Dynamic Range Enhancement for Cochlear Implants

Hypothesis The addition of a continuous, unmodulated, high-rate pulse train to sinusoidal stimuli presented by the cochlear implant to implant recipients will result in increases in the psychophysical dynamic range. Background The hearing dynamic range of cochlear implant patients is markedly reduced compared with that of normal-hearing individuals. This has negative implications for both speech perception and sound quality in these patients. It has been suggested that the addition of an unmodulated high-rate pulse train to deafened auditory nerves could create spontaneous-like neural activity, similar to that recorded from normal ears, of which one significant benefit would be an increase in the dynamic range of cochlear implant users. Methods Twenty-nine patients who underwent implantation with the Clarion CII device participated in this single-blinded prospective study. The psychophysical dynamic range of 28 of these subjects was measured with sinusoidal stimuli in response to various levels of an additional unmodulated high-rate pulse train. Results All the tested subjects (n = 28) demonstrated an increase in dynamic range in response to an appropriate level of unmodulated high-rate pulse train. The largest increase in dynamic range for each subject had a mean value of 6.7 dB. Conclusion The addition of an unmodulated high-rate pulse train to the electric signal presented to cochlear implant patients results in significant increases in dynamic range for sinusoidal stimuli.

[1]  Charles A Miller,et al.  Response of the auditory nerve to sinusoidal electrical stimulation: effects of high-rate pulse trains , 2004, Hearing Research.

[2]  F G Zeng,et al.  Amplitude mapping and phoneme recognition in cochlear implant listeners. , 1999, Ear and hearing.

[3]  M. Liberman,et al.  Auditory-nerve response from cats raised in a low-noise chamber. , 1978, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  Q J Fu,et al.  Effects of Dynamic Range and Amplitude Mapping on Phoneme Recognition in Nucleus‐22 Cochlear Implant Users , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[5]  Zachary M. Smith,et al.  Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception , 2002, Nature.

[6]  Carson C. Chow,et al.  Stochastic resonance without tuning , 1995, Nature.

[7]  P E Souza,et al.  Effect of compression ratio on speech recognition and speech-quality ratings with wide dynamic range compression amplification. , 2000, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[8]  R A Levine,et al.  Auditory-nerve activity in cats with normal and abnormal cochleas. In: Sensorineural hearing loss. , 1970, Ciba Foundation symposium.

[9]  Robert V. Shannon,et al.  Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. II. Channel interaction , 1983, Hearing Research.

[10]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  H Levitt,et al.  The effect of compression ratio and release time on the categorical rating of sound quality. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  R. Shannon Threshold and loudness functions for pulsatile stimulation of cochlear implants , 1985, Hearing Research.

[13]  F. Zeng,et al.  Loudness of dynamic stimuli in acoustic and electric hearing. , 1997, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  P C Loizou,et al.  The Effect of Reduced Dynamic Range on Speech Understanding: Implications for Patients with Cochlear Implants , 2000, Ear and hearing.

[15]  J. T Rubinstein,et al.  Pseudospontaneous activity: stochastic independence of auditory nerve fibers with electrical stimulation , 1999, Hearing Research.

[16]  R. Shannon Temporal modulation transfer functions in patients with cochlear implants. , 1992, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  L. Litvak Towards a better speech processor for cochlear implants : auditory- nerve responses to high-rate electric pulse trains , 2002 .

[18]  B. Pfingst,et al.  Stimulus features affecting psychophysical detection thresholds for electrical stimulation of the cochlea. I: Phase duration and stimulus duration. , 1991, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[19]  B. Moore An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing , 1977 .

[20]  B. Delgutte,et al.  Auditory nerve fiber responses to electric stimulation: modulated and unmodulated pulse trains. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[21]  R. Shannon Multichannel electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in man. I. Basic psychophysics , 1983, Hearing Research.

[22]  B. Pfingst,et al.  Stimulus features affecting psychophysical detection thresholds for electrical stimulation of the cochlea. II: Frequency and interpulse interval. , 1993, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.