From Hearing with a Cochlear Implant and a Contralateral Hearing Aid (CI/HA) to Hearing with Two Cochlear Implants (CI/CI): A Within-Subject Design Comparison

被引:0
|
作者
Luntz, Michal [1 ]
Egra-Dagan, Dana [1 ,2 ]
Attias, Joseph [2 ]
Yehudai, Noam [1 ]
Most, Tova [3 ]
Shpak, Talma [1 ]
机构
[1] Technion Israel Inst Technol, Bruce Rappaport Fac Med, Bnai Zion Med Ctr, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg,Ear & Hearing P, IL-31048 Haifa, Israel
[2] Univ Haifa, Dept Commun Sci & Disorders, IL-31999 Haifa, Israel
[3] Tel Aviv Univ, Sch Educ, Dept Commun Disorders, IL-69978 Tel Aviv, Israel
关键词
Bilateral cochlear implantation; Bimodal hearing; Binaural; SPEECH RECOGNITION; BIMODAL HEARING; SPATIAL HEARING; ONE EAR; PERCEPTION; LOCALIZATION; BENEFITS; ADULTS; STIMULATION; CHILDREN;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: To compare within-subject bilateral-binaural and bimodal complementary abilities between bimodal (cochlear implant and hearing aid; CI/HA) and bilateral CI hearing (CI/CI), thereby enabling better-informed counseling of experienced CI/HA users contemplating contralateral implantation. Study Design: Comparative within-subject case review. Setting: Outpatient hearing clinic. Patients: Ten experienced adult CI/HA users with severe-to-profound hearing loss in the HA ear, who converted to CI/CI between 2 and 11 years after initial implantation. Intervention: Task-specific testing of bilateral-binaural hearing (sound lateralization, binaural summation/redundancy/unmasking, head-shadow effect), bimodal complementary benefit (contribution of low-frequency information), and a self-report Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing (SSQ) questionnaire, all before and 1 year after contralateral cochlear implantation. Main Outcome Measures: Test result differences between CI/HA and CI/CI conditions. Results: CI/CI hearing was better than CI/HA for speech lateralization and for perception of semantically unpredictable sentences in speech noise with speech at 0 degrees and noise at +90 degrees azimuth on the old CI side. CI/HA was better than CI/CI only for differences between perception of natural prosody speech and of speech with flattened fundamental frequency (F0) contour with speech and noise in front (at 0 degrees azimuth). Total scores on the SSQ questionnaire were higher in CI/CI than in CI/HA users. Conclusion: Counseling regarding contralateral implantation for CI/HA users with severe-to-profound hearing loss in the HA ear, though generally positive, should consider individual functional needs, and cover expectations about the expected trade-off between gaining improved understanding and speech lateralization in challenging listening conditions and losing some low-frequency cues still available with CI/HA hearing.
引用
收藏
页码:1682 / 1690
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Bimodal Hearing Benefit for Speech Recognition with Competing Voice in Cochlear Implant Subject with Normal Hearing in Contralateral Ear
    Cullington, Helen E.
    Zeng, Fan-Gang
    EAR AND HEARING, 2010, 31 (01): : 70 - 73
  • [22] Outcomes for a clinically representative cohort of hearing-impaired adults using the Nucleus® CI532 cochlear implant
    Hey, Matthias
    Neben, Nicole
    Stoever, Timo
    Baumann, Uwe
    Mewes, Alexander
    Liebscher, Tim
    Schuessler, Mark
    Aschendorff, Antje
    Wesarg, Thomas
    Buechner, Andreas
    Greenham, Paula
    Hoppe, Ulrich
    EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY, 2020, 277 (06) : 1625 - 1635
  • [23] Hearing Preservation with the Slim MoI di olar Electrode Nucleus CI532® Cochlear Implant: A Preliminary Experience
    Ramos-Macias, Angel
    Borkoski-Barreiro, S. A.
    Falcon-Gonzalez, J. C.
    Ramos-de Miguel, A.
    AUDIOLOGY AND NEURO-OTOLOGY, 2017, 22 (06) : 317 - 325
  • [24] Outcomes for a clinically representative cohort of hearing-impaired adults using the Nucleus® CI532 cochlear implant
    Matthias Hey
    Nicole Neben
    Timo Stöver
    Uwe Baumann
    Alexander Mewes
    Tim Liebscher
    Mark Schüssler
    Antje Aschendorff
    Thomas Wesarg
    Andreas Büchner
    Paula Greenham
    Ulrich Hoppe
    European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 2020, 277 : 1625 - 1635
  • [25] Paediatric Cochlear Implantation Surgery: Surgical Aspects and Preliminary Results on Hearing Preservation, Electrode Placement and Performance with the Cochlear™ Nucleus® CI422 Implant
    Dietz, Aarno
    Varonen, Sini
    Hyvarinen, Antti
    Lopponen, Heikki
    AUDIOLOGY AND NEURO-OTOLOGY, 2013, 18 : 17 - 19
  • [26] Speech Perception Benefit for Children with a Cochlear Implant and a Hearing Aid in Opposite Ears and Children with Bilateral Cochlear Implants
    Mok, Mansze
    Galvin, Karyn L.
    Dowell, Richard C.
    McKay, Colette M.
    AUDIOLOGY AND NEURO-OTOLOGY, 2010, 15 (01) : 44 - 56
  • [27] The error patterns of phonemes in children with prelingual hearing loss: A comparison between hearing aid and cochlear implant users
    Nishiyama, Yuri
    Minami, Shujiro
    Ijuin, Ryoko
    Kuroki, Tomoko
    Tendo, Ayako
    Kusui, Yuko
    Wakabayashi, Satoko
    Kaga, Kimitaka
    AURIS NASUS LARYNX, 2024, 51 (03) : 537 - 541
  • [28] Comparison of speech perception in pediatric CLARION® cochlear implant and hearing aid users
    Svirsky, MA
    Meyer, TA
    ANNALS OF OTOLOGY RHINOLOGY AND LARYNGOLOGY, 1999, 108 (04): : 104 - 109
  • [29] Working Memory, Language and Literacy: A Comparison of Cochlear Implant and Hearing Aid Users
    Olds, J.
    Fitzpatrick, E.
    Schramm, D.
    Somerville, R.
    Rabjohn, K.
    Gaboury, I.
    Whittingham, J.
    Durieux-Smith, A.
    CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGIST, 2012, 26 (03) : 466 - 466
  • [30] Comparing Two Hearing Aid Fitting Algorithms for Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users
    Vroegop, Jantien L.
    Homans, Nienke C.
    van der Schroeff, Marc P.
    Goedegebure, Andre
    EAR AND HEARING, 2019, 40 (01): : 98 - 106