Minimum Audible Angle, Just Noticeable Interaural Differences and Speech Intelligibility with Bilateral Cochlear Implants Using Clinical Speech Processors

2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 342-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pascal Senn ◽  
Martin Kompis ◽  
Mattheus Vischer ◽  
Rudolf Haeusler
2005 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard van Hoesel ◽  
Melanie B??hm ◽  
Rolf D. Battmer ◽  
Jens Beckschebe ◽  
Thomas Lenarz

ASHA Leader ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 14-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Litovsky

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-206
Author(s):  
Gennaro Auletta ◽  
Annamaria Franzè ◽  
Carla Laria ◽  
Carmine Piccolo ◽  
Carmine Papa ◽  
...  

Background: The aim of this study was to compare, in users of bimodal cochlear implants, the performance obtained using their own hearing aids (adjusted with the standard NAL-NL1 fitting formula) with the performance using the Phonak Naìda Link Ultra Power hearing aid adjusted with both NAL-NL1 and a new bimodal system (Adaptive Phonak Digital Bimodal (APDB)) developed by Advanced Bionics and Phonak Corporations. Methods: Eleven bimodal users (Naìda CI Q70 + contralateral hearing aid) were enrolled in our study. The users’ own hearing aids were replaced with the Phonak Naìda Link Ultra Power and fitted following the new formula. Speech intelligibility was assessed in quiet and noisy conditions, and comparisons were made with the results obtained with the users’ previous hearing aids and with the Naída Link hearing aids fitted with the NAL-NL1 generic prescription formula. Results: Using Phonak Naìda Link Ultra Power hearing aids with the Adaptive Phonak Digital Bimodal fitting formula, performance was significantly better than that with the users’ own rehabilitation systems, especially in challenging hearing situations for all analyzed subjects. Conclusions: Speech intelligibility tests in quiet settings did not reveal a significant difference in performance between the new fitting formula and NAL-NL1 fittings (using the Naída Link hearing aids), whereas the performance difference between the two fittings was very significant in noisy test conditions.


2006 ◽  
Vol 45 (sup1) ◽  
pp. 78-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Y. Litovsky ◽  
Patti M. Johnstone ◽  
Shelly P. Godar

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 479-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan-Willem Beijen ◽  
Ad F. M. Snik ◽  
Emmanuel A. M. Mylanus

2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marloes Sparreboom ◽  
Andy J. Beynon ◽  
Ad F. M. Snik ◽  
Emmanuel A. M. Mylanus

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document