[Audiological outcome of bimodal CI users over time and depending on different influencing factors]. / Audiologisches Ergebnis bimodal versorgter CI-Träger:innen im zeitlichen Verlauf und in Abhängigkeit unterschiedlicher Einflussfaktoren.

BACKGROUND: Hearing-impaired persons with asymmetric hearing loss and a unilateral indication for a cochlear implant (CI) generally benefit from a bimodal hearing solution. The influence of bimodal fitting on speech comprehension (SC) over time has not yet been sufficiently investigated. The present study examines the influence of bimodal fitting on SC in bimodally fitted CI users with postlingual deafness at least 36 months after implantation and analyzes possible influencing factors. METHODS: Included in this retrospective longitudinal study were 54 bimodally fitted speech-competent CI users with at least 36 months of CI experience. Audiometric data of these CI users at predefined timepoints were compared. RESULTS: The change in the results of the Freiburg monosyllabic test (FT) over 36 months was significant (p < 5%) for the deafness group at <10 years for both the 65 dB sound pressure level (SPL) and at 80 dB SPL and also significant for the deafness group ≥10 years for 65 dB SPL. In the Oldenburg sentence test (OlSa) there was a highly significant change (p < 0.1%) for S0, S0N0, and S0NCI configurations and a very significant change (p < 1%) for S0NHA (HA: hearing aid). Age at implantation as a possible influencing factor could not be confirmed in the FT. In contrast, the duration of deafness was a negative influencing factor for SC with CI in the FT, whereas a longer duration of deafness was associated with worse results in the FT. The degree of hearing loss in the ear fitted with an HA did not influence SC. The median bimodal benefit (here: difference in SC with bimodal fitting compared to unilateral HA fitting for FT at 65 dB SPL) was 10% over the total study period. For a median of 79% of the test subjects, the bimodal benefit was found over the entire period of 36 months. CONCLUSION: Over time, SC improves significantly with a CI for the bimodal test subjects. The investigated influencing factors (age, duration of deafness, and degree of hearing loss in the contralateral ear) support the indication for bimodal provision in accordance with the guideline in Germany for cochlear implantation-regardless of age, duration of deafness, and hearing ability of the contralateral ear.

Benchmarking an 11-qubit quantum computer.

The field of quantum computing has grown from concept to demonstration devices over the past 20 years. Universal quantum computing offers efficiency in approaching problems of scientific and commercial interest, such as factoring large numbers, searching databases, simulating intractable models from quantum physics, and optimizing complex cost functions. Here, we present an 11-qubit fully-connected, programmable quantum computer in a trapped ion system composed of 13 171Yb+ ions. We demonstrate average single-qubit gate fidelities of 99.5[Formula: see text], average two-qubit-gate fidelities of 97.5[Formula: see text], and SPAM errors of 0.7[Formula: see text]. To illustrate the capabilities of this universal platform and provide a basis for comparison with similarly-sized devices, we compile the Bernstein-Vazirani and Hidden Shift algorithms into our native gates and execute them on the hardware with average success rates of 78[Formula: see text] and 35[Formula: see text], respectively. These algorithms serve as excellent benchmarks for any type of quantum hardware, and show that our system outperforms all other currently available hardware.

[User benefit of modern hearing aids. A comparative study]. / Gebrauchsnutzen moderner Hörsysteme. Eine vergleichende Studie.

BACKGROUND: In the face of the rapid development of hearing aid system technology it is helpful to regularly study the user benefit of the current generation. TEST PERSONS AND METHODS: To contribute to the question on how the user benefit of current hearing aids compares with the benefit of the previous generation of hearing aids, a multicentre study was carried out in cooperation with 79 hearing aid acoustics companies in Germany. The user benefit of modern hearing aids in everyday life was assessed by asking end users to participate in a survey by completing a questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of 20 items, 10 of which were taken from validated international inventories (SSQ: Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale, IOI-HA: International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids) and the other 10 were formulated particularly for this purpose. RESULTS: A total of 664 usable questionnaires were returned whereby 421 responders were first time users and 243 responders were previous hearing aid users. The results of the present study showed that modern hearing aid system technology provides significant extra benefits at the 5 % level relative to the previous generation of hearing aids for all variables tested in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Even though the amount of gain in terms of user benefit may be overestimated due to well-known placebo effects, an obvious net effect was evident. Correlations between the level of hearing aid benefit and possible influencing factors, such as age, gender, subjects own hearing aid, duration of use or hearing loss, could not be identified.

[Effect of frequency compression in hearing aids on speech intelligibility and subjective sound quality]. / Wirkung von Frequenzkompression in Hörgeräten auf das Sprachverstehen und das subjektive Klangempfinden der Nutzer.

BACKGROUND: The acceptance of hearing aids by users with high frequency hearing loss still represents a problem. Processing algorithms that shift high frequency signal components into an audible frequency range are proposed as a solution. We looked into the issue of whether frequency compression becomes more beneficial with increasing high frequency hearing loss or/and for users with cochlear dead regions (DR). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 20 hearing aid candidates were assessed audiometrically and classified into two test groups in terms of their hearing loss and the presence of DR. The subjects then evaluated four hearing aid settings that differed solely in the degree of frequency compression. Speech recognition threshold measurements and subjective sound quality ratings were carried out for all four settings. RESULTS: Data showed that 15 of the 20 test subjects understood fricatives with a high frequency spectrum component better, since they were able to distinguish between the two logatomes "Afa" and "Asa". No correlation was found between the beneficial effect of frequency compression and the degree of high frequency hearing loss or the presence of DR. Subjective sound quality ratings indicated no clear preference, but excessive frequency compression was generally deemed counterproductive. CONCLUSION: Frequency compression may be appropriate for hearing aid users with high frequency hearing loss and can improve speech recognition. The degree of frequency compression required to achieve maximal benefit varies from case to case and has to be optimized on an individual basis.