Speech Recognition in Background Noise of Cochlear Implant Patients

Fetterman, Bruce L.; Domico, Elizabeth H.

doi:10.1067/mhn.2002.123044

Cited by 127 publications

(84 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript has been quite successful in providing reasonably good speech understanding in quiet, adult users often experience increased difficulty understanding speech in a noisy environment (e.g., Fetterman & Domico, 2002;Firszt, Holden, Skinner, et al, 2004), and they are placed at a distinct disadvantage when sound is coming from the direction of their nonimplanted ear.…”

Section: Nih-pa Author Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simultaneous Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: A Multicenter Clinical Study

Litovsky¹,

Parkinson²,

Arcaroli³

et al. 2006

Ear and Hearing

283

304

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective-To determine the efficacy of "simultaneous" bilateral cochlear implantation (both implants placed during a single surgical procedure) by comparing bilateral and unilateral implant use in a large number of adult subjects tested at multiple sites.Design-Prospective study of 37 adults with postlinguistic onset of bilateral, severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss. Performance with the bilateral cochlear implants, using the same speech processor type and speech processing strategy, was compared with performance using the left implant alone and the right implant alone. Speech understanding in quiet (CNCs and HINT sentences) and in noise (BKB-SIN Test) were evaluated at several postactivation time intervals, with speech presented at 0° azimuth, and noise at either 0°, 90° right, or 90° left in the horizontal plane. APHAB questionnaire data were collected after each subject underwent a 3-wk "bilateral deprivation" period, during which they wore only the speech processor that produced the best score during unilateral testing, and also after a period of listening again with the bilateral implants.Results-By 6-mo postactivation, a significant advantage for speech understanding in quiet was found in the bilateral listening mode compared with either unilateral listening modes. For speech understanding in noise, the largest and most robust bilateral benefit was when the subject was able to take advantage of the head shadow effect; i.e., results were significantly better for bilateral listening compared with the unilateral condition when the ear opposite to the side of the noise was added to create the bilateral condition. This bilateral benefit was seen on at least one of the two unilateral ear comparisons for nearly all (32/34) subjects. Bilateral benefit was also found for a few subjects in spatial configurations that evaluated binaural redundancy and binaural squelch effects. A subgroup of subjects who had asymmetrical unilateral implant performances were, overall, similar in performance to subjects with symmetrical hearing. The questionnaire data indicated that bilateral users perceive their own performance to be better with bilateral cochlear implants than when using a single device.Conclusions-Findings with a large patient group are in agreement with previous reports on smaller groups, showing that, overall, bilateral implantation offers the majority of patients advantages when listening in simulated adverse conditions. Persons with bilateral severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss have traditionally received a single cochlear implant. To date, health care professionals have recommended unilateral, rather than bilateral, cochlear implant fittings for these patients for several reasons, including: 1) cost/reimbursement issues, 2) preservation of one ear for future technologies, 3) additional risk of two, or extended, surgeries, and 4) lack of sufficient objective and/or subjective evidence documenting bilateral cochlear implant benefit. Although unilateral use of cochlear implants NIH-PA A...

show abstract

Section: Nih-pa Author Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simultaneous Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: A Multicenter Clinical Study

Litovsky¹,

Parkinson²,

Arcaroli³

et al. 2006

Ear and Hearing

283

304

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Modern devices provide relatively coarse representations of spectral information, which are adequate for perceiving speech in ideal listening conditions (Shannon, Zeng, Kamath, Wygonski & Ekelid, 1995;Wilson, 2000), but they are inadequate for perceiving speech in noise (Fetterman & Domico, 2002;Firszt et al, 2004), identifying emotion from speech prosody (Hopyan-Misakyan, Gordon, Dennis & Papsin, 2009;Meister, Landwehr, Pyschny, Walger & Von Wedel, 2009), differentiating one speaker from another (Meister et al, 2009), identifying musical timbres or instruments , and recognizing melodies from pitch cues alone (Kang et al, 2009;Kong, Cruz, Ackland-Jones & Zeng, 2004). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosody perception and musical pitch discrimination in adults using cochlear implants

Kalathottukaren

Purdy

Ballard

2015

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cochlear implants (CIs) provide coarse representations of pitch, which are adequate for speech but not for music. Despite increasing interest in music processing by CI users, the available information is fragmentary. The present experiment attempted to fill this void by conducting a comprehensive assessment of music processing in adult CI users. CI users (n =6) and normally hearing (NH) controls (n = 12) were tested on several tasks involving melody and rhythm perception, recognition of familiar music, and emotion of recognition in speech and music. CI performance was substantially poorer than NH performance and at chance levels on pitch processing tasks. Performance was highly variable, however, with one individual achieving NH performance levels on some tasks, probably because of low-frequency residual hearing in his unimplanted ear. Future research with a larger sample of CI users can shed light on factors associated with good and poor music processing in this population.iii

show abstract

“…Хотя польза от односторонней кохлеарной импланта-ции в обеспечении хорошей разборчивости речи в тихом помещении несомненна, даже взрослые пользователи имплантов часто испытывают трудности в понимании речи в шумной обстановке [7,8].…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Simultaneous Bilateral Cochlear Implantation for a 6-Month Child with a History of Meningitis

Диаб¹,

Дайхес²,

Siraeva³

et al. 2015

Vopr. sovr. pediatr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Speech Recognition in Background Noise of Cochlear Implant Patients

Abstract: Competing noise interferes with comprehension of connected speech for most cochlear implant patients.

Cited by 127 publications

References 12 publications

Simultaneous Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: A Multicenter Clinical Study

Simultaneous Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adults: A Multicenter Clinical Study

Prosody perception and musical pitch discrimination in adults using cochlear implants

Simultaneous Bilateral Cochlear Implantation for a 6-Month Child with a History of Meningitis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About