Relationships Between Health-Related Quality of Life and Speech Perception in Bimodal and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users.

Purpose: Previous studies examining the relationship between health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and speech perception ability in cochlear implant (CI) users have yielded variable results, due to a range of factors, such as a variety of different HRQoL questionnaires and CI speech testing materials in addition to CI configuration. In order to decrease inherent variability and better understand the relationship between these measures in CI users, we administered a commonly used clinical CI speech testing battery as well as two popular HRQoL questionnaires in bimodal and bilateral CI users. Methods: The Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI), a modified five-factor version of the GBI (GBI-5F), and the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire (NCIQ) were administered to 25 CI users (17 bimodal and 8 bilateral). Speech perception abilities were measured with the AzBio sentence test in several conditions (e.g., quiet and noise, binaural, and first-ear CI only). Results: Higher performance scores on the GBI general subscore were related to greater binaural speech perception ability in noise. There were no other relationships between the GBI or NCIQ and speech perception ability under any condition. Scores on many of the GBI-5F factors were substantially skewed and asymmetrical; therefore, correlational analyses could not be applied. Across all participants, binaural speech perception scores were greater than first-ear CI only scores. Conclusion: The GBI general subscore was related to binaural speech perception, which is considered the everyday listening condition of bimodal and bilateral CI users, in noise; while the more CI-specific NCIQ did not relate to speech perception ability in any listening condition. Future research exploring the relationships between the GBI, GBI-5F, and NCIQ considering bimodal and bilateral CI configurations separately is warranted.

Examining Delayed Recall in Cochlear Implant Users Using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, California Verbal Learning Test, Third Edition, and Item Specific Deficit Approach: Preliminary Results.

Purpose: Recent studies using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) suggest delayed recall is challenging for cochlear implant (CI) users. To better understand the underlying processes associated with delayed recall in CI users, we administered the MoCA and the California Verbal Learning Test, Third Edition (CVLT-3), which provides a more comprehensive assessment of delayed recall ability. Methods: The MoCA and CVLT-3 were administered to 18 high-performing CI users. For the CVLT-3, both the traditional scoring and a newer scoring method, the Item-Specific Deficit Approach (ISDA), were employed. Results: The original MoCA score and MoCA delayed recall subtest score did not relate to performance on any CVLT-3 measures regardless of scoring metric applied (i.e., traditional or ISDA). Encoding performance for both the CVLT-3 and ISDA were related. Consolidation, which is only distinctly defined by the ISDA, related to CVLT-3 cued delay recall performance but not free delay recall performance. Lastly, ISDA retrieval only related to CVLT-3 measures when modified. Conclusion: Performance on the MoCA and CVLT-3 in a high performing CI patient population were not related. We demonstrate that the ISDA can be successfully applied to CI users for the quantification and characterization of delayed recall ability; however, future work addressing lower performing CI users, and comparing to normal hearing controls is needed to determine the extent of potential translational applications. Our work also indicates that a modified ISDA retrieval score may be beneficial for evaluating CI users although additional work addressing the clinical relevance of this is still needed.

Estimating Real-World Performance of Percutaneously Coupled Bone-Conduction Device Users With Severe-to-Profound Unilateral Hearing Loss.

Purpose The bone-conduction device attached to a percutaneous screw (BCD) is an important treatment option for individuals with severe-to-profound unilateral hearing loss (UHL). Clinicians may use subjective questionnaires and speech-in-noise measures to evaluate BCD use in this patient population; however, the translation of these metrics to real-world aided performance is unclear. The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to measure speech-in-noise performance in BCD users with severe-to-profound UHL in a simulated real-world environment, relative to individuals with normal hearing bilaterally; second, to determine if BCD users' subjective reports of aided performance relate to simulated real-world performance. Method A between-subjects design with two groups was conducted with 14 adults with severe-to-profound UHL (BCD group) and 10 age-matched participants with normal hearing bilaterally (control group). Speech-in-noise tests were administered in an eight-speaker R-Space simulating a real-world environment. To further explore speech-in-noise evaluation methods for this population, testing was also completed in a clinically common two-speaker array. The effects of various microphone settings on performance were explored for BCD users. Subjective performance was measured with the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB; Cox & Alexander, 1995) and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (Gatehouse & Noble, 2004). Statistical analyses to explore relationships between variables included repeated-measures analysis of variance, regression analyses, independent-samples t tests, nonparametric Mann-Whitney tests, and correlations. Results In the simulated real-world environment, BCD group participants struggled with speech-in-noise understanding compared to control group participants. BCD benefit was observed for all microphone settings when speech stimuli were presented to the side with the BCD. When adaptive directional or fixed directional microphone settings were used, a relationship was noted between simulated real-world speech-in-noise performance for speech stimuli presented to the side with the BCD and subjective reports on the Background Noise subscale of the APHAB. Conclusions The Background Noise subscale of the APHAB may help estimate real-world speech-in-noise performance for BCD users with severe-to-profound UHL for signals of interest presented to the implanted side, specifically when adaptive or fixed directional microphone settings are used. This subscale may provide an efficient and accessible alternative to assessing real-world speech-in-noise performance in lieu of less clinically available measurement tools, such as an R-Space.

Performance on the standard and hearing-impaired Montreal Cognitive Assessment in cochlear implant users.

OBJECTIVES: Commonly used cognitive screening tools were not originally developed for patients with hearing loss (HL) and rely heavily on the ability to hear the instructions and test stimuli. Recently, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was modified for use with hearing-impaired populations (ie, HI-MoCA). In order to investigate the clinical utility of the HI-MoCA, we assessed performance between the standard MoCA and HI-MoCA among postlingually deafened cochlear implant (CI) users. METHODS: We administered the standard MoCA and HI-MoCA to 21 CI users and compared their performance. We assessed differences in pass/fail status when items from the attention and language sections and the delayed recall task were removed. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in performance between the standard MoCA and HI-MoCA. Participants scored higher on both test versions when the delayed recall task was removed. Participants also performed better on the delayed recall task on the HI-MoCA than on the standard MoCA. CONCLUSIONS: While our findings suggest that the modality of presentation for the MoCA does not influence overall performance for postlingually deafened CI users, visual presentation of stimuli impacted performance on delayed recall. Furthermore, irrespective of presentation modality, our participants scored higher on both MoCA versions when the delayed recall task was removed. Clinically, modifications to the presentation of the MoCA might not be necessary for CI users; however, clinicians should be aware that the delayed recall task is inherently harder for these patients.

Assessing performance on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in experienced cochlear implant users: use of alternative scoring guidelines.

Although research suggests a relationship between hearing impairment and cognitive decline in older adults, nuances of this relationship remain unclear. This uncertainty could be attributed to verbal administration of standardized cognitive measures to hearing-impaired (HI) individuals. Various strategies for testing HI populations have been suggested. We tested the efficacy of applying alternative scoring methods that systematically removed auditory-based items on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in 27 cochlear implant patients. We calculated the original MoCA score and three alternative scores. The first alternative removed items from the Attention and Language sections; the second alternative removed the Delayed Recall task, and the third alternative removed the Attention, Language, and Delayed Recall items. QoL was assessed using the Glasgow Benefit Inventory and Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire. Results indicate a significant difference in MoCA scores with two alternative scoring methods. The second alternative MoCA score related to self-reported performance on the GBI.

Assessing Cognitive Abilities in High-Performing Cochlear Implant Users.

Despite being considered one of the most successful neural prostheses, cochlear implants (CIs) provide recipients with a wide range of speech perception performance. While some CI users can understand speech in the absence of visual cues, other recipients exhibit more limited speech perception. Cognitive skills have been documented as a contributor to complex auditory processing, such as language understanding; however, there are no normative data for existing standardized clinical tests assessing cognitive abilities in CI users. Here, we assess the impact of modality of presentation (i.e., auditory-visual versus visual) for the administration of working memory tests in high-performing CI users in addition to measuring processing speed, cognitive efficiency and intelligence quotient (IQ). Second, we relate performance on these cognitive measures to clinical CI speech perception outcomes. Methods: Twenty one post-lingually deafened, high-performing, adult CI users [age range: 52-88 years; 3 unilateral CI, 13 bimodal (i.e., CI with contralateral hearing aid), 5 bilateral CI] with clinical speech perception scores (i.e., AzBio sentences in quiet for the first-ear CI) of ≥60% were recruited. A cognitive test battery assessing auditory-visual working memory (AVWM), visual working memory (VWM), processing speed, cognitive efficiency and IQ was administered, in addition to clinical measures of speech perception in quiet (i.e., AzBio sentences in quiet). AzBio sentences were assessed in two conditions: first-ear CI only, and best-aided everyday wearing condition. Subjects also provided self-reported measures of performance and benefit from their CI using standardized materials, including the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) and the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant questionnaire (NCIQ). Results: High-performing CI users demonstrated greater VWM than AVWM recall. VWM was positively related to AzBio scores when measured in the first-ear CI only. AVWM, processing speed, cognitive efficiency, and IQ did not relate to either measure of speech perception (i.e., first-ear CI or best-aided conditions). Subjects' self-reported benefit as measured by the GBI predicted best-aided CI speech perception performance. Conclusion: In high-performing CI recipients, visual presentation of working memory tests may improve our assessment of cognitive function.

Modification of Osseointegrated Device Parameters to Improve Speech in Noise and Localization Ability: Clinical Recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how best to modify osseointegrated (OI) devices or environmental settings to maximize hearing performance. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Fourteen adults with single-sided deafness (SSD) with a minimum of 6 months OI usage and nine bilaterally normal hearing controls INTERVENTIONS: : Speech in noise (SIN) and localization ability were assessed in a multi-speaker array (R-Space) with patients repeating sentences embedded in competing noise and verbally indicating the source speaker, respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: SIN and localization were assessed with multiple OI microphone settings-fixed-directional, omnidirectional, and adaptive-as well as an unaided (OI off) condition. Participants completed the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit questionnaire. RESULTS: Localization performance remains compromised for OI users with a high number of front-back confusions, but rapid learning using the fixed-directional microphone setting improved localization of sounds on the device side despite poorer localization of sounds on the normal-hearing side. SIN performance is greatly enhanced with speech presented to the contra hearing ear rather than the OI device side. Subjective report of hearing ability is highly predictive of objective SIN measures. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should consider implementing a fixed-directional microphone setting for improved localization for sounds behind the OI device, but inform patients of the trade-off in performance on the normal-hearing side. For better hearing in noise, clinicians should counsel OI recipients to orient the speech signal to their normal hearing ear rather than their OI device. The background noise subscale of the abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB) provides a meaningful metric by which to assess SIN performance of OI device users.