5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Spatial Speech-in-Noise Performance in Bimodal and Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This study compared spatial speech-in-noise performance in two cochlear implant (CI) patient groups: bimodal listeners, who use a hearing aid contralaterally to support their impaired acoustic hearing, and listeners with contralateral normal hearing, i.e., who were single-sided deaf before implantation. Using a laboratory setting that controls for head movements and that simulates spatial acoustic scenes, speech reception thresholds were measured for frontal speech-in-stationary noise from the front, the left, or the right side. Spatial release from masking (SRM) was then extracted from speech reception thresholds for monaural and binaural listening. SRM was found to be significantly lower in bimodal CI than in CI single-sided deaf listeners. Within each listener group, the SRM extracted from monaural listening did not differ from the SRM extracted from binaural listening. In contrast, a normal-hearing control group showed a significant improvement in SRM when using two ears in comparison to one. Neither CI group showed a binaural summation effect; that is, their performance was not improved by using two devices instead of the best monaural device in each spatial scenario. The results confirm a “listening with the better ear” strategy in the two CI patient groups, where patients benefited from using two ears/devices instead of one by selectively attending to the better one. Which one is the better ear, however, depends on the spatial scenario and on the individual configuration of hearing loss.

          Related collections

          Most cited references57

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Age-group differences in speech identification despite matched audiometrically normal hearing: contributions from auditory temporal processing and cognition

          Hearing loss with increasing age adversely affects the ability to understand speech, an effect that results partly from reduced audibility. The aims of this study were to establish whether aging reduces speech intelligibility for listeners with normal audiograms, and, if so, to assess the relative contributions of auditory temporal and cognitive processing. Twenty-one older normal-hearing (ONH; 60–79 years) participants with bilateral audiometric thresholds ≤ 20 dB HL at 0.125–6 kHz were matched to nine young (YNH; 18–27 years) participants in terms of mean audiograms, years of education, and performance IQ. Measures included: (1) identification of consonants in quiet and in noise that was unmodulated or modulated at 5 or 80 Hz; (2) identification of sentences in quiet and in co-located or spatially separated two-talker babble; (3) detection of modulation of the temporal envelope (TE) at frequencies 5–180 Hz; (4) monaural and binaural sensitivity to temporal fine structure (TFS); (5) various cognitive tests. Speech identification was worse for ONH than YNH participants in all types of background. This deficit was not reflected in self-ratings of hearing ability. Modulation masking release (the improvement in speech identification obtained by amplitude modulating a noise background) and spatial masking release (the benefit obtained from spatially separating masker and target speech) were not affected by age. Sensitivity to TE and TFS was lower for ONH than YNH participants, and was correlated positively with speech-in-noise (SiN) identification. Many cognitive abilities were lower for ONH than YNH participants, and generally were correlated positively with SiN identification scores. The best predictors of the intelligibility of SiN were composite measures of cognition and TFS sensitivity. These results suggest that declines in speech perception in older persons are partly caused by cognitive and perceptual changes separate from age-related changes in audiometric sensitivity.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Efficient adaptive procedures for threshold and concurrent slope estimates for psychophysics and speech intelligibility tests.

            The minimum standard deviations achievable for concurrent estimates of thresholds and psychometric function slopes as well as the optimal target values for adaptive procedures are calculated as functions of stimulus level and track length on the basis of the binomial theory. The optimum pair of targets for a concurrent estimate is found at the correct response probabilities p1 = 0.19 and p2 = 0.81 for the logistic psychometric function. An adaptive procedure that converges at these optimal targets is introduced and tested with Monte Carlo simulations. The efficiency increases rapidly when each subject's response consists of more than one statistically independent Bernoulli trial. Sentence intelligibility tests provide more than one Bernoulli trial per sentence when each word is scored separately. The number of within-sentence trials can be quantified by the j factor [Boothroyd and Nittrouer, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 84, 101-114 (1988)]. The adaptive procedure was evaluated with 10 normal-hearing and 11 hearing-impaired listeners using two German sentence tests that differ in j factors. The expected advantage of the sentence test with the higher j factor was not observed, possibly due to training effects. Hence, the number of sentences required for a reliable speech reception threshold (approximately 1 dB standard deviation) concurrently with a slope estimate (approximately 20%-30% relative standard deviation) is at least N = 30 if word scoring for short, meaningful sentences (j approximately 2) is performed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Comparison of pseudobinaural hearing to real binaural hearing rehabilitation after cochlear implantation in patients with unilateral deafness and tinnitus.

              Up to now, treatment modalities of unilateral deafness consist of no treatment, conventional contralateral routing of signal (CROS), or Bone-Anchored Hearing Aid (BAHA) hearing aid. Cochlear implantation makes a new treatment modality available for patients with single-sided deafness. The aim of this study is to evaluate the use of unilateral electrical stimulation with normal hearing on the contralateral side after a period of 6 months compared with the preoperative unaided situation, conventional CROS, or BAHA hearing aids. Prospective design. Tertiary referral center; cochlear implant (CI) program. Eleven adult subjects with unilateral deafness of various causes were enrolled in the study. Only those patients were included in whom therapy with CROS hearing aid or BAHA was not successful and in whom the auditory nerve was found to be intact and the cochlea patent for cochlear implantation. All subjects were fitted in random order with a BAHA Intenso mounted on the softband/tension clamp or with a CROS hearing aid. After test periods with both devices, the subjects received a CI. The Hochmair-Schulz-Moser sentence test and the Oldenburg sentence test were used to test speech comprehension in 3 presentation configurations in the unaided situation, with conventional CROS and BAHA hearing aids before cochlear implantation as well as after 6 months with CI. Localization was assessed using an array of 7 speakers at head level in a frontal semicircle. Subjective improvement in daily life was evaluated using the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale, the Health Utilities Index 3 and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids questionnaires. Tinnitus distress was measured with a tinnitus scale before and after CI implantation. The results show significant improvement in localization ability as well as in speech comprehension in most presentation configurations with the CI. Especially, there is no negative effect on speech comprehension if the noise is presented to the CI ear and speech to the normal hearing ear. With the CI, the summation and squelch effects are not significant, but a significant combined head shadow effect is seen. Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing results show an overall benefit of wearing the CI compared with the other treatment options. The tinnitus scale revealed a positive effect of CI stimulation in cases of preoperative tinnitus. The results in these patients suggest that cochlear implantation improves hearing abilities in people with single-sided deafness and is superior to the alternative treatment options. The use of the CI does not interfere with speech understanding in the normal hearing ear. Our data suggest that the binaural integration of electric and acoustic stimulation is possible even with unilateral normal hearing.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Trends Hear
                Trends Hear
                TIA
                sptia
                Trends in Hearing
                SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )
                2331-2165
                31 July 2019
                Jan-Dec 2019
                : 23
                : 2331216519858311
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Medical Physics and Cluster of Excellence “Hearing4all,” Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Germany
                [2 ]Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center – University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Germany
                [3 ]Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Germany
                [4 ]Institute of Acoustics, University of Applied Sciences Lübeck, Germany
                Author notes
                [*]Ben Williges, Medizinische Physik and Cluster of Excellence “Hearing4all,” Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg; Küpkersweg 74, 26129 Oldenburg, Germany. Email: ben.williges@ 123456uni-oldenburg.de
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7476-1334
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1481-6997
                Article
                10.1177_2331216519858311
                10.1177/2331216519858311
                6669847
                31364496
                394e4885-0445-43ad-84eb-7957371dacac
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                : 5 November 2018
                : 24 May 2019
                : 29 May 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, FundRef https://doi.org10.13039/501100001659;
                Award ID: JU2858/2-1
                Categories
                Original Article
                Custom metadata
                January-December 2019

                cochlear implant,spatial hearing,single-sided deafness,bimodal

                Comments

                Comment on this article