Bimodal Hearing or Bilateral Cochlear Implants? Ask the Patient

被引:34
|
作者
Gifford, Rene H. [1 ]
Dorman, Michael F. [2 ]
机构
[1] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Hearing & Speech Sci, Nashville, TN 37232 USA
[2] Arizona State Univ, Dept Speech & Hearing Sci, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
来源
EAR AND HEARING | 2019年 / 40卷 / 03期
关键词
Bilateral cochlear implants; Bimodal hearing; Cochlear implants hearing aid; Evidence-based practice; Speech recognition; SOUND SOURCE LOCALIZATION; INTERAURAL LEVEL DIFFERENCES; SPEECH RECOGNITION; MUSIC PERCEPTION; TIME DIFFERENCES; ELECTRIC-STIMULATION; ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; BINAURAL BENEFITS; RESIDUAL HEARING; HEAD SHADOW;
D O I
10.1097/AUD.0000000000000657
中图分类号
R36 [病理学]; R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100104 ; 100213 ;
摘要
Objective: The objectives of this study were to assess the effectiveness of various measures of speech understanding in distinguishing performance differences between adult bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipients and to provide a preliminary evidence-based tool guiding clinical decisions regarding bilateral CI candidacy. Design: This study used a multiple-baseline, cross-sectional design investigating speech recognition performance for 85 experienced adult CI recipients (49 bimodal, 36 bilateral). Speech recognition was assessed in a standard clinical test environment with a single loudspeaker using the minimum speech test battery for adult CI recipients as well as with an R-SPACE (TM) 8-loudspeaker, sound-simulation system. All participants were tested in three listening conditions for each measure including each ear alone as well as in the bilateral/bimodal condition. In addition, we asked each bimodal listener to provide a yes/no answer to the question, "Do you think you need a second CI?" Results: This study yielded three primary findings: (1) there were no significant differences between bimodal and bilateral CI performance or binaural summation on clinical measures of speech recognition, (2) an adaptive speech recognition task in the R-SPACE (TM) system revealed significant differences in performance and binaural summation between bimodal and bilateral CI users, with bilateral CI users achieving significantly better performance and greater summation, and (3) the patient's answer to the question, "Do you think you need a second CI?" held high sensitivity (100% hit rate) for identifying likely bilateral CI candidates and moderately high specificity (77% correct rejection rate) for correctly identifying listeners best suited with a bimodal hearing configuration. Conclusions: Clinics cannot rely on current clinical measures of speech understanding, with a single loudspeaker, to determine bilateral CI candidacy for adult bimodal listeners nor to accurately document bilateral benefit relative to a previous bimodal hearing configuration. Speech recognition in a complex listening environment, such as R-SPACE (TM), is a sensitive and appropriate measure for determining bilateral CI candidacy and also likely for documenting bilateral benefit relative to a previous bimodal configuration. In the absence of an available R-SPACE (TM) system, asking the patient whether or not s/he thinks s/he needs a second CI is a highly sensitive measure, which may prove clinically useful.
引用
收藏
页码:501 / 516
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A Within-Subject Comparison of Bimodal Hearing, Bilateral Cochlear Implantation, and Bilateral Cochlear Implantation With Bilateral Hearing Preservation: High-Performing Patients
    Gifford, Rene H.
    Driscoll, Colin L. W.
    Davis, Timothy J.
    Fiebig, Pam
    Micco, Alan
    Dorman, Michael F.
    OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2015, 36 (08) : 1331 - 1337
  • [22] Performance in children with hearing aids or cochlear implants: Bilateral stimulation and binaural hearing
    Ching, Teresa Y. C.
    van Wanrooy, Emma
    Hill, Mandy
    Incerti, Paula
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AUDIOLOGY, 2006, 45 : S108 - S112
  • [23] Binaural Fusion Sharpens on a Scale of Octaves During Pre-adolescence in Children with Normal Hearing, Hearing Aids, and Bimodal Cochlear Implants, but not Bilateral Cochlear ImplantsBinaural Fusion Sharpens on a Scale of Octaves During Pre-adolescence in Children with Normal Hearing, Hearing Aids, and Bimodal Cochlear Implants, but not Bilateral Cochlear ImplantsL. A. J. Reiss et al.
    Lina A. J. Reiss
    Alicia J. Johnson
    Morgan S. Eddolls
    Curtis L. Hartling
    Jennifer R. Fowler
    Gemaine N. Stark
    Bess Glickman
    Holden Sanders
    Yonghee Oh
    Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 2025, 26 (1) : 93 - 109
  • [24] Bimodal Fitting and Bilateral Cochlear Implants in Children With Significant Residual Hearing: The Impact of Asymmetry in Spatial Release of Masking on Localization
    Sparreboom, Marloes
    Ausili, Sebastian
    Agterberg, Martijn J. H.
    Mylanus, Emmanuel A. M.
    JOURNAL OF SPEECH LANGUAGE AND HEARING RESEARCH, 2021, 64 (10): : 4030 - 4043
  • [25] Hearing progress and fluctuations in bimodal-binaural hearing users (unilateral cochlear implants and contralateral hearing aid)
    Luntz, Michal
    Yehudai, Noam
    Shpak, Talma
    ACTA OTO-LARYNGOLOGICA, 2007, 127 (10) : 1045 - 1050
  • [26] Limiting asymmetric hearing improves benefits of bilateral hearing in children using cochlear implants
    Melissa Jane Polonenko
    Blake Croll Papsin
    Karen Ann Gordon
    Scientific Reports, 8
  • [27] Limiting asymmetric hearing improves benefits of bilateral hearing in children using cochlear implants
    Polonenko, Melissa Jane
    Papsin, Blake Croll
    Gordon, Karen Ann
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2018, 8
  • [28] International survey of bimodal hearing and bilateral cochlear implant service provision for adults
    Alfakhri, Manal
    Campbell, Nicole
    Lineton, Ben
    Rowan, Daniel
    Boyle, Patrick
    COCHLEAR IMPLANTS INTERNATIONAL, 2024, 25 (04) : 260 - 274
  • [29] Bilateral cochlear implants
    Mueller, J.
    HNO, 2017, 65 (07) : 561 - 570
  • [30] Language Development in a Hearing and a Deaf Twin With Simultaneous Bilateral Cochlear Implants
    Ruggirello, Caterina
    Mayer, Connie
    JOURNAL OF DEAF STUDIES AND DEAF EDUCATION, 2010, 15 (03): : 274 - 286