Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Hear Res ; 421: 108369, 2022 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34728110

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The output performance of a novel semi-implantable transcutaneous bone conduction device was compared to an established percutaneous bone-anchored hearing system device using cadaver heads. The influence of actuator position, tissue growth below the actuator and mounting it on the surface or in a flattened bone bed on the performance of the implanted actuator was investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The percutaneous and the new transcutaneous device were sequentially implanted at two sites in five human cadaver heads: 55 mm superior-posterior to the ear canal opening (position A) and, closer to the cochlea, about 20 mm inferior-posterior to the ear canal opening behind the pinna on the mastoid (position B). The ipsi- and contralateral cochlear promontory (CP) velocity magnitude responses to percutaneous and transcutaneous stimulation were measured using laser Doppler vibrometry. In addition, the CP vibration of the transcutaneous device placed directly on the skull bone surface was compared with the placement in a flattened bone bed at a depth of about 3 mm. Finally, the influence of placing a thin silicone interposition layer under the implanted transducer was also explored. RESULTS: The percutaneous device provided about an 11 dB higher average CP vibration level than the transcutaneous device at frequencies between 0.5 and 10 kHz. The ipsilateral CP vibration responses with stimulations at position B were on average 13 dB higher compared to stimulation at position A. The placement of the transcutaneous transducer at position B provided similar or higher average vibration magnitudes than the percutaneous transducer at position A. The 3 mm deep flattened bone bed had no significant effects on the output performance. Placing a thin silicone layer under the transcutaneous transducer had no significant influence on the output of the transcutaneous device. CONCLUSIONS: Our results using the CP vibration responses show that at frequencies above 500 Hz the new transcutaneous device at position B provides similar output levels as the percutaneous device at position A. The results also indicated that neither a bone bed for the placement of the transcutaneous transducer nor a simulated tissue growth between the actuator and the bone affect the output performance of the device.


Asunto(s)
Conducción Ósea , Audífonos , Conducción Ósea/fisiología , Cadáver , Cóclea/fisiología , Humanos , Siliconas , Vibración
2.
Ear Hear ; 40(5): 1220-1232, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30807542

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare listening effort, as estimated via pupillary response, during a speech-in-noise test in bone-anchored hearing system (BAHS) users wearing three different sound processors. The three processors, Ponto Pro (PP), Ponto 3 (P3), and Ponto 3 SuperPower (P3SP), differ in terms of maximum force output (MFO) and MFO algorithm. The hypothesis was that listeners would allocate lower listening effort with the P3SP than with the PP, as a consequence of a higher MFO and, hence, fewer saturation artifacts in the signal. DESIGN: Pupil dilations were recorded in 21 BAHS users with a conductive or mixed hearing loss, during a speech-in-noise test performed at positive signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), where the speech and noise levels were individually adjusted to lead to 95% correct intelligibility with the PP. The listeners had to listen to a sentence in noise, retain it for 3 seconds and then repeat it, while an eye-tracking camera recorded their pupil dilation. The three sound processors were tested in random order with a single-blinded experimental design. Two conditions were performed at the same SNR: Condition 1, where the speech level was designed to saturate the PP but not the P3SP, and condition 2, where the overall sound level was decreased relative to condition 1 to reduce saturation artifacts. RESULTS: The P3SP led to higher speech intelligibility than the PP in both conditions, while the performance with the P3 did not differ from the performance with the PP and the P3SP. Pupil dilations were analyzed in terms of both peak pupil dilation (PPD) and overall pupil dilation via growth curve analysis (GCA). In condition 1, a significantly lower PPD, indicating a decrease in listening effort, was obtained with the P3SP relative to the PP. The PPD obtained with the P3 did not differ from the PPD obtained with the other two sound processors. In condition 2, no difference in PPD was observed across the three processors. The GCA revealed that the overall pupil dilation was significantly lower, in both conditions, with both the P3SP and the P3 relative to the PP, and, in condition 1, also with the P3SP relative to the P3. CONCLUSIONS: The overall effort to process a moderate to loud speech signal was significantly reduced by using a sound processor with a higher MFO (P3SP and P3), as a consequence of fewer saturation artifacts. These findings suggest that sound processors with a higher MFO may help BAHS users in their everyday listening scenarios, in particular in noisy environments, by improving sound quality and, thus, decreasing the amount of cognitive resources utilized to process incoming speech sounds.


Asunto(s)
Audífonos , Pérdida Auditiva Conductiva/rehabilitación , Perdida Auditiva Conductiva-Sensorineural Mixta/rehabilitación , Procesamiento de Señales Asistido por Computador/instrumentación , Percepción del Habla , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Pérdida Auditiva Conductiva/fisiopatología , Pérdida Auditiva Conductiva/psicología , Perdida Auditiva Conductiva-Sensorineural Mixta/fisiopatología , Perdida Auditiva Conductiva-Sensorineural Mixta/psicología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ruido , Pupila/fisiología , Relación Señal-Ruido , Adulto Joven
3.
Ear Hear ; 39(6): 1157-1164, 2018.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29578886

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To determine if a newly-designed, forehead-mounted surface microphone would yield equivalent estimates of audibility when compared to audibility measured with a skull simulator for adult bone conduction users. DESIGN: Data was analyzed using a within subjects, repeated measures design. There were two different sensors (skull simulator and surface microphone) measuring the same hearing aid programmed to the same settings for all subjects. We were looking for equivalent results. PATIENTS: Twenty-one adult percutaneous bone conduction users (12 females and 9 males) were recruited for this study. Mean age was 54.32 years with a standard deviation of 14.51 years. Nineteen of the subjects had conductive/mixed hearing loss and two had single-sided deafness. METHODS: To define audibility, we needed to establish two things: (1) in situ-level thresholds at each audiometric frequency in force (skull simulator) and in sound pressure level (SPL; surface microphone). Next, we measured the responses of the preprogrammed test device in force on the skull simulator and in SPL on the surface mic in response to pink noise at three input levels: 55, 65, and 75 dB SPL. The skull simulator responses were converted to real head force responses by means of an individual real head to coupler difference transform. Subtracting the real head force level thresholds from the real head force output of the test aid yielded the audibility for each audiometric frequency for the skull simulator. Subtracting the SPL thresholds from the surface microphone from the SPL output of the test aid yielded the audibility for each audiometric frequency for the surface microphone. The surface microphone was removed and retested to establish the test-retest reliability of the tool. RESULTS: We ran a 2 (sensor) × 3 (input level) × 10 (frequency) mixed analysis of variance to determine if there were any significant main effects and interactions. There was a significant three-way interaction, so we proceeded to explore our planned comparisons. There were 90 planned comparisons of interest, three at each frequency (3 × 10) for the three input levels (30 × 3). Therefore, to minimize a type 1 error associated with multiple comparisons, we adjusted alpha using the Holm-Bonferroni method. There were five comparisons that yielded significant differences between the skull simulator and surface microphone (test and retest) in the estimation of audibility. However, the mean difference in these effects was small at 3.3 dB. Both sensors yielded equivalent results for the majority of comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Models of bone conduction devices that have intact skin cannot be measured with the skull simulator. This study is the first to present and evaluate a new tool for bone conduction verification. The surface microphone is capable of yielding equivalent audibility measurements as the skull simulator for percutaneous bone conduction users at multiple input levels. This device holds potential for measuring other bone conduction devices (Sentio, BoneBridge, Attract, Soft headband devices) that do not have a percutaneous implant.


Asunto(s)
Conducción Ósea , Diseño de Equipo/instrumentación , Audífonos , Pérdida Auditiva Conductiva/rehabilitación , Audiometría , Sordera/rehabilitación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados
4.
Int J Audiol ; 50(4): 226-36, 2011 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21275499

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Hearing-aid users' problems with their own voice caused by occlusion are well known. Conversely, it remains essentially undocumented whether hearing-aid users expected not to have occlusion-related problems experience own-voice issues. DESIGN: To investigate this topic, a dedicated Own Voice Qualities (OVQ) questionnaire was developed and used in two experiments with stratified samples. STUDY SAMPLE: In the main experiment, the OVQ was administered to 169 hearing-aid users (most of whom were expected not to have occlusion-related problems) and to a control group of 56 normally-hearing people. In the follow-up experiment, the OVQ was used in a cross-over study where 43 hearing-aid users rated own voice for an open fitting and a small-vent earmould fitting. RESULTS: The results from the main experiment show that hearing-aid users (without occlusion) have more problems than the normal-hearing controls on several dimensions of own voice. The magnitude of these differences was found to be generally larger than the differences observed between the open fitting and the small-vent fitting in the follow-up experiment. CONCLUSIONS: This suggests that own voice is a potentially important concern, even for hearing-aid users who are not expected to have occlusion-related problems.


Asunto(s)
Corrección de Deficiencia Auditiva , Audífonos , Pérdida Auditiva/rehabilitación , Personas con Deficiencia Auditiva/rehabilitación , Percepción del Habla , Calidad de la Voz , Estimulación Acústica , Anciano , Umbral Auditivo , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Corrección de Deficiencia Auditiva/psicología , Estudios Cruzados , Diseño de Equipo , Femenino , Pérdida Auditiva/fisiopatología , Pérdida Auditiva/psicología , Humanos , Percepción Sonora , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Personas con Deficiencia Auditiva/psicología , Acústica del Lenguaje , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
5.
J Am Acad Audiol ; 20(8): 503-13, 2009 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19764170

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that hearing-aid users have difficulties with own-voice level control, most likely because their auditory feedback is affected by hearing-aid amplification. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate how changes to auditory feedback affect the voice level of hearing-aid users. RESEARCH DESIGN: A correlational study was set up to investigate the relation between voice level and hearing-aid amplification. STUDY SAMPLE: Seven hearing-impaired speakers participated. All were experienced hearing-aid users. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The speakers projected their voice to a passive listener across different speaker-listener distances and with different prescriptions of gain in an experimental hearing aid. For each combination of conditions, produced voice level and self-perceived voice level was measured. These data were subjected to an analysis of variance assuming a mixture of random and fixed effects. In addition, all speakers took part in interviews. RESULTS: Three speakers reacted to the changes in auditory feedback in agreement with previous experiments with normal-hearing speakers: they compensated by changing produced voice level. In contrast, the voice levels in the other four speakers were largely unaffected by the changes to auditory feedback. A secondary observation was that while all speakers increased their voice level with distance, the two subgroups produced different growth rates of vocal level versus distance. CONCLUSIONS: It is hypothesized that the speakers in the former subgroup relied on auditory feedback for solving the experimental task, whereas the latter subgroup had developed an own-voice level-control strategy based on proprioceptory feedback, possibly because they have lost faith in their auditory feedback mechanism, which indeed is changed by both hearing loss and hearing-aid amplification. Comparison to "target" voice levels suggests that proprioceptory feedback is less effective than auditory feedback for achieving adequate level-distance growth rate.


Asunto(s)
Audífonos , Pérdida Auditiva Sensorineural/fisiopatología , Pérdida Auditiva Sensorineural/psicología , Acústica del Lenguaje , Percepción del Habla/fisiología , Conducta Verbal/fisiología , Biorretroalimentación Psicológica , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Pérdida Auditiva Sensorineural/terapia , Humanos , Percepción Sonora/fisiología , Masculino , Medición de la Producción del Habla
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...