offers an extended frequency spectrum. A significant improvement in speech perception for sentences at 10 dB SNR (signal to noise ratio) was observable.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term effects on speech perception in quiet and in noise with the Opus speech processor using FSP. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eight post-lingually deaf patients implanted with Pulsar cochlear implants and fitted with Tempo+ speech processors (both MED-EL) for a minimum of 1 year were tested at baseline with Tempo+ using continuous interleaved sampling (CIS), and at 1 year follow-up with the Opus speech processor using FSP. Monosyllables and sentence tests were performed in quiet, and sentence tests (HSM) in noise with 15, 10 and 5 dB SNR.
RESULTS: Mean speech perception scores showed a trend towards improvement for all tests. A statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvement was only observed for the sentence test in noise at 10 dB SNR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19052929     DOI: 10.1080/00016480802552485

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol        ISSN: 0001-6489            Impact factor:   1.494


  8 in total

1.  Comparing the effects of reverberation and of noise on speech recognition in simulated electric-acoustic listening.

Authors:  Kate Helms Tillery; Christopher A Brown; Sid P Bacon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Relative contributions of temporal envelope and fine structure cues to lexical tone recognition in hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  Shuo Wang; Li Xu; Robert Mannell
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2011-08-11

3.  Effects of hearing loss on the subcortical representation of speech cues.

Authors:  Samira Anderson; Alexandra Parbery-Clark; Travis White-Schwoch; Sarah Drehobl; Nina Kraus
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Spatial hearing benefits demonstrated with presentation of acoustic temporal fine structure cues in bilateral cochlear implant listeners.

Authors:  Tyler H Churchill; Alan Kan; Matthew J Goupell; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Comparison of two cochlear implant coding strategies on speech perception.

Authors:  Margaret T Dillon; Emily Buss; English R King; Ellen J Deres; Sarah N Obarowski; Meredith L Anderson; Marcia C Adunka
Journal:  Cochlear Implants Int       Date:  2016-10-18

6.  Auditory Speech Perception Tests in Relation to the Coding Strategy in Cochlear Implant.

Authors:  Aline Cristine Bazon; Erika Barioni Mantello; Alina Sanches Gonçales; Myriam de Lima Isaac; Miguel Angelo Hyppolito; Ana Cláudia Mirândola Barbosa Reis
Journal:  Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2015-07-28

Review 7.  Assessment and improvement of sound quality in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Meredith T Caldwell; Nicole T Jiam; Charles J Limb
Journal:  Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol       Date:  2017-05-28

8.  Temporal Pitch Perception in Cochlear-Implant Users: Channel Independence in Apical Cochlear Regions.

Authors:  Andreas Griessner; Reinhold Schatzer; Viktor Steixner; Gunesh P Rajan; Clemens Zierhofer; Dayse Távora-Vieira
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.