Literature DB >> 29049602

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

Michael F Dorman1, Rene H Gifford2.   

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this article is to summarize recent published and unpublished research from our 2 laboratories on improving speech understanding in complex listening environments by listeners fit with cochlear implants (CIs). Method: CI listeners were tested in 2 listening environments. One was a simulation of a restaurant with multiple, diffuse noise sources, and the other was a cocktail party with 2 spatially separated point sources of competing speech. At issue was the value of the following sources of information, or interventions, on speech understanding: (a) visual information, (b) adaptive beamformer microphones and remote microphones, (c) bimodal fittings, that is, a CI and contralateral low-frequency acoustic hearing, (d) hearing preservation fittings, that is, a CI with preserved low-frequency acoustic in the same ear plus low-frequency acoustic hearing in the contralateral ear, and (e) bilateral CIs.
Results: A remote microphone provided the largest improvement in speech understanding. Visual information and adaptive beamformers ranked next, while bimodal fittings, bilateral fittings, and hearing preservation provided significant but less benefit than the other interventions or sources of information. Only bilateral CIs allowed listeners high levels of speech understanding when signals were roved over the frontal plane. Conclusions: The evidence supports the use of bilateral CIs and hearing preservation surgery for best speech understanding in complex environments. These fittings, when combined with visual information and microphone technology, should lead to high levels of speech understanding by CI patients in complex listening environments. Presentation Video: http://cred.pubs.asha.org/article.aspx?articleid=2601622.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29049602      PMCID: PMC5945071          DOI: 10.1044/2017_JSLHR-H-17-0035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res        ISSN: 1092-4388            Impact factor:   2.297


  42 in total

1.  Speech understanding in background noise with the two-microphone adaptive beamformer BEAM in the Nucleus Freedom Cochlear Implant System.

Authors:  Ann Spriet; Lieselot Van Deun; Kyriaky Eftaxiadis; Johan Laneau; Marc Moonen; Bas van Dijk; Astrid van Wieringen; Jan Wouters
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Auditory-visual speech perception in normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.

Authors:  Sheetal Desai; Ginger Stickney; Fan-Gang Zeng
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  European multi-centre study of the Nucleus Hybrid L24 cochlear implant.

Authors:  Thomas Lenarz; Chris James; Domenico Cuda; Alec Fitzgerald O'Connor; Bruno Frachet; Johan H M Frijns; Thomas Klenzner; Roland Laszig; Manuel Manrique; Mathieu Marx; Paul Merkus; Emmanuel A M Mylanus; Erwin Offeciers; Joerg Pesch; Angel Ramos-Macias; Alain Robier; Olivier Sterkers; Alain Uziel
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2013-09-02       Impact factor: 2.117

4.  Estimation of Signal-to-Noise Ratios in Realistic Sound Scenarios.

Authors:  Karolina Smeds; Florian Wolters; Martin Rung
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 1.664

5.  Using ILD or ITD Cues for Sound Source Localization and Speech Understanding in a Complex Listening Environment by Listeners With Bilateral and With Hearing-Preservation Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Louise H Loiselle; Michael F Dorman; William A Yost; Sarah J Cook; Rene H Gifford
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 2.297

6.  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

Review 7.  Cochlear implants: system design, integration, and evaluation.

Authors:  Fan-Gang Zeng; Stephen Rebscher; William Harrison; Xiaoan Sun; Haihong Feng
Journal:  IEEE Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2008-11-05

8.  Speech Understanding and Sound Source Localization by Cochlear Implant Listeners Using a Pinna-Effect Imitating Microphone and an Adaptive Beamformer.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Sarah Natale; Louise Loiselle
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  Patient performance over eighteen months with the Ineraid intracochlear implant.

Authors:  R F Gray; S J Quinn; I Court; Z Vanat; D M Baguley
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl       Date:  1995-09

10.  Advanced beamformers for cochlear implant users: acute measurement of speech perception in challenging listening conditions.

Authors:  Andreas Buechner; Karl-Heinz Dyballa; Phillipp Hehrmann; Stefan Fredelake; Thomas Lenarz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  9 in total

1.  Introduction to the Research Symposium Forum.

Authors:  Karen S Helfer
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  Effect of Microphone Configuration and Sound Source Location on Speech Recognition for Adult Cochlear Implant Users with Current-Generation Sound Processors.

Authors:  Robert T Dwyer; Jillian Roberts; René H Gifford
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 1.664

3.  Effects of the "Active Communication Education" Program on Hearing-Related Quality of Life in a Group of Italian Older Adults Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Ilaria Giallini; Maria Nicastri; Bianca M S Inguscio; Ginevra Portanova; Giuseppe Magliulo; Antonio Greco; Patrizia Mancini
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-05-20

4.  Speech Recognition in Noise for Adults With Normal Hearing: Age-Normative Performance for AzBio, BKB-SIN, and QuickSIN.

Authors:  Jourdan T Holder; Laura M Levin; René H Gifford
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 2.311

5.  Adaptation of the Standardized Hearing Outcomes Scattergram to Hearing Preservation in Cochlear Implantation.

Authors:  Elizabeth L Perkins; Nauman F Manzoor; David S Haynes; Matthew O'Malley; René Gifford; Alejandro Rivas
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 2.311

Review 6.  Electro-Haptic Stimulation: A New Approach for Improving Cochlear-Implant Listening.

Authors:  Mark D Fletcher; Carl A Verschuur
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 4.677

7.  Current Profile of Adults Presenting for Preoperative Cochlear Implant Evaluation.

Authors:  Jourdan T Holder; Susan M Reynolds; Linsey W Sunderhaus; René H Gifford
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2018 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

8.  Evaluating hearing performance with cochlear implants within the same patient using daily randomization and imaging-based fitting - The ELEPHANT study.

Authors:  L J G Lambriks; M van Hoof; J A Debruyne; M Janssen; J Chalupper; K A van der Heijden; J R Hof; C A Hellingman; E L J George; E M J Devocht
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 2.279

9.  The Reality of Hearing Preservation in Cochlear Implantation: Who Is Utilizing EAS?

Authors:  Elizabeth Perkins; Jaclyn Lee; Nauman Manzoor; Matthew O'Malley; Marc Bennett; Robert Labadie; Alejandro Rivas; David Haynes; René Gifford
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 2.311

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.