Pitch ranking ability of cochlear implant recipients: A comparison of sound-processing strategies

2005 ◽  
Vol 117 (5) ◽  
pp. 3126-3138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew E. Vandali ◽  
Catherine Sucher ◽  
David J. Tsang ◽  
Colette M. McKay ◽  
Jason W. D. Chew ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Sound Processing ◽  
Processing Strategies

The Effects of Paired versus Sequential Stimulation on Speech Recognition Outcomes of Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Meredith A. Holcomb ◽  
James R. Dornhoffer ◽  
Theodore R McRackan
Keyword(s):  
Speech Recognition ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Processing Strategy ◽  
Sound Processing ◽  
Processing Strategies

<b><i>Purpose:</i></b> Cochlear implant (CI) sound-processing strategies are important to the overall success of a CI recipient. This study aimed to determine the effects of 2 Advanced Bionics (AB) CI-processing strategies, Optima-S and Optima-P, on speech recognition outcomes in adult CI users. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A retrospective chart review was completed at a tertiary academic medical center. Seventeen post-lingually deafened adult CI users (median age = 58.6 years; age range: 23.5–78.9 years) with long-term use of a paired sound-processing strategy (Optima-P) were reprogrammed with a sequential strategy (Optima-S). Demographic data and speech recognition scores with pre- and post-intervention analyses were collected and compared with respect to the 95% confidence interval for common CI word and sentence recognition tests. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Using Optima-S sound-processing strategy, all patients (100%) performed equivalent or better on word and sentence testing than with Optima-P. More specifically, 17.6, 41.2, and 58.8% of the patients performed above the 95% confidence interval for speech recognition conditions of monosyllabic words, sentences in quiet, and sentences in noise, respectively. All patients (100%) selected Optima-S as their preferred strategy for future CI use. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Speech recognition performance with Optima-S processing strategy was stable or improved compared to results with Optima-P in all tested conditions, and subjective preference of Optima-S was selected by all patients. Given these results, CI clinicians should consider programming AB CI users with Optima-S sound-processing strategy to optimize overall speech recognition performance.

An Introduction to Cochlear Implant Technology, Activation, and Programming

2002 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 153-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan A. Moore ◽  
Holly F. B. Teagle
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Speech Processing ◽  
Academic Development ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
School Age ◽  
Technology In The Classroom ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
Cochlear Implant Surgery

Over the last decade, cochlear implantation has become an increasingly viable alternative for the treatment of profound sensorineural hearing loss in children. Although speech and hearing professionals play an important role in the communicative, social, and academic development of children with cochlear implants, many may be unfamiliar with recent advances in implant technology. This article provides an overview of the components of cochlear implant systems and the speech processing strategies that are currently being used by toddlers, preschoolers, and school-age children. A brief description of cochlear implant surgery and the procedures for programming these devices are also included. Finally, information regarding the use of assistive listening technology in the classroom is presented.

Comparison of Sound Processing Strategies for Osseointegrated Bone Conduction Implants in Mixed Hearing Loss

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 598-603 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jolien B. J. Desmet ◽  
Arjan J. Bosman ◽  
Ad F. M. Snik ◽  
Peggy Lambrechts ◽  
Myrthe K. S. Hol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Sound Processing ◽  
Mixed Hearing Loss ◽  
Processing Strategies

scholarly journals Assessing the relationship between neural health measures and speech performance with simultaneous electric stimulation in cochlear implant listeners

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. e0261295
Author(s):  
Florian Langner ◽  
Julie G. Arenberg ◽  
Andreas Büchner ◽  
Waldo Nogueira
Keyword(s):  
Cochlear Implant ◽  
Growth Function ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Signal To Noise ◽  
Indirect Measure ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
Speech Performance ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Offset Effect

Objectives The relationship between electrode-nerve interface (ENI) estimates and inter-subject differences in speech performance with sequential and simultaneous channel stimulation in adult cochlear implant listeners were explored. We investigated the hypothesis that individuals with good ENIs would perform better with simultaneous compared to sequential channel stimulation speech processing strategies than those estimated to have poor ENIs. Methods Fourteen postlingually deaf implanted cochlear implant users participated in the study. Speech understanding was assessed with a sentence test at signal-to-noise ratios that resulted in 50% performance for each user with the baseline strategy F120 Sequential. Two simultaneous stimulation strategies with either two (Paired) or three sets of virtual channels (Triplet) were tested at the same signal-to-noise ratio. ENI measures were estimated through: (I) voltage spread with electrical field imaging, (II) behavioral detection thresholds with focused stimulation, and (III) slope (IPG slope effect) and 50%-point differences (dB offset effect) of amplitude growth functions from electrically evoked compound action potentials with two interphase gaps. Results A significant effect of strategy on speech understanding performance was found, with Triplets showing a trend towards worse speech understanding performance than sequential stimulation. Focused thresholds correlated positively with the difference required to reach most comfortable level (MCL) between Sequential and Triplet strategies, an indirect measure of channel interaction. A significant offset effect (difference in dB between 50%-point for higher eCAP growth function slopes with two IPGs) was observed. No significant correlation was observed between the slopes for the two IPGs tested. None of the measures used in this study correlated with the differences in speech understanding scores between strategies. Conclusions The ENI measure based on behavioral focused thresholds could explain some of the difference in MCLs, but none of the ENI measures could explain the decrease in speech understanding with increasing pairs of simultaneously stimulated electrodes in processing strategies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document