Speech Understanding with the CIS and the n-of-m Strategy in the MED-EL COMBI 40+ System

Speech tests have been performed on 6 subjects for comparing the standard 12-channel continuous interleaved sampling (CIS) strategy (CIS12), the 7-channel CIS strategy (CIS7) and the 7-of-12 strategy in the MED-EL COMBI 40+ system. An ABAB experimental design was used whereby each strategy was reversed and replicated. Speech tests were performed in quiet (vowels, consonants, monosyllables, sentences) and noise (sentences). Results showed that for vowels, CIS12 is significantly superior to CIS7, for consonants and sentences CIS12, CIS7 and 7-of-12 performed equally well, and that for monosyllables 7-of-12 is significantly superior to both CIS12 and CIS7. In addition, 7-of-12 is superior to CIS7 by almost the same amount as CIS12, but in this case the difference is not significant. Further, all strategies have been found to be equally robust in noise with respect to sentence understanding. The differences between CIS12 and 7-of-12 on the one hand and CIS7 on the other hand may be attributed to decreased spectral resolution of the latter. The fact that – in contrast to what has been reported for the SPEAK strategy – 7-of-12 is equally robust in noise as the CIS strategies is explained by the use of higher stimulation rates, wider frequency bands and a higher percentage of channels stimulated in each cycle.

[1]  B. Pompino-Marschall Einfuhrung in Die Phonetik , 1995 .

[2]  J K Shallop,et al.  Evaluation of a new spectral peak coding strategy for the Nucleus 22 Channel Cochlear Implant System. , 1994, The American journal of otology.

[3]  W Baumgartner,et al.  Speech understanding in quiet and in noise with the CIS speech coding strategy (MED-EL Combi-40) compared to the multipeak and spectral peak strategies (nucleus). , 1996, ORL; journal for oto-rhino-laryngology and its related specialties.

[4]  B. S. Wilson,et al.  Comparative studies of speech processing strategies for cochlear implants , 1988, The Laryngoscope.

[5]  Speech Processors for Auditory Prostheses , 2001 .

[6]  D T Lawson,et al.  New processing strategies for multichannel cochlear prostheses. , 1993, Progress in brain research.

[7]  W Baumgartner,et al.  Evaluation of performance with the COMBI40 cochlear implant in adults: a multicentric clinical study. , 1997, ORL; journal for oto-rhino-laryngology and its related specialties.

[8]  I. Hochmair-Desoyer,et al.  The HSM sentence test as a tool for evaluating the speech understanding in noise of cochlear implant users. , 1997, The American journal of otology.

[9]  R V Shannon,et al.  Speech recognition as a function of the number of electrodes used in the SPEAK cochlear implant speech processor. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[10]  W Baumgartner,et al.  Optimization of channel number and stimulation rate for the fast continuous interleaved sampling strategy in the COMBI 40+. , 1997, The American journal of otology.

[11]  William M. Rabinowitz,et al.  Better speech recognition with cochlear implants , 1991, Nature.

[12]  B S Wilson,et al.  The future of cochlear implants. , 1997, British journal of audiology.