Literature DB >> 30374211

Bimodal Hearing in Individuals with Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss: Benefits, Challenges, and Management.

Sarah E Warren1,2, M Noelle Dunbar3.   

Abstract

Binaural hearing offers numerous advantages over monaural hearing. While bilateral implants are a successful treatment option for some patients, many individuals choose to achieve binaural hearing by using a cochlear implant with a contralateral hearing aid. Compared with monaural hearing, benefits of bimodal hearing include improved speech perception in quiet and in noise, improved localization, and more natural sound quality. Despite the advantages, there exist disadvantages to bimodal hearing, primarily related to binaural integration. Management of these devices can be challenging in that the hearing aid and cochlear implant may be managed by different clinicians. When fitting devices, strategies are recommended to optimize the integration of input from both devices. In managing bimodal devices, recommended outcomes measures include those that would reflect bimodal benefit, such as speech understanding in noise and spatial sound quality perception.

Entities:  

Keywords:  asymmetric; bimodal; binaural; cochlear implant; hearing aid

Year:  2018        PMID: 30374211      PMCID: PMC6203455          DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1670706

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Semin Hear        ISSN: 0734-0451


  48 in total

1.  Assessing cochlear implant benefit in very young children.

Authors:  S Zimmerman-Phillips; A M Robbins; M J Osberger
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl       Date:  2000-12

2.  Evaluating meaningful auditory integration in profoundly hearing-impaired children.

Authors:  A M Robbins; J J Renshaw; S W Berry
Journal:  Am J Otol       Date:  1991

3.  Sound Localization and Speech Perception in Noise of Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients: Bimodal Fitting Versus Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Ji Eun Choi; Il Joon Moon; Eun Yeon Kim; Hee-Sung Park; Byung Kil Kim; Won-Ho Chung; Yang-Sun Cho; Carolyn J Brown; Sung Hwa Hong
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  New version of the TEN test with calibrations in dB HL.

Authors:  Brian C J Moore; Brian R Glasberg; Michael A Stone
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  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

6.  How much residual hearing is 'useful' for music perception with cochlear implants?

Authors:  Fouad El Fata; Chris J James; Marie-Laurence Laborde; Bernard Fraysse
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2009-04-22       Impact factor: 1.854

7.  Matching Automatic Gain Control Across Devices in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Lidwien C E Veugen; Josef Chalupper; Ad F M Snik; A John van Opstal; Lucas H M Mens
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 8.  Pediatric Minimum Speech Test Battery.

Authors:  Kristin Uhler; Andrea Warner-Czyz; Rene Gifford; Pmstb Working Group
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  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

10.  Validation of the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire.

Authors:  Richard S Tyler; Ann E Perreau; Haihong Ji
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.570

View more
  1 in total

1.  Changes in Speech-Related Brain Activity During Adaptation to Electro-Acoustic Hearing.

Authors:  Tobias Balkenhol; Elisabeth Wallhäusser-Franke; Nicole Rotter; Jérôme J Servais
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 4.003

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.