Literature DB >> 19390441

BKB-SIN and ANL predict perceived communication ability in cochlear implant users.

Gail S Donaldson1, Theresa H Chisolm, Georgina P Blasco, Leslie J Shinnick, Katie J Ketter, Jean C Krause.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Cochlear implant (CI) users typically report that speech recognition becomes substantially more difficult in the presence of background noise. This perception is consistent with objective measures of speech recognition showing that CI users require more favorable signal-to-noise ratios than normal-hearing (NH) listeners to achieve equivalent speech recognition. However, recent research in hearing aid users suggests that noise tolerance or the "willingness to listen in noise" may also influence perceived communication ability. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the extent to which speech recognition in noise and noise tolerance predict perceived communication ability among adult CI users.
DESIGN: Twenty adult CI users were evaluated on an objective test of speech recognition in noise (Bamford-Kowal-Bench Sentences in Noise [BKB-SIN] test) and a measure of noise tolerance (Acceptable Noise Level [ANL] test) and completed a self-report measure of communication difficulty (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit [APHAB]). Relationships between BKB-SIN scores, ANL scores, and aided APHAB scores for the ease of communication, background noise, reverberation, and Global scales were assessed. In addition, BKB-SIN scores and ANL scores for the CI users were compared with scores for a control group of 23 NH listeners.
RESULTS: CI users demonstrated substantially poorer BKB-SIN scores than NH listeners, as expected; however, their ANL scores were similar to those for NH listeners. BKB-SIN scores and ANL scores were not systematically related to one another. Each measure accounted for more than one third of the variance in CI users' aided APHAB Global scores; together, the two measures accounted for 72% of that variance.
CONCLUSIONS: Both speech recognition in noise and noise tolerance are strongly associated with CI users' self-perceived communication ability. The two measures seem to reflect different factors that influence an individual's communication experience; thus, both may provide useful clinical information. The establishment of formal criteria for BKB-SIN scores and ANL scores that are predictive of excessive communication difficulty may help to identify CI users who could benefit from additional audiologic rehabilitation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19390441     DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181a16379

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  15 in total

1.  Optimizing the perception of soft speech and speech in noise with the Advanced Bionics cochlear implant system.

Authors:  Laura K Holden; Ruth M Reeder; Jill B Firszt; Charles C Finley
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2011-01-28       Impact factor: 2.117

2.  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

3.  Effect of stimulus and recording parameters on spatial spread of excitation and masking patterns obtained with the electrically evoked compound action potential in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Michelle L Hughes; Lisa J Stille
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Cochlear implantation in adults with asymmetric hearing loss.

Authors:  Jill B Firszt; Laura K Holden; Ruth M Reeder; Lisa Cowdrey; Sarah King
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2012 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Discrimination of Stochastic Frequency Modulation by Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Stanley Sheft; Min-Yu Cheng; Valeriy Shafiro
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.664

6.  Sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in a patient with bilateral Ménière's disease.

Authors:  Laura K Holden; J Gail Neely; Brenda D Gotter; Karen M Mispagel; Jill B Firszt
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.664

7.  Within-subjects comparison of the HiRes and Fidelity120 speech processing strategies: speech perception and its relation to place-pitch sensitivity.

Authors:  Gail S Donaldson; Patricia K Dawson; Lamar Z Borden
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  [Results of clinical use of the German version of the APHAB].

Authors:  J Löhler; L Moser; D Heinrich; K Hörmann; L E Walther
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.284

9.  Postlingual adult performance in noise with HiRes 120 and ClearVoice Low, Medium, and High.

Authors:  Laura K Holden; Christine Brenner; Ruth M Reeder; Jill B Firszt
Journal:  Cochlear Implants Int       Date:  2013-05-15

10.  Advantages of binaural amplification to acceptable noise level of directional hearing aid users.

Authors:  Ja-Hee Kim; Jae Hee Lee; Ho-Ki Lee
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-05-21       Impact factor: 3.372

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.