Transcranial Attenuation of Bone-Conducted Sound When Stimulation Is at the Mastoid and at the Bone Conduction Hearing Aid Position

Stenfelt, Stefan

doi:10.1097/mao.0b013e31823e28ab

Cited by 127 publications

(152 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

128

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…to the also open ear estimate in Stenfelt (2012). There was a clear difference at frequencies of 6 kHz and above where the Stenfelt (2012) estimate showed nearly 10 dB less separation between the sides than the estimates in the current study.…”

Section: Comparisons With Previous Measurementscontrasting

confidence: 57%

“…In the same study the results were compared with estimations from vibration of the cochlea in cadaver heads using one-dimensional velocity measurements (Eeg-Olofsson et al, 2011) and three-dimensional acceleration measurements (Stenfelt and Goode, 2005a). According to Stenfelt (2012), average perceptual measures were close to the vibration estimates at frequencies between 0.8 and 6 kHz. In Stenfelt and Goode (2005a) the vibration data of the cochlear promontory was compared to the proposed sensitivity difference between ipsilateral mastoid and forehead BC stimulation according to the standard ISO:389-3 (1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…The caveat is that the relation between hearing thresholds and cochlear vibration have to date not been directly determined. So far, the validity of the assumption is based on similar effects seen in vibration and threshold estimates, for example transcranial attenuation estimates (Stenfelt, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, the transcranial attenuation was estimated for two stimulation positions (one close to the ear-canal opening and the other further back) by hearing thresholds (Stenfelt, 2012). In the same study the results were compared with estimations from vibration of the cochlea in cadaver heads using one-dimensional velocity measurements (Eeg-Olofsson et al, 2011) and three-dimensional acceleration measurements (Stenfelt and Goode, 2005a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Estimation of bone conduction skull transmission by hearing thresholds and ear-canal sound pressure

Reinfeldt¹,

Stenfelt²,

Hȧkansson³

2013

Hearing Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bone conduction sound transmission in the human skull and the occlusion effect were estimated from hearing thresholds and ear-canal sound pressure (ECSP) measured by a probe tube microphone when stimulation was at three positions on the skull (ipsilateral mastoid, contralateral mastoid, and forehead). The measurements were done with the ear-canal open as well as occluded by an ear-plug. Depending on the estimation method, transcranial transmission at frequencies below 1 kHz was between -8 and 5 dB, around 0 dB at 1 kHz that decreased with frequency to between -17 and -7 dB at 8 kHz. The forehead transmission was, except at frequencies between 1 and 2 kHz, similar to that proposed in the standard ISO:389-3 (1994) when the threshold measurements were conducted with open ear-canals. Compared with the same measurements using hearing thresholds, the ECSP gave similar transmission results at most frequencies, but differed at 0.5, 0.75, 2 and 3 kHz. One probable reason for the differences between thresholds and ECSP measures was a significant perception improvement (lower thresholds) when the stimulation was at the ipsilateral mastoid that was not found at the other positions. This improvement, which also was present in the occlusion effect data, was hypothesized to originate in greater sensitivity of the cochlea for vibration in line with the ipsilateral stimulation direction than from other directions.

show abstract

Section: Comparisons With Previous Measurementscontrasting

confidence: 57%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Estimation of bone conduction skull transmission by hearing thresholds and ear-canal sound pressure

Reinfeldt¹,

Stenfelt²,

Hȧkansson³

2013

Hearing Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, for the frequency range used here, the sensitivity difference between a position at the mastoid and one around 20 mm further back was on average 2 dB (Stenfelt, 2012). It is therefore felt that the small differences in exact stimulation positions between datasets used for the simulation has only given a minor uncertainty to the results presented.…”

Section: Relative Importance Of the Five Componentsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Model predictions for bone conduction perception in the human

Stenfelt

2016

Hearing Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Five different pathways are often suggested as important for bone conducted (BC) sound: (1) sound pressure in the ear canal, (2) inertia of the middle ear ossicles, (3) inertia of the inner ear fluid, (4) compression of the inner ear space, and (5) pressure transmission from the skull interior. The relative importance of these pathways was investigated with an acousticimpedance model of the inner ear. The model incorporated data of BC generated ear canal sound pressure, middle ear ossicle motion, cochlear promontory vibration, and intracranial sound pressure. With BC stimulation at the mastoid, the inner ear inertia dominated the excitation of the cochlea but inner ear compression and middle ear inertia were within 10 dB for almost the entire frequency range of 0.1 to 10 kHz. Ear canal sound pressure gave little contribution at the low and high frequencies, but was around 15 dB below the total contribution at the mid frequencies. Intracranial sound pressure gave responses similar to the others at low frequencies, but decreased with frequency to a level of 55 dB below the total contribution at 10 kHz. When the BC inner ear model was evaluated against AC stimulation at threshold levels, the results were close up to approximately 4 kHz but deviated significantly at higher frequencies. 3 Highlights• A model for BC simulates the contribution from 5 components.• The inner ear compression and inertia and middle ear inertia are most important.• The contribution from intracranial sound pressure is insignificant at higher frequencies.• The model provides similar BM excitation for AC and BC threshold stimulation up to 4 kHz. KeywordsBone conduction, inner ear model, fluid inertia, inner ear compression, middle ear inertia

show abstract

Viscoelastic computational modeling of the human head‐neck system: Eigenfrequencies and time‐dependent analysis

Boccia

Gizzi

Cherubini

et al. 2017

Numer Methods Biomed Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A subject-specific 3-dimensional viscoelastic finite element model of the human head-neck system is presented and investigated based on computed tomography and magnetic resonance biomedical images. Ad hoc imaging processing tools are developed for the reconstruction of the simulation domain geometry and the internal distribution of bone and soft tissues. Material viscoelastic properties are characterized point-wise through an image-based interpolating function used then for assigning the constitutive prescriptions of a heterogenous viscoelastic continuum model. The numerical study is conducted both for modal and time-dependent analyses, compared with similar studies and validated against experimental evidences. Spatiotemporal analyses are performed upon different exponential swept-sine wave-localized stimulations. The modeling approach proposes a generalized, patient-specific investigation of sound wave transmission and attenuation within the human head-neck system comprising skull and brain tissues. Model extensions and applications are finally discussed. KEYWORDScomputational modeling, finite elements, human head-neck system, structural acoustics and vibration, viscoelasticity

show abstract

Transcranial Attenuation of Bone-Conducted Sound When Stimulation Is at the Mastoid and at the Bone Conduction Hearing Aid Position

Abstract: The median transcranial attenuation depends on stimulation position and frequency. However, the variability is great, both between individuals and within subjects for adjacent frequencies.

Cited by 127 publications

References 23 publications

Estimation of bone conduction skull transmission by hearing thresholds and ear-canal sound pressure

Estimation of bone conduction skull transmission by hearing thresholds and ear-canal sound pressure

Model predictions for bone conduction perception in the human

Viscoelastic computational modeling of the human head‐neck system: Eigenfrequencies and time‐dependent analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About