Literature DB >> 34291758

No Benefit of Deriving Cochlear-Implant Maps From Binaural Temporal-Envelope Sensitivity for Speech Perception or Spatial Hearing Under Single-Sided Deafness.

Coral E Dirks1,2, Peggy B Nelson1,2, Andrew J Oxenham2,3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study tested whether speech perception and spatial acuity improved in people with single-sided deafness and a cochlear implant (SSD+CI) when the frequency allocation table (FAT) of the CI was adjusted to optimize frequency-dependent sensitivity to binaural disparities.
DESIGN: Nine SSD+CI listeners with at least 6 months of CI listening experience participated. Individual experimental FATs were created to best match the frequency-to-place mapping across ears using either sensitivity to binaural temporal-envelope disparities or estimated insertion depth. Spatial localization ability was measured, along with speech perception in spatially collocated or separated noise, first with the clinical FATs and then with the experimental FATs acutely and at 2-month intervals for 6 months. Listeners then returned to the clinical FATs and were retested acutely and after 1 month to control for long-term learning effects.
RESULTS: The experimental FAT varied between listeners, differing by an average of 0.15 octaves from the clinical FAT. No significant differences in performance were observed in any of the measures between the experimental FAT after 6 months and the clinical FAT one month later, and no clear relationship was found between the size of the frequency-allocation shift and perceptual changes.
CONCLUSION: Adjusting the FAT to optimize sensitivity to interaural temporal-envelope disparities did not improve localization or speech perception. The clinical frequency-to-place alignment may already be sufficient, given the inherently poor spectral resolution of CIs. Alternatively, other factors, such as temporal misalignment between the two ears, may need to be addressed before any benefits of spectral alignment can be observed.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34291758      PMCID: PMC8770730          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001094

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


  57 in total

1.  The role of perceived spatial separation in the unmasking of speech.

Authors:  R L Freyman; K S Helfer; D D McCall; R K Clifton
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Frequency-place map for electrical stimulation in cochlear implants: Change over time.

Authors:  Katrien Vermeire; David M Landsberger; Paul H Van de Heyning; Maurits Voormolen; Andrea Kleine Punte; Reinhold Schatzer; Clemens Zierhofer
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Effects of interaural pitch matching and auditory image centering on binaural sensitivity in cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Alan Kan; Ruth Y Litovsky; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Cochlear implant treatment of patients with single-sided deafness or asymmetric hearing loss.

Authors:  S Arndt; R Laszig; A Aschendorff; F Hassepass; R Beck; T Wesarg
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 1.284

5.  Review: Bone conduction devices and contralateral routing of sound systems in single-sided deafness.

Authors:  Jeroen P M Peters; Adriana L Smit; Inge Stegeman; Wilko Grolman
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2014-08-14       Impact factor: 3.325

6.  Cochlear implantation as a long-term treatment for ipsilateral incapacitating tinnitus in subjects with unilateral hearing loss up to 10 years.

Authors:  Griet Mertens; Marc De Bodt; Paul Van de Heyning
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2015-10-24       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Multidimensional scaling between acoustic and electric stimuli in cochlear implant users with contralateral hearing.

Authors:  Katrien Vermeire; David M Landsberger; Peter Schleich; Paul H Van de Heyning
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 3.208

8.  Having Two Ears Facilitates the Perceptual Separation of Concurrent Talkers for Bilateral and Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implantees.

Authors:  Joshua G W Bernstein; Matthew J Goupell; Gerald I Schuchman; Arnaldo L Rivera; Douglas S Brungart
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Self-Adjusted Amplification Parameters Produce Large Between-Subject Variability and Preserve Speech Intelligibility.

Authors:  Peggy B Nelson; Trevor T Perry; Melanie Gregan; Dianne VanTasell
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2018 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

10.  Sound Localization in Real-Time Vocoded Cochlear-Implant Simulations With Normal-Hearing Listeners.

Authors:  Sebastian A Ausili; Bradford Backus; Martijn J H Agterberg; A John van Opstal; Marc M van Wanrooij
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2019 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Considerations for Fitting Cochlear Implants Bimodally and to the Single-Sided Deaf.

Authors:  Sabrina H Pieper; Noura Hamze; Stefan Brill; Sabine Hochmuth; Mats Exter; Marek Polak; Andreas Radeloff; Michael Buschermöhle; Mathias Dietz
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2022 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.496

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.