Literature DB >> 25413720

Population-based prediction of fitting levels for individual cochlear implant recipients.

Feddo B van der Beek1, Jeroen J Briaire, Johan H M Frijns.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study analyzed the predictability of fitting levels for cochlear implant recipients based on a review of the clinical levels of the recipients.
DESIGN: Data containing threshold levels (T-levels) and maximum comfort levels (M-levels) for 151 adult subjects using a CII/HiRes 90K cochlear implant with a HiFocus 1/1 J electrode were used. The 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 90th percentiles of the T- and M-levels are reported. Speech perception of the subjects, using a HiRes speech coding strategy, was measured during routine clinical follow-up.
RESULTS: T-levels for most subjects were between 20 and 35% of their M-levels and were rarely (<1/50) below 10% of the M-levels. Furthermore, both T- and M-levels showed an increase over the first year of follow-up. Interestingly, levels expressed in linear charge units showed a clear increase in dynamic range (DR) over 1 year (29.8 CU; SD 73.0), whereas the DR expressed in decibels remained stable. T-level and DR were the only fitting parameters for which a significant correlation with speech perception (r = 0.34, p < 0.01, and r = 0.33, p < 0.01, respectively) could be demonstrated. Additionally, analysis showed that T- and M-level profiles expressed in decibels were independent of the subjects' across-site mean levels. Using mixed linear models, predictive models were obtained for the T- and M-levels of all separate electrode contacts.
CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the data set from 151 subjects, clinically applicable predictive models for T- and M-levels have been obtained. Based on one psychophysical measurement and a population-based T- or M-level profile, individual recipients' T- and M-levels can be approximated with a closed-set formula. Additionally, the analyzed fitting level data can serve as a reference for future patients.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25413720     DOI: 10.1159/000362779

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Audiol Neurootol        ISSN: 1420-3030            Impact factor:   1.854


  5 in total

Review 1.  [Cochlear implant fitting strategies].

Authors:  U Hoppe; T Liebscher; J Hornung
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  Electrically Evoked Auditory Event-Related Responses in Patients with Auditory Brainstem Implants: Morphological Characteristics, Test-Retest Reliability, Effects of Stimulation Level, and Association with Auditory Detection.

Authors:  Shuman He; Tyler C McFayden; Holly F B Teagle; Matthew Ewend; Lillian Henderson; Craig A Buchman
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 3.  The Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential: From Laboratory to Clinic.

Authors:  Shuman He; Holly F B Teagle; Craig A Buchman
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2017-06-23       Impact factor: 4.677

4.  Correlation between Speech Perception Outcomes after Cochlear Implantation and Postoperative Acoustic and Electric Hearing Thresholds.

Authors:  Ursina Rüegg; Adrian Dalbert; Dorothe Veraguth; Christof Röösli; Alexander Huber; Flurin Pfiffner
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-01-17       Impact factor: 4.241

5.  The Relationship Between Impedance, Programming and Word Recognition in a Large Clinical Dataset of Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  Benjamin Caswell-Midwinter; Elizabeth M Doney; Meisam K Arjmandi; Kelly N Jahn; Barbara S Herrmann; Julie G Arenberg
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.