[Speech discrimination with separated signal sources and sound localization with speech stimuli : Learning effects and reproducibility]. / Verstehen im Störschall mit räumlich getrennten Signalquellen und Richtungshören mit Sprachstimuli : Lerneffekte und Reproduzierbarkeit.

BACKGROUND: Binaural hearing enables better speech comprehension in noisy environments and is necessary for acoustic spatial orientation. This study investigates speech discrimination in noise with separated signal sources and measures sound localization. The aim was to study characteristics and reproducibility of two selected measurement techniques which seem to be suitable for description of the aforementioned aspects of binaural hearing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Speech reception thresholds (SRT) in noise and test-retest reliability were collected from 55 normal-hearing adults for a spatial setup of loudspeakers with angles of ±â€¯45° and ±â€¯90° using the Oldenburg sentence test. The investigations of sound localization were conducted in a semicircle and fullcircle setup (7 and 12 equidistant loudspeakers). RESULTS: SRT (S-45N45: -14.1 dB SNR; S45N-45: -16.4 dB SNR; S0N90: -13.1 dB SNR; S0N-90: -13.4 dB SNR) and test-retest reliability (4 to 6 dB SNR) were collected for speech intelligibility in noise with separated signals. The procedural learning effect for this setup could only be mitigated with 120 training sentences. Significantly smaller SRT values, resulting in better speech discrimination, were found for the test situation of the right compared to the left ear. RMS values could be gathered for sound localization in the semicircle (1,9°) as well as in the fullcircle setup (11,1°). Better results were obtained in the retest of the fullcircle setup. CONCLUSION: When using the Oldenburg sentence test in noise with spatially separated signals, it is mandatory to perform a training session of 120 sentences in order to minimize the procedural learning effect. Ear-specific SRT values for speech discrimination in noise with separated signal sources are required, which is probably due to the right-ear advantage. A training is recommended for sound localization in the fullcircle setup.

Factors to Describe the Outcome Characteristics of a CI Recipient.

Background: In cochlear implant (CI) treatment, there is a large variability in outcome. The aim of our study was to identify the independent audiometric measures that are most directly relevant for describing this variability in outcome characteristics of CI recipients. An extended audiometric test battery was used with selected adult patients in order to characterize the full range of CI outcomes. Methods: CI users were recruited for this study on the basis of their postoperative results and divided into three groups: low (1st quartile), moderate (medium decentile), and high hearing performance (4th quartile). Speech recognition was measured in quiet by using (i) monosyllabic words (40-80 dB SPL), (ii) speech reception threshold (SRT) for numbers, and (iii) the German matrix test in noise. In order to reconstruct demanding everyday listening situations in the clinic, the temporal characteristics of the background noise and the spatial arrangements of the signal sources were varied for tests in noise. In addition, a survey was conducted using the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities (SSQ) questionnaire and the Listening Effort (LE) questionnaire. Results: Fifteen subjects per group were examined (total N = 45), who did not differ significantly in terms of age, time after CI surgery, or CI use behavior. The groups differed mainly in the results of speech audiometry. For speech recognition, significant differences were found between the three groups for the monosyllabic tests in quiet and for the sentences in stationary (S0°N0°) and fluctuating (S0°NCI) noise. Word comprehension and sentence comprehension in quiet were both strongly correlated with the SRT in noise. This observation was also confirmed by a factor analysis. No significant differences were found between the three groups for the SSQ questionnaire and the LE questionnaire results. The results of the factor analysis indicate that speech recognition in noise provides information highly comparable to information from speech intelligibility in quiet. Conclusions: The factor analysis highlighted three components describing the postoperative outcome of CI patients. These were (i) the audiometrically measured supra-threshold speech recognition and (ii) near-threshold audibility, as well as (iii) the subjective assessment of the relationship to real life as determined by the questionnaires. These parameters appear well suited to setting up a framework for a test battery to assess CI outcomes.

Optimizing the efficiency of ECAP measurements due to interpolation.

BACKGROUND: Thresholds of electrically evoked compound action potentials (TECAP) may serve as starting points for electrophysiologically based fitting of cochlear implants. Absent TECAP data at single electrodes reduces the number of data points available for fitting and can be substituted by interpolation of measured data points. AIM: To compare complete TECAP profiles with interpolated TECAP profiles of 5/22 (∼22.7%) and 11/22 (50%) electrode contacts. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Single-centre, retrospective, observational study of data from 624 ears implanted with a Slim Modiolar (CI ×32) or Contour Advance (CI ×12, CI24RE(CA)) electrode array (Cochlear Ltd). The deviation of the complete measured TECAP profile from the same profile with missing and therefore interpolated TECAP values was quantified. RESULTS: Interpolated TECAP profiles significantly differ from complete measured profiles especially at the basal and apical electrodes. Reference data for Slim Modiolar and Contour Advance electrodes mean profiles are provided. CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: Reducing the number of measured TECAP electrodes has to be weighted against losses in the TECAP accuracy of interpolated values. A clinically acceptable compromise may be a reduction from 22 to 11 even non-equidistant data points. While reducing ECAP measurement time, it is accompanied by a minimal loss of accuracy of the TECAP threshold profile.