Michael S Harris1, Marcia Hay-McCutcheon. 1. DeVault Otologic Research Laboratory, Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA. michharr@iupui.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study was to assess the appropriateness of hearing aid fittings within a sample of adult cochlear implant recipients who use a hearing aid in the contralateral ear (i.e., bimodal stimulation). METHODS: The hearing aid gain was measured using real ear testing for 14 postlingually deaf English-speaking adults who use a cochlear implant in the contralateral ear. Unaided and aided audiometric testing assessed the degree of functional gain derived from hearing aid use. RESULTS: On average, the target to actual output level difference was within 10 dB only at frequencies of 750 Hz and 1,000 Hz. Only 1 of the 14 study participants had a hearing aid for which the majority of the tested frequencies were within 10 dB of the target gain. In addition, a greater amount of functional gain (i.e., the increase in unaided behavioral thresholds after amplification) was provided for lower frequencies than higher frequencies. CONCLUSIONS: Hearing aid settings in our sample were suboptimal and may be regarded as a contributing factor to the variability in bimodal benefit. Refining hearing aid fitting strategies tailored to the needs of the concurrent cochlear implant and hearing aid user is recommended.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study was to assess the appropriateness of hearing aid fittings within a sample of adult cochlear implant recipients who use a hearing aid in the contralateral ear (i.e., bimodal stimulation). METHODS: The hearing aid gain was measured using real ear testing for 14 postlingually deaf English-speaking adults who use a cochlear implant in the contralateral ear. Unaided and aided audiometric testing assessed the degree of functional gain derived from hearing aid use. RESULTS: On average, the target to actual output level difference was within 10 dB only at frequencies of 750 Hz and 1,000 Hz. Only 1 of the 14 study participants had a hearing aid for which the majority of the tested frequencies were within 10 dB of the target gain. In addition, a greater amount of functional gain (i.e., the increase in unaided behavioral thresholds after amplification) was provided for lower frequencies than higher frequencies. CONCLUSIONS: Hearing aid settings in our sample were suboptimal and may be regarded as a contributing factor to the variability in bimodal benefit. Refining hearing aid fitting strategies tailored to the needs of the concurrent cochlear implant and hearing aid user is recommended.
Authors: Lorienne M Jenstad; Marlene P Bagatto; Richard C Seewald; Susan D Scollie; Leonard E Cornelisse; Ron Scicluna Journal: Ear Hear Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 3.570
Authors: C Morera; M Manrique; A Ramos; L Garcia-Ibanez; L Cavalle; A Huarte; C Castillo; E Estrada Journal: Acta Otolaryngol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 1.494
Authors: Michael S Harris; Aaron C Moberly; Ben L Hamel; Kara Vasil; Christina L Runge; William J Riggs; Valeriy Shafiro Journal: J Speech Lang Hear Res Date: 2021-03-02 Impact factor: 2.674
Authors: Elke M J Devocht; A Miranda L Janssen; Josef Chalupper; Robert J Stokroos; Herman Kingma; Erwin L J George Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-12-03 Impact factor: 3.240