Literature DB >> 30261772

Assessment of speech recognition abilities in quiet and in noise: a comparison between self-administered home testing and testing in the clinic for adult cochlear implant users.

Feike de Graaff1, Elke Huysmans1, Paul Merkus1, S Theo Goverts1, Cas Smits1.   

Abstract

Self speech recognition tests in quiet and noise at home are compared to the standard tests performed in the clinic. Potential effects of stimuli presentation modes (loudspeaker or audio cable) and assessment (clinician or self-assessment at home) on test results were investigated. Speech recognition in quiet was assessed using the standard Dutch test with monosyllabic words. Speech recognition in noise was assessed with the digits-in-noise test. Sixteen experienced CI users (aged between 44 and 83 years) participated. No significant difference was observed in speech recognition in quiet between and presentation modes. Speech recognition in noise was significantly better with the audio cable than with the loudspeaker. There was no significant difference in speech recognition in quiet at 65 dB and in speech recognition in noise between self-assessment at home and testing in the clinic. At 55 dB, speech recognition assessed at home was slightly but significantly better than that assessed in the clinic. The results demonstrate that it is feasible for experienced CI users to perform self-administered speech recognition tests at home. Self-assessment by CI users of speech recognition in quiet and noise within the home environment could serve as an alternative to the tests performed in the clinic.

Keywords:  Cochlear implant; audio cable; consonant-vowel-consonant; digits-in-noise; direct connect; self-administered home tests; speech recognition

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30261772     DOI: 10.1080/14992027.2018.1506168

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Audiol        ISSN: 1499-2027            Impact factor:   2.117


  5 in total

1.  FreeHear: A New Sound-Field Speech-in-Babble Hearing Assessment Tool.

Authors:  David R Moore; Helen Whiston; Melanie Lough; Antonia Marsden; Harvey Dillon; Kevin J Munro; Michael A Stone
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2019 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

2.  Our experience with home self-assessment of speech recognition in the care pathway of 10 newly implanted adult cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Feike de Graaff; Elke Huysmans; Birgit Philips; Paul Merkus; S Theo Goverts; Sophia E Kramer; Cas Smits
Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 2.597

3.  Home-Based Speech Perception Monitoring for Clinical Use With Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Astrid van Wieringen; Sara Magits; Tom Francart; Jan Wouters
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 4.677

4.  FORUM: Remote testing for psychological and physiological acoustics.

Authors:  Z Ellen Peng; Sebastian Waz; Emily Buss; Yi Shen; Virginia Richards; Hari Bharadwaj; G Christopher Stecker; Jordan A Beim; Adam K Bosen; Meredith D Braza; Anna C Diedesch; Claire M Dorey; Andrew R Dykstra; Frederick J Gallun; Raymond L Goldsworthy; Lincoln Gray; Eric C Hoover; Antje Ihlefeld; Thomas Koelewijn; Judy G Kopun; Juraj Mesik; Daniel E Shub; Jonathan H Venezia
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-05       Impact factor: 2.482

5.  Reward Enhances Online Participants' Engagement With a Demanding Auditory Task.

Authors:  Roberta Bianco; Gordon Mills; Mathilde de Kerangal; Stuart Rosen; Maria Chait
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2021 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.