Literature DB >> 25285624

Factors constraining the benefit to speech understanding of combining information from low-frequency hearing and a cochlear implant.

Michael F Dorman1, Sarah Cook2, Anthony Spahr3, Ting Zhang2, Louise Loiselle2, David Schramm4, JoAnne Whittingham4, Rene Gifford5.   

Abstract

Many studies have documented the benefits to speech understanding when cochlear implant (CI) patients can access low-frequency acoustic information from the ear opposite the implant. In this study we assessed the role of three factors in determining the magnitude of bimodal benefit - (i) the level of CI-only performance, (ii) the magnitude of the hearing loss in the ear with low-frequency acoustic hearing and (iii) the type of test material. The patients had low-frequency PTAs (average of 125, 250 and 500 Hz) varying over a large range (<30 dB HL to >70 dB HL) in the ear contralateral to the implant. The patients were tested with (i) CNC words presented in quiet (n = 105) (ii) AzBio sentences presented in quiet (n = 102), (iii) AzBio sentences in noise at +10 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) (n = 69), and (iv) AzBio sentences at +5 dB SNR (n = 64). We find maximum bimodal benefit when (i) CI scores are less than 60 percent correct, (ii) hearing loss is less than 60 dB HL in low-frequencies and (iii) the test material is sentences presented against a noise background. When these criteria are met, some bimodal patients can gain 40-60 percentage points in performance relative to performance with a CI. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled <Lasker Award>.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25285624      PMCID: PMC4380824          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2014.09.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  22 in total

1.  Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features.

Authors:  Kenneth N Stevens
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Combined electric and contralateral acoustic hearing: word and sentence recognition with bimodal hearing.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Michael F Dorman; Sharon A McKarns; Anthony J Spahr
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.297

3.  The benefits of combining acoustic and electric stimulation for the recognition of speech, voice and melodies.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Rene H Gifford; Anthony J Spahr; Sharon A McKarns
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 1.854

4.  Critical difference table for word recognition testing derived using computer simulation.

Authors:  Edward Carney; Robert S Schlauch
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Binaural benefits for adults who use hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears.

Authors:  Teresa Y C Ching; Paula Incerti; Mandy Hill
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Clinical assessment of spectral modulation detection for adult cochlear implant recipients: a non-language based measure of performance outcomes.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Andrea Hedley-Williams; Anthony J Spahr
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 2.117

7.  Auditory models of suprathreshold distortion and speech intelligibility in persons with impaired hearing.

Authors:  Joshua G W Bernstein; Van Summers; Elena Grassi; Ken W Grant
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 1.664

8.  Dead regions in the cochlea: diagnosis, perceptual consequences, and implications for the fitting of hearing AIDS.

Authors:  B C Moore
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2001-03

9.  Validation of a clinical assessment of spectral-ripple resolution for cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Ward R Drennan; Elizabeth S Anderson; Jong Ho Won; Jay T Rubinstein
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Understanding excessive SNR loss in hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  Ken W Grant; Therese C Walden
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 1.664

View more
  19 in total

1.  Influences of noise-interruption and information-bearing acoustic changes on understanding simulated electric-acoustic speech.

Authors:  Christian Stilp; Gail Donaldson; Soohee Oh; Ying-Yee Kong
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Speech Understanding in Noise for Adults With Cochlear Implants: Effects of Hearing Configuration, Source Location Certainty, and Head Movement.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Louise Loiselle; Sarah Natale; Sterling W Sheffield; Linsey W Sunderhaus; Mary S Dietrich; Michael F Dorman
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 2.297

3.  The Effect of Binaural Beamforming Technology on Speech Intelligibility in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  Jantien L Vroegop; Nienke C Homans; André Goedegebure; J Gertjan Dingemanse; Teun van Immerzeel; Marc P van der Schroeff
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 1.854

4.  Experiments on Auditory-Visual Perception of Sentences by Users of Unilateral, Bimodal, and Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Julie Liss; Shuai Wang; Visar Berisha; Cimarron Ludwig; Sarah Cook Natale
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 2.297

Review 5.  Speech Understanding in Complex Listening Environments by Listeners Fit With Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Rene H Gifford
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  Frequency change detection and speech perception in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Fawen Zhang; Gabrielle Underwood; Kelli McGuire; Chun Liang; David R Moore; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-04-17       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Segmental and Suprasegmental Perception in Children Using Hearing Aids.

Authors:  Kaitlyn A Wenrich; Lisa S Davidson; Rosalie M Uchanski
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2017 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 1.664

8.  Effects of Early Acoustic Hearing on Speech Perception and Language for Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  Lisa S Davidson; Ann E Geers; Rosalie M Uchanski; Jill B Firszt
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 2.297

9.  Bimodal Hearing or Bilateral Cochlear Implants? Ask the Patient.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Michael F Dorman
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Results in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients With Varied Asymmetric Hearing: A Prospective Longitudinal Study of Speech Recognition, Localization, and Participant Report.

Authors:  Jill B Firszt; Ruth M Reeder; Laura K Holden; Noël Y Dwyer
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Sep/Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.