Clinical assessment of spectral modulation detection for adult cochlear implant recipients: A non-language based measure of performance outcomes

Abstract Objective: Spectral modulation detection (SMD) provides a psychoacoustic estimate of spectral resolution. The SMD threshold for an implanted ear is highly correlated with speech understanding and is thus a non-linguistic, psychoacoustic index of speech understanding. This measure, however, is time and equipment intensive and thus not practical for clinical use. Thus the purpose of the current study was to investigate the efficacy of a quick SMD task with the following three study aims: (1) to investigate the correlation between the long psychoacoustic, and quick SMD tasks, (2) to determine the test/retest variability of the quick SMD task, and (3) to evaluate the relationship between the quick SMD task and speech understanding. Design: This study included a within-subjects, repeated-measures design. Study sample: Seventy-six adult cochlear implant recipients participated. Results: The results were as follows: (1) there was a significant correlation between the long psychoacoustic, and quick SMD tasks, (2) the test-retest variability of the quick SMD task was highly significant and, (3) there was a significant positive correlation between the quick SMD task and monosyllabic word recognition. Conclusions: The results of this study represent the direct clinical translation of a research-proven task of SMD into a quick, clinically feasible format.

[1]  M. Cooke,et al.  Consonant identification in noise by native and non-native listeners: effects of local context. , 2008, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[2]  G. Fechner Elemente der Psychophysik , 1998 .

[3]  A K Nábĕlek,et al.  Perception of consonants in reverberation by native and non-native listeners. , 1984, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[4]  A. Nabelek,et al.  English consonant recognition in noise and in reverberation by Japanese and American listeners. , 1990, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[5]  Anthony J Spahr,et al.  Spectral modulation detection and vowel and consonant identifications in cochlear implant listeners. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Belinda A Henry,et al.  Spectral peak resolution and speech recognition in quiet: normal hearing, hearing impaired, and cochlear implant listeners. , 2005, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Guidelines for manual pure-tone threshold audiometry. , 1978, ASHA.

[8]  Heather A. Kreft,et al.  Comparing spatial tuning curves, spectral ripple resolution, and speech perception in cochlear implant users. , 2011, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[9]  Darren George,et al.  SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference , 1998 .

[10]  Mead C. Killion,et al.  Quick SIN and BKB‐SIN, two new speech‐in‐noise tests permitting SNR‐50 estimates in 1 to 2 min , 2001 .

[11]  Robert G Turner The Hearing Aid Expert: Audiologist, Dealer, or Otolaryngologist? , 1998, American journal of audiology.

[12]  S Buus,et al.  Age of second-language acquisition and perception of speech in noise. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[13]  Belinda A Henry,et al.  The resolution of complex spectral patterns by cochlear implant and normal-hearing listeners. , 2003, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[14]  Jackson Roush,et al.  Year 2007 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs , 2007, Pediatrics.

[15]  Jong Ho Won,et al.  Maximizing the Spectral and Temporal Benefits of Two Clinically Used Sound Processing Strategies for Cochlear Implants , 2012, Trends in amplification.

[16]  Anthony J Spahr,et al.  Relationship between perception of spectral ripple and speech recognition in cochlear implant and vocoder listeners. , 2007, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[17]  Ting Zhang,et al.  Relationship Between Auditory Function of Nonimplanted Ears and Bimodal Benefit , 2013, Ear and hearing.

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

[19]  Jong Ho Won,et al.  Relationship Between Behavioral and Physiological Spectral-Ripple Discrimination , 2011, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

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

[21]  Anthony Spahr,et al.  Spectral cues for understanding speech in quiet and in noise , 2011, Cochlear implants international.

[22]  Michael F Dorman,et al.  Development and Validation of the AzBio Sentence Lists , 2012, Ear and hearing.

[23]  D. Swanepoel Global epidemic of infant hearing loss - priorities for prevention , 2010 .

[24]  Jong Ho Won,et al.  Spectral-Ripple Resolution Correlates with Speech Reception in Noise in Cochlear Implant Users , 2007, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[25]  Ruth A. Bentler,et al.  Guidelines for hearing aid fitting for adults , 1998 .

[26]  Andrew J Oxenham,et al.  Assessing the role of spectral and intensity cues in spectral ripple detection and discrimination in cochlear-implant users. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.