Perception of lexical stress cued by low-frequency pitch and insights into speech perception in noise for cochlear implant users and normal hearing adults

Objective: To identify clinical criteria for selecting the aiding device for the contralateral ear of children with a unilateral cochlear implant (CI). Methods: Sixty-five children, including 36 bilateral CI users and 29 bimodal users, participated in the study. A speech perception test (monosyllabic word test) in noise was administered. The target speech (65 dB sound pressure level) was presented from the front loudspeaker, and noise (10 dB signal-to-noise ratio) was presented from 3 directions: from in front of the child and 90° to the child's right and left sides. The test was performed using the first CI alone and under bilateral CI or bimodal conditions. The bilateral benefits to speech perception in noise were compared between bilateral CI users and bimodal users. Results: Significant benefits in speech perception in noise were evident in bilateral CI users in all 3 noise conditions. In bimodal users, the hearing threshold at low frequencies of ≤1 kHz in the nonimplanted ear affected the bilateral benefit. Bimodal users with a low-frequency hearing threshold ≤90 dB hearing level (HL) showed a significant bilateral benefit in various noise conditions. By contrast, bimodal users with a low-frequency hearing threshold >90 dB HL showed no significant bilateral benefits in all 3 noise conditions. Conclusions: Bilateral CI and bimodal listening provide better speech perception in noise than unilateral CI alone in children. The contralateral CI is better than bimodal listening for children with a low-frequency hearing threshold >90 dB HL. A hearing threshold at low frequencies of ≤1 kHz may be a good criterion for deciding on the type of device for the contralateral ear of children with a unilateral CI.

Download Full-text

Benefits of Localization and Speech Perception with Multiple Noise Sources in Listeners with a Short-Electrode Cochlear Implant

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology ◽

10.3766/jaaa.21.1.6 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 21 (01) ◽

pp. 044-051 ◽

Cited By ~ 53

Author(s):

Camille C. Dunn ◽

Ann Perreau ◽

Bruce Gantz ◽

Richard S. Tyler

Keyword(s):

Speech Perception ◽

Cochlear Implant ◽

Hearing Aids ◽

Hearing Aid ◽

Low Frequency ◽

Noise Sources ◽

Speech Perception In Noise ◽

Hearing Aid Use ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Array Performance

Background: Research suggests that for individuals with significant low-frequency hearing, implantation of a short-electrode cochlear implant may provide benefits of improved speech perception abilities. Because this strategy combines acoustic and electrical hearing within the same ear while at the same time preserving low-frequency residual acoustic hearing in both ears, localization abilities may also be improved. However, very little research has focused on the localization and spatial hearing abilities of users with a short-electrode cochlear implant. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate localization abilities for listeners with a short-electrode cochlear implant who continue to wear hearing aids in both ears. A secondary purpose was to document speech perception abilities using a speech-in-noise test with spatially separate noise sources. Research Design: Eleven subjects that utilized a short-electrode cochlear implant and bilateral hearing aids were tested on localization and speech perception with multiple noise locations using an eight-loudspeaker array. Performance was assessed across four listening conditions using various combinations of cochlear implant and/or hearing aid use. Results: Results for localization showed no significant difference between using bilateral hearing aids and bilateral hearing aids plus the cochlear implant. However, there was a significant difference between the bilateral hearing aid condition and the implant plus use of a contralateral hearing aid for all 11 subjects. Results for speech perception showed a significant benefit when using bilateral hearing aids plus the cochlear implant over use of the implant plus only one hearing aid. Conclusion: Combined use of both hearing aids and the cochlear implant show significant benefits for both localization and speech perception in noise for users with a short-electrode cochlear implant. These results emphasize the importance of low-frequency information in two ears for the purpose of localization and speech perception in noise.

Download Full-text

Neural correlates of individual differences in speech-in-noise performance in a large cohort of cochlear implant users

10.1101/2021.04.22.440998 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Joel I. Berger ◽

Phillip E. Gander ◽

Subong Kim ◽

Adam T. Schwalje ◽

Jihwan Woo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Individual Differences ◽

Speech Perception ◽

Word Recognition ◽

Cochlear Implant ◽

Low Frequency ◽

Normal Hearing ◽

Large Cohort ◽

Noise Performance ◽

Speech In Noise ◽

Hearing Thresholds

AbstractObjectivesUnderstanding speech in noise (SiN) is a complex task that recruits multiple cortical subsystems. Individuals vary in their ability to understand SiN. This cannot be explained by simple peripheral hearing profiles, but recent work by our group (Kim et al., 2021, Neuroimage) highlighted central neural factors underlying the variance in SiN ability in normal hearing (NH) subjects. The current study examined neural predictors of speech-in-noise ability in a large cohort of cochlear-implant (CI) users, with the long-term goal of developing a simple electrophysiological correlate that could be implemented in clinics.DesignWe recorded electroencephalography (EEG) in 114 post-lingually deafened CI users while they completed the California Consonant Test (CCT): a word-in-noise task. In many subjects, data were also collected on two other commonly used clinical measures of speech perception: a word-in-quiet task (Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant [CNC]) word and a sentence-in-noise task (AzBio sentences). Neural activity was assessed at a single vertex electrode (Cz), to maximize generalizability to clinical situations. The N1-P2 complex of event-related potentials (ERPs) at this location were included in multiple linear regression analyses, along with several other demographic and hearing factors as predictors of speech in noise performance.ResultsIn general, there was a good agreement between the scores on the three speech perception tasks. ERP amplitudes did not predict AzBio performance which was predicted by the duration of device use, low-frequency hearing thresholds, and age. However, ERP amplitudes were strong predictors for performance for both word recognition tasks: the CCT (which was conducted simultaneously with EEG recording), and the CNC (conducted offline). These correlations held even after accounting for known predictors of performance including residual low-frequency hearing thresholds. In CI-users, better performance was predicted by an increased cortical response to the target word, in contrast to previous reports in normal-hearing subjects in whom speech perception ability was accounted for by the ability to suppress noise.ConclusionsThese data indicate a neurophysiological correlate of speech-in-noise performance that can be relatively easily captured within the clinic, thereby revealing a richer profile of an individual’s hearing performance than shown by psychoacoustic measures alone. These results also highlight important differences between sentence and word recognition measures of performance and suggest that individual differences in these measures may be underwritten by different mechanisms. Finally, the contrast with prior reports of NH listeners in the same task suggests CI-users performance may be explained by a different weighting of neural processes than NH listeners.

Download Full-text

A Speech Perception Test in Simulated Reverberation Conditions

American Journal of Audiology ◽

10.1044/2015_aja-14-0028 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 24 (2) ◽

pp. 169-177 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Jaclyn B. Spitzer ◽

Sharon A. Sandridge ◽

Craig W. Newman ◽

Sarah Sydlowski ◽

Robert M. Ghent

Keyword(s):

Speech Perception ◽

Cochlear Implant ◽

Analysis Of Variance ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Real Life ◽

Normal Hearing ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Speech Perception In Noise ◽

Simulated Environments ◽

High Predictability

Purpose This study developed new test materials by applying various reverberation treatments to sentences having high and low contextual redundancy. Method The Speech Perception in Noise–Revised (SPIN-R; Bilger, Nuetzel, Rabinowitz, & Rzeczkowski, 1984; Kalikow, Stevens, & Elliott, 1977) sentences were modified (SPIN-Reverb) with reverberation times (RT 60 ) from simulated environments: unprocessed, RevCond 1 (RT 60 = 600 ms), RevCond 2 (RT 60 = 1200 ms), and RevCond 3 (RT 60 = 3600 ms). Phase 1 investigated list equivalency among 75 listeners with normal hearing; Phase 2 examined the utility of SPIN-Reverb for 15 cochlear implant (CI) recipients. Results Equivalent lists within each reverberation condition (unprocessed, RevCond 1, 2, and 3) were identified using nonparametric bootstrapping. Analysis of variance (Phase 1) demonstrated significant differences across conditions for high predictability and total scores. Listening performance decreased for both high and low predictability as RT 60 increased for listeners with normal hearing and CI recipients. Unprocessed, RevCond 1, RevCond 2, and RevCond 3 conditions were significantly different from each other. Within RevCond conditions, high- and low-predictability sentences were significantly different from each other. Conclusions RevCond 1 and RevCond 2 may be useful supplements to the current CI battery. The SPIN-Reverb has potential as a set of clinically feasible materials that are graded in difficulty and representative of real-life acoustic challenges for the evaluation of sensory devices.

Download Full-text

Logatome Discrimination in Cochlear Implant Users: Subjective Tests Compared to the Mismatch Negativity

The Scientific World JOURNAL ◽

10.1100/tsw.2010.28 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 10 ◽

pp. 329-339 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Torsten Rahne ◽

Michael Ziese ◽

Dorothea Rostalski ◽

Roland Mühler

Keyword(s):

Speech Perception ◽

Cochlear Implant ◽

Mismatch Negativity ◽

Speech Intelligibility ◽

Event Related Potentials ◽

Normal Hearing ◽

Discrimination Test ◽

Speech Database ◽

Automated Speech Recognition ◽

Related Potentials

This paper describes a logatome discrimination test for the assessment of speech perception in cochlear implant users (CI users), based on a multilingual speech database, the Oldenburg Logatome Corpus, which was originally recorded for the comparison of human and automated speech recognition. The logatome discrimination task is based on the presentation of 100 logatome pairs (i.e., nonsense syllables) with balanced representations of alternating “vowel-replacement” and “consonant-replacement” paradigms in order to assess phoneme confusions. Thirteen adult normal hearing listeners and eight adult CI users, including both good and poor performers, were included in the study and completed the test after their speech intelligibility abilities were evaluated with an established sentence test in noise. Furthermore, the discrimination abilities were measured electrophysiologically by recording the mismatch negativity (MMN) as a component of auditory event-related potentials. The results show a clear MMN response only for normal hearing listeners and CI users with good performance, correlating with their logatome discrimination abilities. Higher discrimination scores for vowel-replacement paradigms than for the consonant-replacement paradigms were found. We conclude that the logatome discrimination test is well suited to monitor the speech perception skills of CI users. Due to the large number of available spoken logatome items, the Oldenburg Logatome Corpus appears to provide a useful and powerful basis for further development of speech perception tests for CI users.

Download Full-text

Bone-anchored hearing system, contralateral routing of signals hearing aid or cochlear implant: what is best in single-sided deafness?

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology ◽

10.1007/s00405-021-06634-7 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Till F. Jakob ◽

Iva Speck ◽

Ann-Kathrin Rauch ◽

Frederike Hassepass ◽

Manuel C. Ketterer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Speech Perception ◽

Cochlear Implant ◽

Hearing Aids ◽

Long Term Results ◽

Speech Perception In Noise ◽

Sound Localisation ◽

Therapy Option ◽

Single Sided Deafness ◽

Objective Hearing Tests

Abstract Purpose The aim of the study was to compare long-term results after 1 year in patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) who were fitted with different hearing aids. The participants tested contralateral routing of signals (CROS) hearing aids and bone-anchored hearing systems (BAHS). They were also informed about the possibility of a cochlear implant (CI) and chose one of the three devices. We also investigated which factors influenced the choice of device. Methods Prospective study with 89 SSD participants who were divided into three groups by choosing BAHS, CROS, or CI. All participants received test batteries with both objective hearing tests (speech perception in noise and sound localisation) and subjective questionnaires. Results 16 participants opted for BAHS-, 13 for CROS- and 30 for CI-treatment. The greater the subjective impairment caused by SSD, the more likely patients were to opt for surgical treatment (BAHS or CI). The best results in terms of speech perception in noise (especially when sound reaches the deaf ear and noise the hearing ear), sound localization, and subjective results were achieved with CI. Conclusion The best results regarding the therapy of SSD are achieved with a CI, followed by BAHS. This was evident both in objective tests and in the subjective questionnaires. Nevertheless, an individual decision is required in each case as to which SSD therapy option is best for the patient. Above all, the patient's subjective impairment and expectations should be included in the decision-making process.

Download Full-text