The Influence of Different Speech Processor and Hearing Aid Settings on Speech Perception Outcomes in Electric Acoustic Stimulation Patients

2008 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrien Vermeire ◽  
Ilona Anderson ◽  
Mark Flynn ◽  
Paul Van de Heyning
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Speech Processor ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation

Effects of Hearing Aid Settings for Electric-Acoustic Stimulation

2014 ◽  
Vol 25 (02) ◽  
pp. 133-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret T. Dillon ◽  
Emily Buss ◽  
Harold C. Pillsbury ◽  
Oliver F. Adunka ◽  
Craig A. Buchman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Hearing Preservation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Speech Processor ◽  
Listening Condition ◽  
Nonlinear Fitting ◽  
Fitting Procedure ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation

Background: Cochlear implant (CI) recipients with postoperative hearing preservation may utilize an ipsilateral bimodal listening condition known as electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS). Studies on EAS have reported significant improvements in speech perception abilities over CI-alone listening conditions. Adjustments to the hearing aid (HA) settings to match prescription targets routinely used in the programming of conventional amplification may provide additional gains in speech perception abilities. Purpose: Investigate the difference in users’ speech perception scores when listening with the recommended HA settings for EAS patients versus HA settings adjusted to match National Acoustic Laboratories’ nonlinear fitting procedure version 1 (NAL-NL1) targets. Research Design: Prospective analysis of the influence of HA settings. Study Sample: Nine EAS recipients with greater than 12 mo of listening experience with the DUET speech processor. Intervention: Subjects were tested in the EAS listening condition with two different HA setting configurations. Speech perception materials included consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) words in quiet, AzBio sentences in 10-talker speech babble at a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of +10, and the Bamford-Kowal-Bench sentences in noise (BKB-SIN) test. Data Collection and Analysis: The speech perception performance on each test measure was compared between the two HA configurations. Results: Subjects experienced a significant improvement in speech perception abilities with the HA settings adjusted to match NAL-NL1 targets over the recommended HA settings. Conclusions: EAS subjects have been shown to experience improvements in speech perception abilities when listening to ipsilateral combined stimulation. This population’s abilities may be underestimated with current HA settings. Tailoring the HA output to the patient’s individual hearing loss offers improved outcomes on speech perception measures.

scholarly journals The Benefits of Using RONDO and an In-the-Ear Hearing Aid in Patients Using a Combined Electric-Acoustic System

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dayse Távora-Vieira ◽  
Stuart Miller
Keyword(s):  
Single Unit ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Control Unit ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Profound Hearing Loss ◽  
Low Frequencies ◽  
Speech Processor ◽  
High Frequencies ◽  
Acoustic Hearing ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation

People with residual hearing in the low frequencies and profound hearing loss in the high frequencies often do not benefit from acoustic amplification. Focus on this group of patients led to the development of the combined electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) systems which can provide users with greater speech perception than can cochlear implant (CI) alone or acoustic hearing alone. EAS users wear a combined speech processor that incorporates a behind-the-ear audio processor that sits with an ear hook on the user’s pinna and a hearing aid, which sits in the ear canal. However, with the introduction of single-unit processors, which combine the audio processor, coil, control unit, and battery pack into a single device that sits on the implant site, therefore off the ear, simultaneous electric (CI) and acoustic (hearing aid) stimulation is not currently possible with a combined processor. To achieve EAS with a single-unit processor, a CI user must also wear a hearing aid. This study seeks to determine if experienced users of combined EAS speech processors could also benefit from using a combination of a single-unit speech processor that sits off the ear and an in-the-ear hearing aid.

scholarly journals The advantages of sound localization and speech perception of bilateral electric acoustic stimulation

2014 ◽  
Vol 135 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideaki Moteki ◽  
Ryosuke Kitoh ◽  
Keita Tsukada ◽  
Satoshi Iwasaki ◽  
Shin-Ya Nishio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Sound Localization ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation

scholarly journals Assessment of the Subjective Benefit of Electric Acoustic Stimulation with the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit

ORL ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 73 (6) ◽  
pp. 321-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang K. Gstoettner ◽  
Paul Van de Heyning ◽  
Alec Fitzgerald O’Connor ◽  
Jan Kiefer ◽  
Constantino Morera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Hearing Aid Benefit

Is Electric Acoustic Stimulation Better Than Conventional Cochlear Implantation for Speech Perception in Quiet?

2010 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 1049-1054 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver F. Adunka ◽  
Harold C. Pillsbury ◽  
Marcia C. Adunka ◽  
Craig A. Buchman
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Cochlear Implantation ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Better Than

Influence of Test Condition on Speech Perception With Electric-Acoustic Stimulation

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 520-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret T. Dillon ◽  
Emily Buss ◽  
Oliver F. Adunka ◽  
Craig A. Buchman ◽  
Harold C. Pillsbury
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Listening Experience ◽  
Improved Performance ◽  
Frequency Map ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Better Than

Purpose The goal of this work was to better understand speech perception for cochlear implant (CI) users with bilateral residual hearing, including consideration of effects related to listening conditions and test measures. Of interest was the role of acoustic hearing for speech perception in a complex background, the role of listening experience for CI-alone conditions, and whether performance with electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) was improved by a contralateral hearing aid (HA). Method Eleven subjects provided data on Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC; Peterson & Lehiste, 1962) words in quiet, City University of New York (CUNY; Boothroyd, Hanin, & Hnath, 1985) sentences in steady noise, and Bamford-Kowal-Bench (Bench, Kowal, & Bamford, 1979) sentences in multitalker babble. Listening conditions included: CI with a full-frequency map, CI with a truncated-frequency map, EAS, and EAS+HA (EAS plus contralateral HA). Sounds were presented at 0° azimuth. Results For CNC words and CUNY sentences, performance was better with the truncated-frequency than the full-frequency map, and performance with EAS was better than for either CI-alone condition. For Bench-Kowal-Bamford sentences, EAS+HA was better than EAS. Conclusions As demonstrated previously, performance was better in the EAS condition than either CI-alone condition. Better performance in the truncated-frequency than full-frequency CI-alone condition suggests that listening experience may be important. A contralateral HA improved performance over unilateral EAS under some conditions.

Electric-acoustic stimulation in adults: localization and speech perception

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (sup1) ◽  
pp. S17-S20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paola V Incerti ◽  
Teresa Y C Ching ◽  
Robert Cowan
Keyword(s):  
Speech Perception ◽  
Acoustic Stimulation ◽  
Electric Acoustic Stimulation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document