Speech perception scores in cochlear implant recipients: An analysis of ceiling effects in the CUNY sentence test (Quiet) in post-lingually deafened cochlear implant recipients

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the clinical utility of the CUNY sentence test in a cohort of post-lingually deafened CI recipients over time. The distribution of all post-operative CUNY test scores skewed to the right with 82% of test scores reaching above 90%.Discussion: This study demonstrates that the CUNY test cannot be used as a valid tool to measure the speech perception skills of post-lingually deafened CI recipients over time. This may be overcome by using adaptive test protocols or linguistically, cognitively or contextually demanding test materials. Conclusion:The high percentage of CI recipients achieving ceiling scores for the CUNY sentence test in quiet at three months post-implantation, questions the validity of using CUNY in CI assessment test battery and limits its application for use in longitudinal studies evaluating CI outcomes. Further studies are required to examine different methods to overcome this problem.

The Important Role of Contextual Information in Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users and Its Consequences in Speech Tests

“…According to Boothroyd and Nittrouer (1988), sentences with high predictability result in higher scores than sentences with low predictability and are therefore more prone to ceiling effects. Ebrahimi-Madiseh, Eikelboom, Jayakody, and Atlas (2016) showed that a ceiling effect also exists in the City University of New York sentence test (Boothroyd, Hanin, & Hnath, 1985) if used in CI recipients. Gifford et al.…”

“…According to Boothroyd and Nittrouer (1988), sentences with high predictability result in higher scores than sentences with low predictability and are therefore more prone to ceiling effects. Ebrahimi-Madiseh, Eikelboom, Jayakody, and Atlas (2016) showed that a ceiling effect also exists in the City University of New York sentence test (Boothroyd, Hanin, & Hnath, 1985) if used in CI recipients. Gifford et al (2008) recommended the use of the Arizona Biomedical Institute sentence test (Spahr et al, 2012), because this test contains more difficult, less predictable sentences, spoken by different talkers in a casual style.…”

The Benefits of Bimodal Aiding on Extended Dimensions of Speech Perception: Intelligibility, Listening Effort, and Sound Quality

“…In the past, clinicians have often not extended testing beyond speech intelligibility in quiet conditions. However, increasingly higher levels of CI performance suggest that testing in quiet does not sufficiently cover the difficulty range to document performance in current CI populations ( Ebrahimi-Madiseh, Eikelboom, Jayakody, & Atlas, 2016 ; Gifford, Shallop, & Peterson, 2008 ). Beyond the fact that testing in noise better reflects real-life situations than testing in quiet, it has also been shown that speech intelligibility in noise is a better metric for evaluating the maximum potential of bimodal aiding ( Dorman et al., 2015 ).…”

Speech and language assessment in adult cochlear implant candidates and users

“…V některých studiích se však prokázaly jako nevyužitelné z hlediska měření řečové percepce u postlingválně ohluchlých uživatelů KI (např. Gifford et al, 2008;Ebrahimi-Madiseh et al, 2016), a to z důvodu neposkytnutí validních údajů a reálného obrazu zlepšování poslechových dovedností pacienta v čase.…”