Literature DB >> 34133400

Novel Approaches to Measure Spatial Release From Masking in Children With Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Z Ellen Peng1, Ruth Y Litovsky.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the role of auditory cues for spatial release from masking (SRM) in children with bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) and compare their performance with children with normal hearing (NH). To quantify the contribution to speech intelligibility benefits from individual auditory cues: head shadow, binaural redundancy, and interaural differences; as well as from multiple cues: SRM and binaural squelch. To assess SRM using a novel approach of adaptive target-masker angular separation, which provides a more functionally relevant assessment in realistic complex auditory environments.
DESIGN: Children fitted with BiCIs (N = 11) and with NH (N = 18) were tested in virtual acoustic space that was simulated using head-related transfer functions measured from individual children with BiCIs behind the ear and from a standard head and torso simulator for all NH children. In experiment I, by comparing speech reception thresholds across 4 test conditions that varied in target-masker spatial separation (colocated versus separated at 180°) and listening conditions (monaural versus binaural/bilateral listening), intelligibility benefits were derived for individual auditory cues for SRM. In experiment II, SRM was quantified using a novel measure to find the minimum angular separation (MAS) between the target and masker to achieve a fixed 20% intelligibility improvement. Target speech was fixed at either +90 or -90° azimuth on the side closer to the better ear (+90° for all NH children) and masker locations were adaptively varied.
RESULTS: In experiment I, children with BiCIs as a group had smaller intelligibility benefits from head shadow than NH children. No group difference was observed in benefits from binaural redundancy or interaural difference cues. In both groups of children, individuals who gained a larger benefit from interaural differences relied less on monaural head shadow, and vice versa. In experiment II, all children with BiCIs demonstrated measurable MAS thresholds <180° and on average larger than that from NH children. Eight of 11 children with BiCIs and all NH children had a MAS threshold <90°, requiring interaural differences only to gain the target intelligibility benefit; whereas the other 3 children with BiCIs had a MAS between 120° and 137°, requiring monaural head shadow for SRM.
CONCLUSIONS: When target and maskers were separated at 180° on opposing hemifields, children with BiCIs demonstrated greater intelligibility benefits from head shadow and interaural differences than previous literature showed with a smaller separation. Children with BiCIs demonstrated individual differences in using auditory cues for SRM. From the MAS thresholds, more than half of the children with BiCIs demonstrated robust access to interaural differences without needing additional monaural head shadow for SRM. Both experiments led to the conclusion that individualized fitting strategies in the bilateral devices may be warranted to maximize spatial hearing for children with BiCIs in complex auditory environments.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34133400      PMCID: PMC8671563          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001080

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.562


  72 in total

1.  Spatial release from informational masking in speech recognition.

Authors:  R L Freyman; U Balakrishnan; K S Helfer
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Redundant Information Is Sometimes More Beneficial Than Spatial Information to Understand Speech in Noise.

Authors:  Benjamin Dieudonné; Tom Francart
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Sound localization skills in children who use bilateral cochlear implants and in children with normal acoustic hearing.

Authors:  Tina M Grieco-Calub; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Binaural release from masking with single- and multi-electrode stimulation in children with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Ann E Todd; Matthew J Goupell; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Speech-in-Noise and Quality-of-Life Measures in School-Aged Children With Normal Hearing and With Unilateral Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Amanda M Griffin; Sarah F Poissant; Richard L Freyman
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Spatial release from masking in normal-hearing children and children who use hearing aids.

Authors:  Teresa Y C Ching; Emma van Wanrooy; Harvey Dillon; Lyndal Carter
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Binaural redundancy and inter-aural time difference cues for patients wearing a cochlear implant and a hearing aid in opposite ears.

Authors:  Teresa Y C Ching; Emma van Wanrooy; Mandy Hill; Harvey Dillon
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.117

8.  Using Microphone Technology to Improve Speech Perception in Noise in Children with Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Patti M Johnstone; Kristen E T Mills; Elizabeth Humphrey; Kelly R Yeager; Emily Jones; Kelly McElligott; Amy Pierce; Smita Agrawal; Crista Froeling; John P Little
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S).

Authors:  Sharon Cameron; Harvey Dillon
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Development of Sound Localization Strategies in Children with Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Yi Zheng; Shelly P Godar; Ruth Y Litovsky
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.