Recognition and localization of speech by adult cochlear implant recipients wearing a digital hearing aid in the nonimplanted ear (bimodal hearing).

BACKGROUND The use of bilateral amplification is now common clinical practice for hearing aid users but not for cochlear implant recipients. In the past, most cochlear implant recipients were implanted in one ear and wore only a monaural cochlear implant processor. There has been recent interest in benefits arising from bilateral stimulation that may be present for cochlear implant recipients. One option for bilateral stimulation is the use of a cochlear implant in one ear and a hearing aid in the opposite nonimplanted ear (bimodal hearing). PURPOSE This study evaluated the effect of wearing a cochlear implant in one ear and a digital hearing aid in the opposite ear on speech recognition and localization. RESEARCH DESIGN A repeated-measures correlational study was completed. STUDY SAMPLE Nineteen adult Cochlear Nucleus 24 implant recipients participated in the study. INTERVENTION The participants were fit with a Widex Senso Vita 38 hearing aid to achieve maximum audibility and comfort within their dynamic range. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Soundfield thresholds, loudness growth, speech recognition, localization, and subjective questionnaires were obtained six-eight weeks after the hearing aid fitting. Testing was completed in three conditions: hearing aid only, cochlear implant only, and cochlear implant and hearing aid (bimodal). All tests were repeated four weeks after the first test session. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to analyze the data. Significant effects were further examined using pairwise comparison of means or in the case of continuous moderators, regression analyses. The speech-recognition and localization tasks were unique, in that a speech stimulus presented from a variety of roaming azimuths (140 degree loudspeaker array) was used. RESULTS Performance in the bimodal condition was significantly better for speech recognition and localization compared to the cochlear implant-only and hearing aid-only conditions. Performance was also different between these conditions when the location (i.e., side of the loudspeaker array that presented the word) was analyzed. In the bimodal condition, the speech-recognition and localization tasks were equal regardless of which side of the loudspeaker array presented the word, while performance was significantly poorer for the monaural conditions (hearing aid only and cochlear implant only) when the words were presented on the side with no stimulation. Binaural loudness summation of 1-3 dB was seen in soundfield thresholds and loudness growth in the bimodal condition. Measures of the audibility of sound with the hearing aid, including unaided thresholds, soundfield thresholds, and the Speech Intelligibility Index, were significant moderators of speech recognition and localization. Based on the questionnaire responses, participants showed a strong preference for bimodal stimulation. CONCLUSIONS These findings suggest that a well-fit digital hearing aid worn in conjunction with a cochlear implant is beneficial to speech recognition and localization. The dynamic test procedures used in this study illustrate the importance of bilateral hearing for locating, identifying, and switching attention between multiple speakers. It is recommended that unilateral cochlear implant recipients, with measurable unaided hearing thresholds, be fit with a hearing aid.

[1]  T A Ricketts Fitting Hearing Aids to Individual Loudness‐Perception Measures , 1996, Ear and hearing.

[2]  David Grayden,et al.  Speech perception for adults who use hearing aids in conjunction with cochlear implants in opposite ears. , 2006, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[3]  Wolfgang Gaggl,et al.  Recognition of Speech Presented at Soft to Loud Levels by Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients of Three Cochlear Implant Systems , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[4]  P. Blamey Adaptive Dynamic Range Optimization (ADRO): A Digital Amplification Strategy for Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants , 2005, Trends in amplification.

[5]  S. Waltzman,et al.  Sensory aids in conjunction with cochlear implants. , 1992, The American journal of otology.

[6]  William Noble,et al.  Hearing speech against spatially separate competing speech versus competing noise , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  G M Clark,et al.  The Effect of Loudness Imbalance between Electrodes in Cochlear Implant Users , 1997, Ear and hearing.

[8]  D B Hawkins,et al.  Monaural/binaural preferences: effect of hearing aid circuit on speech intelligibility and sound quality. , 1997, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[9]  P Nopp,et al.  Sound Localization in Bilateral Users of MED-EL COMBI 40/40+ Cochlear Implants , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[10]  Nicole Sislian,et al.  Sound-Direction Identification with Bilateral Cochlear Implants , 2007, Ear and hearing.

[11]  D D Dirks,et al.  The effect of spatially separated sound sources on speech intelligibility. , 1969, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[12]  P G Stelmachowicz,et al.  A Comparison of Threshold‐Based Fitting Strategies for Nonlinear Hearing Aids , 1998, Ear and hearing.

[13]  W. Baumgartner,et al.  Speech perception with a cochlear implant used in conjunction with a hearing aid in the opposite ear , 2004, International journal of audiology.

[14]  D. Grantham,et al.  Horizontal-Plane Localization of Noise and Speech Signals by Postlingually Deafened Adults Fitted With Bilateral Cochlear Implants* , 2007, Ear and hearing.

[15]  Larry E. Humes,et al.  Evolution of Prescriptive Fitting Approaches , 1996 .

[16]  H. Wallach,et al.  The role of head movements and vestibular and visual cues in sound localization. , 1940 .

[17]  Hugo Fastl,et al.  Localization ability with bimodal hearing aids and bilateral cochlear implants. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[18]  R R Coles,et al.  Binaural advantages in hearing of speech , 1971, The Journal of Laryngology & Otology.

[19]  Naoki Matsushiro,et al.  Comparison of speech perception between monaural and binaural hearing in cochlear implant patients , 2004, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[20]  Robyn M. Cox,et al.  Development of the Connected Speech Test (CST) , 1987, Ear and hearing.

[21]  Erin C Schafer,et al.  A meta-analytic comparison of binaural benefits between bilateral cochlear implants and bimodal stimulation. , 2007, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[22]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  Spatial Hearing and Speech Intelligibility in Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users , 2009, Ear and hearing.

[23]  Samuel F. Lybarger,et al.  Binaural Hearing and Amplification. , 1981 .

[24]  D. Byrne,et al.  Effects of long-term bilateral and unilateral fitting of different hearing aid types on the ability to locate sounds. , 1992, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[25]  M. Skinner,et al.  Evaluation of equivalency in two recordings of monosyllabic words. , 2006, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[26]  M P Haggard,et al.  Forms of binaural summation and the implications of individual variability for binaural hearing aids. , 1982, Scandinavian audiology. Supplementum.

[27]  R A Butler,et al.  An analysis of the monaural displacement of sound in space , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[28]  Stuart Gatehouse,et al.  Effects of bilateral versus unilateral hearing aid fitting on abilities measured by the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing scale (SSQ) , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[29]  Haggard Mp,et al.  Forms of binaural summation and the implications of individual variability for binaural hearing aids. , 1982 .

[30]  Richard S. Tyler,et al.  Patients Utilizing a Hearing Aid and a Cochlear Implant: Speech Perception and Localization , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[31]  M. Lutman,et al.  Auditory Localization Abilities in Bilateral Cochlear Implant Recipients , 2005, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[32]  Mandy Hill,et al.  An Overview of Binaural Advantages for Children and Adults Who Use Binaural/Bimodal Hearing Devices , 2006, Audiology and Neurotology.

[33]  H S Colburn,et al.  Binaural interaction of impaired listeners. A review of past research. , 1981, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[34]  Denis Byrne,et al.  Open Earmold Fittings for Improving Aided Auditory Localization for Sensorineural Hearing Losses with Good High‐Frequency Hearing , 1998, Ear and hearing.

[35]  Margaret W Skinner,et al.  Nucleus® 24 Advanced Encoder Conversion Study: Performance versus Preference , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[36]  Margaret W Skinner,et al.  Effects of Stimulation Rate with the Nucleus 24 ACE Speech Coding Strategy , 2002, Ear and hearing.

[37]  W Noble,et al.  Improvement in aided sound localization with open earmolds: observations in people with high-frequency hearing loss. , 1998, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[38]  M. Demorest,et al.  Use of Test‐Retest Measures to Evaluate Performance Stability in Adults with Cochlear Implants , 1995, Ear and hearing.

[39]  M. Skinner,et al.  Optimization of Speech Processor Fitting Strategies for Chinese‐Speaking Cochlear Implantees , 1998, The Laryngoscope.

[40]  C James,et al.  Speech perception in noise with implant and hearing aid. , 1997, The American journal of otology.

[41]  W. Noble,et al.  The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) , 2004, International journal of audiology.

[42]  M W Skinner,et al.  Amplification bandwidth and speech intelligibility for two listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. , 1982, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[43]  Richard S Tyler,et al.  Benefit of wearing a hearing aid on the unimplanted ear in adult users of a cochlear implant. , 2005, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[44]  Ira J. Hirsh,et al.  The Relation between Localization and Intelligibility , 1950 .

[45]  Stuart Gatehouse,et al.  Interaural asymmetry of hearing loss, Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) disabilities, and handicap , 2004, International Journal of Audiology.

[46]  R. Tyler,et al.  Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[47]  P Seligman,et al.  Architecture of the Spectra 22 speech processor. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[48]  J. Jerger,et al.  Speech perception and production in children wearing a cochlear implant in one ear and a hearing aid in the opposite ear. , 1995, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[49]  B. Hornsby,et al.  The Speech Intelligibility Index: What is it and whatʼs it good for? , 2004 .

[50]  J. Jerger,et al.  Preferred Method For Clinical Determination Of Pure-Tone Thresholds , 1959 .

[51]  Á. Ramos,et al.  Advantages of binaural hearing provided through bimodal stimulation via a cochlear implant and a conventional hearing aid: A 6-month comparative study , 2005, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[52]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Speech and melody recognition in binaurally combined acoustic and electric hearing. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[53]  M Florentine,et al.  Relation between lateralization and loudness in asymmetrical hearing losses. , 1976, Journal of the American Audiology Society.

[54]  Chris J James,et al.  An Investigation of Input Level Range for the Nucleus 24 Cochlear Implant System: Speech Perception Performance, Program Preference, and Loudness Comfort Ratings , 2003, Ear and hearing.

[55]  R. Humanski,et al.  Binaural and Monaural Localization of Sound in Two-Dimensional Space , 1990, Perception.

[56]  R. V. Hoesel Exploring the benefits of bilateral cochlear implants. , 2004 .

[57]  W Noble,et al.  A comparison of different binaural hearing aid systems for sound localization in the horizontal and vertical planes. , 1990, British journal of audiology.

[58]  Gitte Keidser,et al.  The effect of multi-channel wide dynamic range compression, noise reduction, and the directional microphone on horizontal localization performance in hearing aid wearers , 2006, International journal of audiology.

[59]  W. Noble,et al.  Auditory localization, detection of spatial separateness, and speech hearing in noise by hearing impaired listeners. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[60]  P J Blamey,et al.  Monaural and Binaural Loudness Measures in Cochlear Implant Users with Contralateral Residual Hearing , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[61]  D. Pascoe,et al.  Frequency responses of hearing aids and their effects on the speech perception of hearing-impaired subjects. , 1975, The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology.

[62]  Ruth A. Bentler,et al.  Comparison of Hearing Aids Over the 20th Century , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[63]  T. Ching,et al.  Should Children Who Use Cochlear Implants Wear Hearing Aids in the Opposite Ear? , 2001, Ear and hearing.

[64]  B E Walden,et al.  Description and validation of an LDL procedure designed to select SSPL90. , 1987, Ear and hearing.

[65]  Thomas J Balkany,et al.  Benefits of bilateral cochlear implantation: a review , 2007, Current opinion in otolaryngology & head and neck surgery.

[66]  R. Carhart,et al.  Monaural and Binaural Discrimination against Competing Sentences , 1965 .

[67]  R. V. van Hoesel Exploring the Benefits of Bilateral Cochlear Implants , 2004, Audiology and Neurotology.

[68]  H. Dillon,et al.  Binaural-Bimodal Fitting or Bilateral Implantation for Managing Severe to Profound Deafness: A Review , 2007, Trends in amplification.

[69]  J M Festen,et al.  Speech-reception threshold in noise with one and two hearing aids. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[70]  Margaret W Skinner,et al.  Optimizing Cochlear Implant Speech Performance , 2003, The Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology. Supplement.

[71]  Teresa Y. C. Ching,et al.  Binaural Benefits for Adults Who Use Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants in Opposite Ears , 2004, Ear and hearing.

[72]  Ruth Y Litovsky,et al.  Bilateral Cochlear Implants in Children: Localization Acuity Measured with Minimum Audible Angle , 2006, Ear and hearing.

[73]  G. E. Peterson,et al.  Revised CNC lists for auditory tests. , 1962, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[74]  D Byrne,et al.  Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[75]  J. C. Middlebrooks,et al.  Two-dimensional sound localization by human listeners. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[76]  R. Häusler,et al.  Sound localization in subjects with impaired hearing. Spatial-discrimination and interaural-discrimination tests. , 1983, Acta oto-laryngologica. Supplementum.

[77]  H Levitt,et al.  An experimental comparison of four hearing aid prescription methods. , 1988, Ear and hearing.

[78]  Talma Shpak,et al.  Binaural–bimodal hearing: Concomitant use of a unilateral cochlear implant and a contralateral hearing aid , 2005, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[79]  M W Skinner,et al.  Comparison of two methods for selecting minimum stimulation levels used in programming the Nucleus 22 cochlear implant. , 1999, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[80]  W R Thurlow,et al.  Head movements during sound localization. , 1967, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[81]  W Noble,et al.  Disabilities and handicaps associated with impaired auditory localization. , 1995, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[82]  H W EWERTSEN,et al.  Hearing aid evaluation. , 1956, A.M.A. archives of otolaryngology.

[83]  I. Hirsh The Influence of Interaural Phase on Interaural Summation and Inhibition , 1948 .

[84]  T. Ching,et al.  Binaural redundancy and inter-aural time difference cues for patients wearing a cochlear implant and a hearing aid in opposite ears , 2005, International journal of audiology.

[85]  Michael Valente,et al.  Strategies for Selecting and Verifying Hearing Aid Fittings. , 1994 .

[86]  Sam Glucksberg,et al.  Noise Localization after Unilateral Attenuation , 1966 .

[87]  J. C. R. Licklider,et al.  The Influence of Interaural Phase Relations upon the Masking of Speech by White Noise , 1948 .