Virtual reality sound localization testing in cochlear implant users

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen D. Sechler ◽  
Alejandro Lopez Valdes ◽  
Saskia M. Waechter ◽  
Cristina Simoes-Franklin ◽  
Laura Viani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Localization

Comparing the Effect of Different Hearing Aid Fitting Methods in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jantien L. Vroegop ◽  
J. Gertjan Dingemanse ◽  
Marc P. van der Schroeff ◽  
André Goedegebure
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Hearing Aid Fitting ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Localization Test ◽  
Fitting Procedures ◽  
Auditory Performance ◽  
Contralateral Ear ◽  
Noise Test

PurposeThe aim of the study was to investigate the effect of 3 hearing aid fitting procedures on provided gain of the hearing aid in bimodal cochlear implant users and their effect on bimodal benefit.MethodThis prospective study measured hearing aid gain and auditory performance in a cross-over design in which 3 hearing aid fitting methods were compared. Hearing aid fitting methods differed in initial gain prescription rule (NAL-NL2 and Audiogram+) and loudness balancing method (broadband vs. narrowband loudness balancing). Auditory functioning was evaluated by a speech-in-quiet test, a speech-in-noise test, and a sound localization test. Fourteen postlingually deafened adult bimodal cochlear implant users participated in the study.ResultsNo differences in provided gain and in bimodal performance were found for the different hearing aid fittings. For all hearing aid fittings, a bimodal benefit was found for speech in noise and sound localization.ConclusionOur results confirm that cochlear implant users with residual hearing in the contralateral ear substantially benefit from bimodal stimulation. However, on average, no differences were found between different types of fitting methods, varying in prescription rule and loudness balancing method.

Sound localization in patients with cochlear implant—preliminary results

2002 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michal Luntz ◽  
Alexander Brodsky ◽  
Hava Hafner ◽  
Thalma Shpak ◽  
Hava Feiglin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Preliminary Results

Remote measurement of spectral weighting in sound localization using virtual reality headsets

2021 ◽  
Vol 150 (4) ◽  
pp. A299-A299
Author(s):  
Jwala P. Rejimon ◽  
Monica L. Folkerts ◽  
G. Christopher Stecker
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Remote Measurement ◽  
Spectral Weighting

Amount of Frequency Compression in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users Is a Poor Predictor for Audibility and Spatial Hearing

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Snandan Sharma ◽  
Waldo Nogueira ◽  
A. John van Opstal ◽  
Josef Chalupper ◽  
Lucas H. M. Mens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Spatial Hearing ◽  
Meaningful Improvement ◽  
Frequency Compression ◽  
Knee Point ◽  
Localization Performance

Purpose Speech understanding in noise and horizontal sound localization is poor in most cochlear implant (CI) users with a hearing aid (bimodal stimulation). This study investigated the effect of static and less-extreme adaptive frequency compression in hearing aids on spatial hearing. By means of frequency compression, we aimed to restore high-frequency audibility, and thus improve sound localization and spatial speech recognition. Method Sound-detection thresholds, sound localization, and spatial speech recognition were measured in eight bimodal CI users, with and without frequency compression. We tested two compression algorithms: a static algorithm, which compressed frequencies beyond the compression knee point (160 or 480 Hz), and an adaptive algorithm, which aimed to compress only consonants leaving vowels unaffected (adaptive knee-point frequencies from 736 to 2946 Hz). Results Compression yielded a strong audibility benefit (high-frequency thresholds improved by 40 and 24 dB for static and adaptive compression, respectively), no meaningful improvement in localization performance (errors remained > 30 deg), and spatial speech recognition across all participants. Localization biases without compression (toward the hearing-aid and implant side for low- and high-frequency sounds, respectively) disappeared or reversed with compression. The audibility benefits provided to each bimodal user partially explained any individual improvements in localization performance; shifts in bias; and, for six out of eight participants, benefits in spatial speech recognition. Conclusions We speculate that limiting factors such as a persistent hearing asymmetry and mismatch in spectral overlap prevent compression in bimodal users from improving sound localization. Therefore, the benefit in spatial release from masking by compression is likely due to a shift of attention to the ear with the better signal-to-noise ratio facilitated by compression, rather than an improved spatial selectivity. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16869485

Horizontal sound localization in cochlear implant users with a contralateral hearing aid

2016 ◽  
Vol 336 ◽  
pp. 72-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lidwien C.E. Veugen ◽  
Maartje M.E. Hendrikse ◽  
Marc M. van Wanrooij ◽  
Martijn J.H. Agterberg ◽  
Josef Chalupper ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Hearing Aid

C057 Speech performance and sound localization abilities in Neurelec Digisonic(r) SP Binaural cochlear implant users

2011 ◽  
Vol 75 ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
N. Verhaert ◽  
J.P. Bébéar ◽  
D.S. Lazard ◽  
D. Gnansia ◽  
Ph. Romanet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Speech Performance

scholarly journals Reducing the Device Delay Mismatch Can Improve Sound Localization in Bimodal Cochlear Implant/Hearing-Aid Users

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 233121651984387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Zirn ◽  
Julian Angermeier ◽  
Susan Arndt ◽  
Antje Aschendorff ◽  
Thomas Wesarg
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Delay Line ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Interaural Time Differences ◽  
Localization Accuracy ◽  
Everyday Situation ◽  
Acclimatization Period ◽  
Study Participants ◽  
Line P

In users of a cochlear implant (CI) together with a contralateral hearing aid (HA), so-called bimodal listeners, differences in processing latencies between digital HA and CI up to 9 ms constantly superimpose interaural time differences. In the present study, the effect of this device delay mismatch on sound localization accuracy was investigated. For this purpose, localization accuracy in the frontal horizontal plane was measured with the original and minimized device delay mismatch. The reduction was achieved by delaying the CI stimulation according to the delay of the individually worn HA. For this, a portable, programmable, battery-powered delay line based on a ring buffer running on a microcontroller was designed and assembled. After an acclimatization period to the delayed CI stimulation of 1 hr, the nine bimodal study participants showed a highly significant improvement in localization accuracy of 11.6% compared with the everyday situation without the delay line ( p < .01). Concluding, delaying CI stimulation to minimize the device delay mismatch seems to be a promising method to increase sound localization accuracy in bimodal listeners.

scholarly journals Bimodal Cochlear Implant Listeners’ Ability to Perceive Minimal Audible Angle Differences

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (08) ◽  
pp. 659-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley Zaleski-King ◽  
Matthew J. Goupell ◽  
Dragana Barac-Cikoja ◽  
Matthew Bakke
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Free Field ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Spatial Location ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Acoustic Environments ◽  
The Right

AbstractBilateral inputs should ideally improve sound localization and speech understanding in noise. However, for many bimodal listeners [i.e., individuals using a cochlear implant (CI) with a contralateral hearing aid (HA)], such bilateral benefits are at best, inconsistent. The degree to which clinically available HA and CI devices can function together to preserve interaural time and level differences (ITDs and ILDs, respectively) enough to support the localization of sound sources is a question with important ramifications for speech understanding in complex acoustic environments.To determine if bimodal listeners are sensitive to changes in spatial location in a minimum audible angle (MAA) task.Repeated-measures design.Seven adult bimodal CI users (28–62 years). All listeners reported regular use of digital HA technology in the nonimplanted ear.Seven bimodal listeners were asked to balance the loudness of prerecorded single syllable utterances. The loudness-balanced stimuli were then presented via direct audio inputs of the two devices with an ITD applied. The task of the listener was to determine the perceived difference in processing delay (the interdevice delay [IDD]) between the CI and HA devices. Finally, virtual free-field MAA performance was measured for different spatial locations both with and without inclusion of the IDD correction, which was added with the intent to perceptually synchronize the devices.During the loudness-balancing task, all listeners required increased acoustic input to the HA relative to the CI most comfortable level to achieve equal interaural loudness. During the ITD task, three listeners could perceive changes in intracranial position by distinguishing sounds coming from the left or from the right hemifield; when the CI was delayed by 0.73, 0.67, or 1.7 msec, the signal lateralized from one side to the other. When MAA localization performance was assessed, only three of the seven listeners consistently achieved above-chance performance, even when an IDD correction was included. It is not clear whether the listeners who were able to consistently complete the MAA task did so via binaural comparison or by extracting monaural loudness cues. Four listeners could not perform the MAA task, even though they could have used a monaural loudness cue strategy.These data suggest that sound localization is extremely difficult for most bimodal listeners. This difficulty does not seem to be caused by large loudness imbalances and IDDs. Sound localization is best when performed via a binaural comparison, where frequency-matched inputs convey ITD and ILD information. Although low-frequency acoustic amplification with a HA when combined with a CI may produce an overlapping region of frequency-matched inputs and thus provide an opportunity for binaural comparisons for some bimodal listeners, our study showed that this may not be beneficial or useful for spatial location discrimination tasks. The inability of our listeners to use monaural-level cues to perform the MAA task highlights the difficulty of using a HA and CI together to glean information on the direction of a sound source.

scholarly journals Pinna-Imitating Microphone Directionality Improves Sound Localization and Discrimination in Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users

2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Fischer ◽  
Christoph Schmid ◽  
Martin Kompis ◽  
Georgios Mantokoudis ◽  
Marco Caversaccio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Bilateral Cochlear Implant

scholarly journals HearMeVirtual Reality: Using Virtual Reality to Facilitate Empathy Between Hearing Impaired Children and Their Parents

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lasse Embøl ◽  
Carl Hutters ◽  
Andreas Junker ◽  
Daniel Reipur ◽  
Ali Adjorlu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Word Recognition ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
School Setting ◽  
Qualitative Evaluation ◽  
Hearing Impaired ◽  
Speech Corpus ◽  
Open Set ◽  
Localization Test

Cochlear implants (CI) enable hearing in individuals with sensorineural hearing loss, albeit with difficulties in speech perception and sound localization. In noisy environments, these difficulties are disproportionately greater for CI users than for children with no reported hearing loss. Parents of children with CIs are motivated to experience what CIs sound like, but options to do so are limited. This study proposes using virtual reality to simulate having CIs in a school setting with two contrasting settings: a noisy playground and a quiet classroom. To investigate differences between hearing conditions, an evaluation utilized a between-subjects design with 15 parents (10 female, 5 male; age M = 38.5, SD = 6.6) of children with CIs with no reported hearing loss. In the virtual environment, a word recognition and sound localization test using an open-set speech corpus compared differences between simulated unilateral CI, simulated bilateral CI, and normal hearing conditions in both settings. Results of both tests indicate that noise influences word recognition more than it influences sound localization, but ultimately affects both. Furthermore, bilateral CIs are equally to or significantly beneficial over having a simulated unilateral CI in both tests. A follow-up qualitative evaluation showed that the simulation enabled users to achieve a better understanding of what it means to be an hearing impaired child.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document