The effect of fluctuating maskers on speech understanding of high-performing cochlear implant users.

OBJECTIVE: The present study evaluated whether the poorer baseline performance of cochlear implant (CI) users or the technical and/or physiological properties of CI stimulation are responsible for the absence of masking release. DESIGN: This study measured speech reception thresholds (SRTs) in continuous and modulated noise as a function of signal to noise ratio (SNR). STUDY SAMPLE: A total of 24 subjects participated: 12 normal-hearing (NH) listeners and 12 subjects provided with recent MED-EL CI systems. RESULTS: The mean SRT of CI users in continuous noise was -3.0 ± 1.5 dB SNR (mean ± SEM), while the normal-hearing group reached -5.9 ± 0.8 dB SNR. In modulated noise, the difference across groups increased considerably. For CI users, the mean SRT worsened to -1.4 ± 2.3 dB SNR, while it improved for normal-hearing listeners to -18.9 ± 3.8 dB SNR. CONCLUSIONS: The detrimental effect of fluctuating maskers on SRTs in CI users shown by prior studies was confirmed by the current study. Concluding, the absence of masking release is mainly caused by the technical and/or physiological properties of CI stimulation, not just the poorer baseline performance of many CI users compared to normal-hearing subjects. Speech understanding in modulated noise was more robust in CI users who had a relatively large electrical dynamic range.

Towards a Unified Testing Framework for Single-Sided Deafness Studies: A Consensus Paper.

BACKGROUND: While hearing aids for a contralateral routing of signals (CROS-HA) and bone conduction devices have been the traditional treatment for single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL), in recent years, cochlear implants (CIs) have increasingly become a viable treatment choice, particularly in countries where regulatory approval and reimbursement schemes are in place. Part of the reason for this shift is that the CI is the only device capable of restoring bilateral input to the auditory system and hence of possibly reinstating binaural hearing. Although several studies have independently shown that the CI is a safe and effective treatment for SSD and AHL, clinical outcome measures in those studies and across CI centers vary greatly. Only with a consistent use of defined and agreed-upon outcome measures across centers can high-level evidence be generated to assess the safety and efficacy of CIs and alternative treatments in recipients with SSD and AHL. METHODS: This paper presents a comparative study design and minimum outcome measures for the assessment of current treatment options in patients with SSD/AHL. The protocol was developed, discussed, and eventually agreed upon by expert panels that convened at the 2015 APSCI conference in Beijing, China, and at the CI 2016 conference in Toronto, Canada. RESULTS: A longitudinal study design comparing CROS-HA, BCD, and CI treatments is proposed. The recommended outcome measures include (1) speech in noise testing, using the same set of 3 spatial configurations to compare binaural benefits such as summation, squelch, and head shadow across devices; (2) localization testing, using stimuli that rove in both level and spectral content; (3) questionnaires to collect quality of life measures and the frequency of device use; and (4) questionnaires for assessing the impact of tinnitus before and after treatment, if applicable. CONCLUSION: A protocol for the assessment of treatment options and outcomes in recipients with SSD and AHL is presented. The proposed set of minimum outcome measures aims at harmonizing assessment methods across centers and thus at generating a growing body of high-level evidence for those treatment options.

Comparison between ABR with click and narrow band chirp stimuli in children.

OBJECTIVE: Click and chirp-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABR) are applied for the estimation of hearing thresholds in children. The present study analyzes ABR thresholds across a large sample of children's ears obtained with both methods. The aim was to demonstrate the correlation between both methods using narrow band chirp and click stimuli. METHODS: Click and chirp evoked ABRs were measured in 253 children aged from 0 to 18 years to determine their individual auditory threshold. The delay-compensated stimuli were narrow band CE chirps with either 2000 Hz or 4000 Hz center frequencies. Measurements were performed consecutively during natural sleep, and under sedation or general anesthesia. Threshold estimation was performed for each measurement by two experienced audiologists. RESULTS: Pearson-correlation analysis revealed highly significant correlations (r=0.94) between click and chirp derived thresholds for both 2 kHz and 4 kHz chirps. No considerable differences were observed either between different age ranges or gender. Comparing the thresholds estimated using ABR with click stimuli and chirp stimuli, only 0.8-2% for the 2000 Hz NB-chirp and 0.4-1.2% of the 4000 Hz NB-chirp measurements differed more than 15 dB for different degrees of hearing loss or normal hearing. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that either NB-chirp or click ABR is sufficient for threshold estimation. This holds for the chirp frequencies of 2000 Hz and 4000 Hz. The use of either click- or chirp-evoked ABR allows a reduction of recording time in young infants. Nevertheless, to cross-check the results of one of the methods, we recommend measurements with the other method as well.

Comodulation masking release induced by controlled electrical stimulation of auditory nerve fibers.

Normal-hearing listeners can perceptually segregate concurrent sound sources, but listeners with significant hearing loss or who wear a cochlear implant (CI) lag behind in this ability. Perceptual grouping mechanisms are essential to segregate concurrent sound sources and affect comodulation masking release (CMR). Thus, CMR measurements in CI users could shed light on segregation cues needed for forming and grouping of auditory objects. CMR illustrates the fact that detection of a target sound embedded in a fluctuating masker is improved by the addition of masker energy remote from the target frequency, provided the envelope fluctuations across masker components are coherent. We modified such a CMR experiment to electrically-induced hearing using direct stimulation and measured the effect in 21 CI users. Cluster analysis of our data revealed two groups: one showed no or only small CMR of 0.1 dB ± 2.7 (N = 14) and a second group achieved a CMR of 10.7 dB ± 3.2 (N = 7), a value that is close to the enhancement observed in a comparable acoustic experiment in normal-hearing listeners (12.9 dB ± 2.6, N = 6). Interestingly, we observed that CMR in CI users may relate to hearing etiology and duration of hearing loss pre-implantation. Our study demonstrates for the first time that a substantial minority of cochlear-implant listeners (about a third) can show significant CMR. This outcome motivates the development of physiologically inspired multi-band gain control and/or different coding strategies for these groups in order to better preserve coherent modulation and thus to take advantage of the individual remaining capabilities to analyze spectro-temporal patterns.