OBJECTIVES: The goals of this study were (1) to describe the relationship between electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) and electrically evoked auditory brainstem response (EABR) amplitude growth functions and loudness growth functions in bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users, and (2) to determine whether matching the stimulus levels in the two ears of bilateral CI users based on equal ECAP amplitude, EABR amplitude, or current level resulted in the smallest discrepancy in loudness rating across the two ears. DESIGN: Ten adult, bilateral CI users participated in this study. The stimulus used to elicit loudness judgments and generate ECAP and EABR growth functions was a train of biphasic current pulses (32 μs/phase) presented at a rate of 23 pps. Loudness growth functions were obtained with a method of constant stimuli. ECAPs were measured using the implant telemetry system. EABR growth functions were recorded using surface electrodes and standard averaging techniques. Both ears of each subject were tested. For each ear, ECAP, EABR, and loudness functions were recorded using both an apical and basal stimulating electrode. Both the physiologic and psychophysical growth functions were fit using linear regression techniques. RESULTS: Comparison of the regression equations obtained for the two ears revealed that stimulus levels that yielded approximately equal ECAP amplitudes in the two ears were judged to differ in loudness, on average, by 20% for electrode 3 and 14% for electrode 13. Stimulation levels that evoked similar amplitude EABRs differed in loudness, on average, by 50% for electrode 3 and 13% for electrode 13. Matched stimulus current levels were judged to differ in loudness, on average, by 14% for electrode 3 and 16% for electrode 13. No significant differences in loudness discrepancy across ears derived from equal amplitude ECAP, EABR, or matched current levels were found. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that stimuli that evoke equal amplitude neural responses in both ears of a bilateral CI user or which are matched in current level cannot be assumed to be perceived as equally loud. No statistically significant differences in accuracy were found between ECAP, EABR, or matched current levels or between the basal and apical electrode in approximations of equal loudness.
OBJECTIVES: The goals of this study were (1) to describe the relationship between electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) and electrically evoked auditory brainstem response (EABR) amplitude growth functions and loudness growth functions in bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users, and (2) to determine whether matching the stimulus levels in the two ears of bilateral CI users based on equal ECAP amplitude, EABR amplitude, or current level resulted in the smallest discrepancy in loudness rating across the two ears. DESIGN: Ten adult, bilateral CI users participated in this study. The stimulus used to elicit loudness judgments and generate ECAP and EABR growth functions was a train of biphasic current pulses (32 μs/phase) presented at a rate of 23 pps. Loudness growth functions were obtained with a method of constant stimuli. ECAPs were measured using the implant telemetry system. EABR growth functions were recorded using surface electrodes and standard averaging techniques. Both ears of each subject were tested. For each ear, ECAP, EABR, and loudness functions were recorded using both an apical and basal stimulating electrode. Both the physiologic and psychophysical growth functions were fit using linear regression techniques. RESULTS: Comparison of the regression equations obtained for the two ears revealed that stimulus levels that yielded approximately equal ECAP amplitudes in the two ears were judged to differ in loudness, on average, by 20% for electrode 3 and 14% for electrode 13. Stimulation levels that evoked similar amplitude EABRs differed in loudness, on average, by 50% for electrode 3 and 13% for electrode 13. Matched stimulus current levels were judged to differ in loudness, on average, by 14% for electrode 3 and 16% for electrode 13. No significant differences in loudness discrepancy across ears derived from equal amplitude ECAP, EABR, or matched current levels were found. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that stimuli that evoke equal amplitude neural responses in both ears of a bilateral CI user or which are matched in current level cannot be assumed to be perceived as equally loud. No statistically significant differences in accuracy were found between ECAP, EABR, or matched current levels or between the basal and apical electrode in approximations of equal loudness.
Authors: Frederic Venail; Thibault Mura; Mohamed Akkari; Caroline Mathiolon; Sophie Menjot de Champfleur; Jean Pierre Piron; Marielle Sicard; Françoise Sterkers-Artieres; Michel Mondain; Alain Uziel Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-07-05 Impact factor: 3.411