Frequency Overlap Between Electric and Acoustic Stimulation and Speech-Perception Benefit in Patients with Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation

Objectives: Our aim was to assess, for patients with a cochlear implant in one ear and low-frequency acoustic hearing in the contralateral ear, whether reducing the overlap in frequencies conveyed in the acoustic signal and those analyzed by the cochlear implant speech processor would improve speech recognition. Design: The recognition of monosyllabic words in quiet and sentences in noise was evaluated in three listening configurations: electric stimulation alone, acoustic stimulation alone, and combined electric and acoustic stimulation. The acoustic stimuli were either unfiltered or low-pass (LP) filtered at 250, 500, or 750 Hz. The electric stimuli were either unfiltered or high-pass (HP) filtered at 250, 500, or 750 Hz. In the combined condition, the unfiltered acoustic signal was paired with the unfiltered electric signal, the 250-Hz LP acoustic signal was paired with the 250-Hz HP electric signal, the 500-Hz LP acoustic signal was paired with the 500-Hz HP electric signal, and the 750-Hz LP acoustic signal was paired with the 750-Hz HP electric signal. Results: For both acoustic and electric signals, performance increased as the bandwidth increased. The highest level of performance in the combined condition was observed in the unfiltered acoustic plus unfiltered electric condition. Conclusions: Reducing the overlap in frequency representation between acoustic and electric stimulation does not increase speech understanding scores for patients who have residual hearing in the ear contralateral to the implant. We find that acoustic information <250 Hz significantly improves performance for patients who combine electric and acoustic stimulation and accounts for the majority of the speech-perception benefit when acoustic stimulation is combined with electric stimulation.

[1]  Marco Pelizzone,et al.  Acoustic to Electric Pitch Comparisons in Cochlear Implant Subjects with Residual Hearing , 2006, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[2]  René H. Gifford,et al.  Speech Recognition Materials and Ceiling Effects: Considerations for Cochlear Implant Programs , 2008, Audiology and Neurotology.

[3]  Sharon A McKarns,et al.  The Benefits of Combining Acoustic and Electric Stimulation for the Recognition of Speech, Voice and Melodies , 2007, Audiology and Neurotology.

[4]  Thomas Lenarz,et al.  Residual Hearing Conservation and Electroacoustic Stimulation with the Nucleus 24 Contour Advance Cochlear Implant , 2006, Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology.

[5]  Philipos C. Loizou,et al.  Factors that allow a high level of speech understanding by patients fit with cochlear implants. , 2002 .

[6]  Bruce J Gantz,et al.  Combining acoustic and electrical speech processing: Iowa/Nucleus hybrid implant , 2004, Acta oto-laryngologica.

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

[8]  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.

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

[10]  Speech Processors for Auditory Prostheses , 2001 .

[11]  Fan-Gang Zeng,et al.  Unintelligible Low-Frequency Sound Enhances Simulated Cochlear-Implant Speech Recognition in Noise , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[12]  Jan Kiefer,et al.  Hearing preservation in cochlear implantation for electric acoustic stimulation , 2004, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[13]  Jan Kiefer,et al.  Conservation of low-frequency hearing in cochlear implantation , 2004, Acta oto-laryngologica.

[14]  H. Dillon,et al.  The National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) New Procedure for Selecting the Gain and Frequency Response of a Hearing Aid , 1986, Ear and hearing.

[15]  Louise Loiselle,et al.  An Electric Frequency-to-place Map for a Cochlear Implant Patient with Hearing in the Nonimplanted Ear , 2007, Journal for the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[16]  Michael F Dorman,et al.  Combined electric and contralateral acoustic hearing: word and sentence recognition with bimodal hearing. , 2007, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[17]  Michael F Dorman,et al.  Effects of Minimum Stimulation Settings for the Med El Tempo+ Speech Processor on Speech Understanding , 2005, Ear and hearing.

[18]  A. Gunkel,et al.  Microendoscopic transoral CO2-laser resection of an extensive nasopharyngeal and oral teratoma. , 1997, American journal of otolaryngology.

[19]  P. Newall,et al.  Hearing aid gain and frequency response requirements for the severely/profoundly hearing impaired. , 1990, Ear and hearing.

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

[21]  Jan Kiefer,et al.  Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation of the Auditory System: Results of a Clinical Study , 2005, Audiology and Neurotology.

[22]  R. Hartmann,et al.  Electric-Acoustic Stimulation of the Auditory System , 1999, ORL.

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

[24]  Bruce J Gantz,et al.  Speech recognition in noise for cochlear implant listeners: benefits of residual acoustic hearing. , 2004, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[25]  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.

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

[27]  Ilona Anderson,et al.  The Influence of Different Speech Processor and Hearing Aid Settings on Speech Perception Outcomes in Electric Acoustic Stimulation Patients , 2007, Ear and hearing.