Age standardization and time-of-day performance for the Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA): results from the population-based Gutenberg Health Study.

PURPOSE: The Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA) is a German matrix test designed to determine speech recognition thresholds (SRT). It is widely used for hearing-aids and cochlear implant fitting, but an age-adjusted standard is still lacking. In addition, knowing that the ability to concentrate is an important factor in OLSA performance, we hypothesized that OLSA performance would depend on the time of day it was administered. The aim of this study was to propose an age standardization for the OLSA and to determine its diurnal performance. METHODS: The Gutenberg Health Study is an ongoing population-based study and designed as a single-centre observational, prospective cohort study. Participants were interviewed about common otologic symptoms and tested with pure-tone audiometry and OLSA. Two groups-subjects with and without hearing loss-were established. The OLSA was performed in two runs. The SRT was evaluated for each participant. Results were characterized by age in 5-year cohorts, gender and speech recognition threshold (SRT). A time stamp with an hourly interval was also implemented. RESULTS: The mean OLSA SRT was - 6.9 ± 1.0 dB (group 1 male) and - 7.1 ± 0.8 dB (group 1 female) showing an inverse relationship with age in the whole cohort, whereas a linear increase was observed in those without hearing loss. OLSA-SRT values increased more in males than in females with increasing age. No statistical significance was found for the diurnal performance. CONCLUSIONS: A study with 2900 evaluable Oldenburg Sentence Tests is a novelty and representative for the population of Mainz and its surroundings. We postulate an age- and gender-standardized scale for the evaluation of the OLSA. In fact, with an intergroup standard deviation (of about 1.5 dB) compared to the age dependence of 0.7 dB/10 years, this age normalization should be considered as clinically relevant.

The multilingual digits-in-noise (DIN) test: development and evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a methodologically uniform digits-in-noise (DIN) test in 17 different languages. DESIGN: The DIN test was developed for Android devices as an extension to the open-access Hearing Test™ app, available on the Google Play store. It utilised professionally recorded female speech, speech-shaped noise, a digit scoring method and a variable step size. The test was adaptively optimised and evaluated as the results of tests taken online by users of the app became available. STUDY SAMPLE: Optimisation using 35,534 ears, evaluation using 6012 ears. RESULTS: Optimisation improved the slopes of the psychometric functions for all languages by an average of 6.8%/dB. Evaluation included calculation of normative speech reception thresholds (SRTs) and estimation of test-retest standard deviations. Normative values for SRTs ranged from -14.2 dB SNR (95% CI -14.3 to -14.0) for Chinese to -11.2 dB SNR (95% CI -11.3 to -11.1) for Japanese, with reliability estimates ranging from 0.48 dB (95% CI 0.36-0.64) for Portuguese to 0.91 dB (95% CI 0.73-1.21) for Romanian. CONCLUSIONS: The optimisation of each language version was confirmed by the improvement in the slopes of the psychometric functions. The normative values obtained from the test evaluation were in agreement with literature data. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Science Support Centre of Wroclaw Medical University BW-59/2020.

Value of patient-reported outcome measures for evaluating the benefit of speech processor upgrading in patients with cochlear implants.

BACKGROUND: Patients with a cochlear implant (CI) should be evaluated for a new speech processor every 6 years. The aim of this analysis was to assess the subjective and audiological benefit of upgrades. METHODS: Speech understanding and subjective benefit were analyzed in 99 patients with the old and the new speech processor after 4 weeks of wearing. Speech understanding was assessed using the Freiburg monosyllabic test in quiet (FBE) at 65 dB and 80 dB, and the Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA) at 65 dB noise with adaptive speech sound level. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) was used to assess subjective hearing impairment, and the Audio Processor Satisfaction Questionnaire (APSQ) was used to assess subjective satisfaction. RESULTS: The speech processor upgrade resulted in a significant improvement of speech understanding in quiet at 65 dB (mean difference 8.9 ± 25.9 percentage points, p < 0.001) and 80 dB (mean difference 8.1 ± 29.7 percentage points, p < 0.001) and in noise (mean difference 3.2 ± 10.7 dB signal-to-noise ratio [S/N], p = 0.006). Using the APHAB, a significant improvement (mean difference 0.07 ± 0.16, p < 0.001) in hearing impairment was demonstrated in all listening situations. The APSQ showed significantly higher patient satisfaction with the new speech processor (mean difference 0.42 ± 1.26, p = 0.006). A comparative assessment of the benefit based on subjective and speech audiometric results identified a proportion of patients (35-42%) who subjectively benefited from the upgrade but had no measurable benefit based on speech audiometry. CONCLUSION: There was a significant improvement in audiologically measurable and subjectively reflected speech understanding and patient satisfaction after the upgrade. In patients with only a small improvement in audiologically measurable speech understanding, the subjective benefit should also be assessed with validated measurement instruments in order to justify an upgrade to the payers in the health sector.

Comparison of speech perception in bimodal cochlear implant patients with respect to the cochlear coverage.

BACKGROUND: The hearing success of patients with bimodal fitting, utilizing both a cochlear implant (CI) and a hearing aid (HA), varies considerably: While some patients benefit from bimodal CI and HA, others do not. OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study aimed to investigate speech perception in bimodally fitted patients and compare it with the cochlear coverage (CC). METHODS: The CC was calculated with the OTOPLAN software, measuring the cochlear duct length on temporal bone CT scans of 39 patients retrospectively. The patients were categorized into two groups: CC ≤ 65% (CC500) and CC > 65% (CC600). Monaural speech intelligibility for monosyllables at a sound pressure level (SPL) of 65 dB in a free-field setting was assessed before and after CI at various time points. The two groups, one with preoperative HA and one with postoperative CI, were compared. Additionally, speech intelligibility was correlated with CC in the entire cohort before CI and at the last available follow-up (last observation time, LOT). RESULTS: Overall, there was no significant difference in speech intelligibility between CC500 and CC600 patients, with both groups demonstrating a consistent improvement after implantation. While CC600 patients tended to exhibit earlier improvement in speech intelligibility, CC500 patients showed a slower initial improvement within the first 3 months but demonstrated a steeper learning curve thereafter. At LOT, the two patient groups converged, with no significant differences in expected speech intelligibility. There was no significant relationship between unimodal/unilateral free-field speech intelligibility and CC. Interestingly, patients with a CC of 70-75% achieved the highest speech intelligibility. CONCLUSION: Despite of the lack of a significant correlation between CC and speech perception, patients appeared to reach their maximum in unimodal/unilateral speech perception primarily at a coverage level of 70-75%. Nevertheless, further investigation is warranted, as CC500 was associated with shorter cochlear duct length, and different types of electrodes were used in both groups.

Speech perception in modulated noise assessed in bimodal CI users.

BACKGROUND: Although good speech perception in quiet is achievable with cochlear implants (CIs), speech perception in noise is severely impaired compared to normal hearing (NH). In the case of a bimodal CI fitting with a hearing aid (HA) in the opposite ear, the amount of residual acoustic hearing influences speech perception in noise. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to investigate speech perception in noise in a group of bimodal CI users and compare the results to age-matched HA users and people without subjective hearing loss, as well as with a young NH group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study participants comprised 19 bimodal CI users, 39 HA users, and 40 subjectively NH subjects in the age group 60-90 years and 14 young NH subjects. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) in noise were adaptively measured using the Oldenburg Sentence Test for the two spatial test conditions S0N0 (speech and noise from the front) and multisource-noise field (MSNF; speech from the front, four spatially distributed noise sources) in continuous noise of the Oldenburg Sentence Test (Ol-noise) and amplitude-modulated Fastl noise (Fastl-noise). RESULTS: With increasing hearing loss, the median SRT worsened significantly in all conditions. In test condition S0N0, the SRT of the CI group was 5.6 dB worse in Ol-noise than in the young NH group (mean age 26.4 years) and 22.5 dB worse in Fastl-noise; in MSNF, the differences were 6.6 dB (Ol-noise) and 17.3 dB (Fastl-noise), respectively. In the young NH group, median SRT in condition S0N0 improved by 11 dB due to gap listening; in the older NH group, SRTs improved by only 3.1 dB. In the HA and bimodal CI groups there was no gap listening effect and SRTs in Fastl-noise were even worse than in Ol-noise. CONCLUSION: With increasing hearing loss, speech perception in modulated noise is even more impaired than in continuous noise.

Evaluative audiometry after cochlear implant provision.

BACKGROUND: One of the main treatment goals in cochlear implant (CI) patients is to improve speech perception. One of the target parameters is speech intelligibility in quiet. However, treatment results show a high variability, which has not been sufficiently explained so far. The aim of this noninterventional retrospective study was to elucidate this variability using a selected population of patients in whom etiology was not expected to have a negative impact on postoperative speech intelligibility. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Audiometric findings of the CI follow-up of 28 adult patients after 6 months of CI experience were evaluated. These were related to the preoperative audiometric examination and evaluated with respect to a recently published predictive model for the postoperative monosyllabic score. RESULTS: Inclusion of postoperative categorical loudness scaling and hearing loss for Freiburg numbers in the model explained 55% of the variability in fitting outcomes with respect to monosyllabic word recognition. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that much of the cause of variability in fitting outcomes can be captured by systematic postoperative audiometric checks. Immediate conclusions for CI system fitting adjustments may be drawn from these results. However, the extent to which these are accepted by individual patients and thus lead to an improvement in outcome must be subject of further studies, preferably prospective.

Test-retest reliability of the urban outdoor situated phoneme (SiP) test.

OBJECTIVE: To introduce the urban outdoor version of the Situated Phoneme (SiP) test and investigate its test-retest reliability. DESIGN: Phonemic discrimination scores in matched-spectrum real-world (MSRW) maskers from an urban outdoor environment were measured using a three-alternative forced choice test paradigm at different phoneme-to-noise ratios (PNR). Each measurement was repeated twice. Test-retest scores for the full 84-trial SiP-test, as well as for four types of contrasting phonemes, were analysed and compared to critical difference scores based on binomial confidence intervals. STUDY SAMPLE: Seventy-two adult native speakers of Swedish (26-83 years) with symmetric hearing threshold levels ranging from normal hearing to severe sensorineural hearing loss. RESULTS: Test-retest scores did not differ significantly for the whole test, or for the subtests analysed. A lower amount of test-retest score difference than expected exceeded the bounds of the corresponding critical difference intervals. CONCLUSIONS: The urban outdoor SiP-test has high test-retest reliability. This information can help audiologists to interpret test scores attained with the urban outdoor SiP-test.

Clinical utility of response time in speech audiometry in elderly with mild cognitive impairment.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated whether verbal response time (RT) as a measure of listening effort in speech audiometry could be an indicator for identifying elderly individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). DESIGN: Korean sentence recognition tests were conducted in favourable (+5 dB signal-to-noise ratio [SNR]) and adverse (-5 dB SNR) conditions in the presence of noise. Sentence recognition scores (SRSs) and RTs for the two groups were measured and analysed with other demographic variables. STUDY SAMPLES: Fourteen elderly adults who were diagnosed with MCI and 14 age-matched adults with normal cognition participated in this study. RESULTS: No statistical difference was found between the SRSs of the two groups. RTs for the MCI elderly were significantly longer than the control group. We found significant correlations of RTs with SRSs, Korean Mini-Mental State Examination (K-MMSE) scores, and age at -5 dB SNR. Only the SRSs were correlated with the RTs at +5 dB SNR. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that elderly individuals with MCI need a longer time for sentence recognition in noise. These findings suggest that measuring RT in speech audiometry could potentially be a cost-effective and time-saving method that could characterise elderly with MCI at hearing-care clinics.

Comparison of three calibration procedures for free-field reference speech audiometry.

OBJECTIVE: In standards IEC 60645-1 and ANSI S3.6, the free-field equivalent earphone output level method is assumed as the reference for speech audiometry. Three calibration procedures for this method were compared in this study. DESIGN: Speech audiometry was conducted with Dutch consonant-vowel-consonant words for the following conditions: 1. TDH39 earphones, 2. loudspeaker, and 3. free-field simulated with TDH39 earphones. The first calibration procedure was based on the empirically determined difference between the speech recognition threshold (SRT) with earphones and a loudspeaker. The second procedure was based on the theoretical free-field correction, derived from the known speech spectrum and the free-field to coupler difference. The third calibration procedure corresponded to the results of the free-field simulated speech material under earphones. STUDY SAMPLE: The sample included 20 normal hearing subjects. RESULTS: The differences between the observed SRT in the free-field and earphone conditions and the free-field and simulated free-field conditions were 7.1 dB and 0.6 dB, respectively. CONCLUSION: The three calibration procedures for the free-field equivalent output method yielded approximately the same results, and therefore all appear to be useful for TDH39 earphones.

[Evaluative audiometry after cochlear implant provision. German Version]. / Zur evaluierenden Audiometrie nach Cochlea-Implantat-Versorgung.

BACKGROUND: One of the main treatment goals in cochlear implant (CI) patients is to improve speech perception. One of the target parameters is speech intelligibility in quiet. However, treatment results show a high variability, which has not been sufficiently explained so far. The aim of this noninterventional retrospective study was to elucidate this variability using a selected population of patients in whom etiology was not expected to have a negative impact on postoperative speech intelligibility. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Audiometric findings of the CI follow-up of 28 adult patients after 6 months of CI experience were evaluated. These were related to the preoperative audiometric examination and evaluated with respect to a recently published predictive model for the postoperative monosyllabic score. RESULTS: Inclusion of postoperative categorical loudness scaling and hearing loss for Freiburg numbers in the model explained 55% of the variability in fitting outcomes with respect to monosyllabic comprehension. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that much of the cause of variability in fitting outcomes can be captured by systematic postoperative audiometric checks. Immediate conclusions for CI system adjustments may be drawn from these results. However, the extent to which these are accepted by individual patients and thus lead to an improvement in outcome must be subject to further study, preferably prospective.

[Speech perception as a function of cochlear coverage-comparison in bimodally hearing cochlear implant patients. German version]. / Sprachverstehen in Abhängigkeit von der cochleären Abdeckung ­ Vergleich bei bimodal versorgten Cochleaimplantatpatienten.

BACKGROUND: Hearing success in bimodally hearing patients with a cochlear implant (CI) and a hearing aid (HA) exhibits different results: while some benefit from bimodal CI and HA, others do not. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate hearing success in terms of speech perception in bimodally fitted patients in relation to the cochlear coverage (CC) of the CI electrodes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the OTOPLAN software (CAScination AG, Bern, Switzerland), CC was retrospectively measured from CT scans of the temporal bone of 39 patients, who were then categorized into two groups: CC ≤ 65% (CC500) and CC > 65% (CC600). Monaural speech intelligibility for monosyllables at a sound pressure level (SPL) of 65 dB in open field was assessed at various timepoints, preoperatively with HA and postoperatively with CI, and compared between the groups. In addition, speech intelligibility was correlated with CC in the entire cohort before surgery and during follow-up (FU). RESULTS: Overall, no significant differences in speech intelligibility were found between CC500 and CC600 patients at any of the FU timepoints. However, both CC500 and CC600 patients showed a steady improvement in speech intelligibility after implantation. While CC600 patients tended to show an earlier improvement in speech intelligibility, CC500 patients tended to show a slower improvement during the first 3 months and a steeper learning curve thereafter. The two patient groups converged during FU, with no significant differences in speech intelligibility. There was no significant relationship between unimodal/unilateral free-field speech intelligibility and CC. However, patients with a CC of 70-75% achieved maximum speech intelligibility. CONCLUSION: Despite a nonsignificant correlation between CC and speech discrimination, patients seem to reach their maximum in unimodal/unilateral speech understanding mainly at 70-75% coverage. However, there is room for further investigation, as CC500 was associated with a shorter cochlear duct length (CDL), and long and very long electrodes were used in both groups.

[Value of patient-reported outcome measures for evaluating the benefit of speech processor upgrading in patients with cochlear implants. German version]. / Wertigkeit von Patient-Reported Outcome Measures zur Bewertung des Versorgungsvorteils der Sprachprozessorumversorgung bei Patient/-innen mit Cochleaimplantaten.

BACKGROUND: Patients with a cochlear implant (CI) should be evaluated for a new speech processor every 6 years. The aim of this analysis was to assess the subjective and audiological benefit of upgrades. METHODS: Speech understanding and subjective benefit were analyzed in 99 patients with the old and the new speech processor after 4 weeks of wearing. Speech understanding was assessed using the Freiburg monosyllabic test in quiet (FBE) at 65 dB and 80 dB, and the Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA) at 65 dB noise with adaptive speech sound level. The Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB) was used to assess subjective hearing impairment, and the Audio Processor Satisfaction Questionnaire (APSQ) was used to assess subjective satisfaction. RESULTS: The speech processor upgrade resulted in a significant improvement of speech understanding in quiet at 65 dB (mean difference 8.9 ± 25.9 percentage points, p < 0.001) and 80 dB (mean difference 8.1 ± 29.7 percentage points, p < 0.001) and in noise (mean difference 3.2 ± 10.7 dB signal-to-noise ratio [S/N], p = 0.006). Using the APHAB, a significant improvement (mean difference 0.07 ± 0.16, p < 0.001) in hearing impairment was demonstrated in all listening situations. The APSQ showed significantly higher patient satisfaction with the new speech processor (mean difference 0.42 ± 1.26, p = 0.006). A comparative assessment of the benefit based on subjective and speech audiometric results identified a proportion of patients (35-42%) who subjectively benefited from the upgrade but had no measurable benefit based on speech audiometry. CONCLUSION: There was a significant improvement in audiologically measurable and subjectively reflected speech understanding and patient satisfaction after the upgrade. In patients with only a small improvement in audiologically measurable speech understanding, the subjective benefit should also be assessed with validated measurement instruments in order to justify an upgrade to the payers in the health sector.

Speech comprehension in noise-considerations for ecologically valid assessment of communication skills ability with cochlear implants.

BACKGROUND: Nowadays, cochlear implant (CI) patients mostly show good to very good speech comprehension in quiet, but there are known problems with communication in everyday noisy situations. There is thus a need for ecologically valid measurements of speech comprehension in real-life listening situations for hearing-impaired patients. The additional methodological effort must be balanced with clinical human and spatial resources. This study investigates possible simplifications of a complex measurement setup. METHODS: The study included 20 adults from long-term follow-up after CI fitting with postlingual onset of hearing impairment. The complexity of the investigated listening situations was influenced by changing the spatiality of the noise sources and the temporal characteristics of the noise. To compare different measurement setups, speech reception thresholds (SRT) were measured unilaterally with different CI processors and settings. Ten normal-hearing subjects served as reference. RESULTS: In a complex listening situation with four loudspeakers, differences in SRT from CI subjects to the control group of up to 8 dB were found. For CI subjects, this SRT correlated with the situation with frontal speech signal and fluctuating interference signal from the side with R2 = 0.69. For conditions with stationary interfering signals, R2 values <0.2 were found. CONCLUSION: There is no universal solution for all audiometric questions with respect to the spatiality and temporal characteristics of noise sources. In the investigated context, simplification of the complex spatial audiometric setting while using fluctuating competing signals was possible.

[Suitability of determining percentage hearing loss for monitoring cochlear implant rehabilitation]. / Eignung der Bestimmung prozentualer Hörverluste zum Monitoring der Cochlea Implantat Rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Calculation of percentage hearing loss (pHV) from the pure-tune audiogram according to Röser in 1973 or from the speech audiogram according to Boenninghaus and Röser in 1973 is a method still applied for quantitative assessment of hearing. However, this is not common for the evaluation of postoperative results of implantable hearing systems. During the regular work-up after cochlear implantation (CI) in Germany, all necessary parameters are available for calculation of pHV either from categorical loudness scaling (pHVKLS) or speech-recognition threshold (pHVFB). OBJECTIVE: The parameters pHVKLS and pHVFB are introduced and calculated from data available from clinical routine. Their potential applicability for assessment of the result of CI is evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study comprises retrospective chart review of audiological parameters from 66 CI procedures in one tertiary referral center. pHVKLS was calculated from the equal loudness curve 5 CU, pHVFB from the Freiburg speech test in free field. RESULTS: While pHVKLS shows small variation, the variation in pHVFB is initially larger but decreases over time. Furthermore, starting from initial fitting, the mean pHV shows convergence over time. The difference between pHVFB and pHVKLS is positive and statistically significant. CONCLUSION: It is possible to calculate pHVKLS and pHVFB from routine data. A correlation of the difference between pHVFB and pHVKLS with successful CI performance seems plausible.

[OLSA level control in monaural speech audiometry in background noise for the evaluation of the CI fitting result]. / OLSA-Pegelsteuerung bei monauraler Sprachaudiometrie im Störschall zur Evaluation des CI-Versorgungsergebnisses.

SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND: Speech audiometry measurements under the influence of background noise are a fundamental part of evaluating the outcome of hearing care. As yet far, there are no recommendations for selecting a suitable method for adaptive speech audiometry measurements in background noise in cochlear implant (CI) care, so either the choice the adaptive level change of the speech signal (S) with constant noise (N) or the adaptive level change of N with constant S. OBJECTIVES: Do the measurement results of the monaural speechrecognition threshold in noise (SRT) with the Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA) depend on the choice of level control? MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 50 series of measurements with OLSA in noise and the Freiburg speech intelligibility test in quiet (FBE) on middle-aged CI patients from clinical routine. RESULTS: There is no significant difference in the measurement results with different level controls when the SRT is less than 5 [Formula: see text]. Below 55 % monosyllabic intelligibility in quiet, the SRT in noise becomes greater than 5 [Formula: see text]. CONCLUSION: From a clinical, audiological and methodological point of view, it is advisable to carry out the adaptive monaural speech intelligibility measurement with a constant speech signal at 65 [Formula: see text].

Validation of a predictive model for speech discrimination after cochlear impIant provision.

BACKGROUND: If sufficient speech discrimination is no longer achieved with conventional hearing systems, an audiological indication for a cochlear implant (CI) is given. However, there are no established target criteria for CI aftercare with regard to the level of speech comprehension to be achieved. The aim of this study is to validate an existing predictive model for speech comprehension after CI provision. This is applied to different patient groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prospective study included 124 postlingually deaf adults. The model is based on preoperative maximum monosyllabic recognition score, aided monosyllabic recognition score at 65 dBSPL, and age the time of implantation. The model was investigated with regard to prediction accuracy for monosyllabic recognition with CI after 6 months. RESULTS: Mean speech discrimination improved from 10% with hearing aid to 65% with CI after 6 months, with a statistically significant improvement in 93% of cases. Deterioration of aided unilateral speech discrimination was not observed. The mean prediction error was 11.5 percentage points in the cases with preoperative scores better than zero and 23.2 percentage points in all other cases. CONCLUSION: Cochlear implantation should also be considered in patients with moderately severe to severe hearing loss and insufficient speech discrimination with hearing aids. The model based on preoperatively measured data for predicting speech discrimination with CI can be used in preoperative consultation and in the context of postoperative quality assurance.

[Speech perception in modulated noise assessed in bimodal CI users-German version]. / Sprachverstehen im modulierten Störgeräusch bei bimodal versorgten CI-Tragenden.

BACKGROUND: Although good speech perception in quiet is achievable with cochlear implants (CIs), speech perception in noise is severely impaired compared to normal hearing (NH). In the case of a bimodal CI fitting with a hearing aid (HA) in the opposite ear, the amount of residual acoustic hearing influences speech perception in noise. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to investigate speech perception in noise in a group of bimodal CI users and compare the results to age-matched HA users and people without subjective hearing loss, as well as with a young NH group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study participants comprised 19 bimodal CI users, 39 HA users, and 40 subjectively NH subjects in the age group 60-90 years and 14 young NH subjects. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) in noise were adaptively measured using the Oldenburg Sentence Test for the two spatial test conditions S0N0 (speech and noise from the front) and multisource-noise field (MSNF; speech from the front, four spatially distributed noise sources) in continuous noise of the Oldenburg Sentence Test (Ol-noise) and amplitude-modulated Fastl noise (Fastl-noise). RESULTS: With increasing hearing loss, the median SRT worsened significantly in all conditions. In test condition S0N0, the SRT of the CI group was 5.6 dB worse in Ol-noise than in the young NH group (mean age 26.4 years) and 22.5 dB worse in Fastl-noise; in MSNF, the differences were 6.6 dB (Ol-noise) and 17.3 dB (Fastl-noise), respectively. In the young NH group, median SRT in condition S0N0 improved by 11 dB due to gap listening; in the older NH group, SRTs improved by only 3.1 dB. In the HA and bimodal CI groups there was no gap listening effect and SRTs in Fastl-noise were even worse than in Ol-noise. CONCLUSION: With increasing hearing loss, speech perception in modulated noise is even more impaired than in continuous noise.

[Prospective comparative analysis of cochlear implant patients with single-sided deafness and asymmetric hearing loss with regard to health-related quality of life, tinnitus distress and psychological comorbidities]. / Prospektive Vergleichsanalyse von CI-Patienten mit einseitiger Taubheit und asymmetrischem Hörverlust hinsichtlich der gesundheitsbezogenen Lebensqualität, Tinnitusbelastung und psychischen Komorbiditäten.

BACKGROUND: Patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) are increasingly being treated with cochlear implants (CI) due to the demonstrated improvements in auditory abilities and quality of life. To date, there are few published studies in which these two groups are comparatively studied. The aim of the current study was to examine which factors differ between those two patient groups, especially preoperatively. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the previously published raw data of 66 prospectively recruited CI patients (21 SSD/45 AHL) was performed. In addition to the hearing outcome, tinnitus distress (tinnitus questionnaire), health-related quality of life (Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, NCIQ), stress (Perceived Stress Questionnaire, PSQ), and psychological comorbidities (General Depression Scale, ADS­L and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, GAD-7) were assessed in SSD and AHL patients pre- and postoperatively. RESULTS: Preoperatively, SSD patients showed significantly higher scores in the NCIQ subdomains "elementary" and "advanced sound perception" than the AHL group. Stress (PSQ) and anxiety symptoms (GAD-7) were significantly higher preoperatively in SSD patients than in AHL patients. After CI, these differences were strongly reduced, with minimal differences being detectable between the groups in the investigated domains postoperatively. CONCLUSION: SSD and AHL patients differ significantly preoperatively in terms of their subjective hearing assessment and psychosocial parameters. In SSD patients, psychological stress factors may have a stronger impact on the quality of life than in AHL patients. These aspects should be taken into account in the preoperative counseling and postoperative rehabilitation.

[Validation of a predictive model for speech discrimination after cochlear implant provision]. / Validierung eines Modells zur Vorhersage des Sprachverstehens nach Cochleaimplantation.

BACKGROUND: If sufficient speech discrimination is no longer achieved with conventional hearing systems, an audiological indication for a cochlear implant (CI) is given. However, there are no established target criteria for CI aftercare with regard to the level of speech comprehension to be achieved. The aim of this study is to validate an existing predictive model for speech comprehension after CI provision. This is applied to different patient groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prospective study included 124 postlingually deaf adults. The model is based on preoperative maximum monosyllabic recognition score, aided monosyllabic recognition score at 65 dBSPL, and age the time of implantation. The model was investigated with regard to prediction accuracy for monosyllabic recognition with CI after 6 months. RESULTS: Mean speech discrimination improved from 10% with hearing aid to 65% with CI after 6 months, with a statistically significant improvement in 93% of cases. Deterioration of aided unilateral speech discrimination was not observed. The mean prediction error was 11.5 percentage points in the cases with preoperative scores better than zero and 23.2 percentage points in all other cases. CONCLUSION: Cochlear implantation should also be considered in patients with moderately severe to severe hearing loss and insufficient speech discrimination with hearing aids. The model based on preoperatively measured data for predicting speech discrimination with CI can be used in preoperative consultation and in the context of postoperative quality assurance.

Free-field correction values for RadioEar DD65v2 circumaural audiometric headphones.

OBJECTIVE: Free-field correction values were measured for RadioEar DD65v2 audiometric headphones. DESIGN: Free-field correction values, that is, the difference GF-GC between the free-field sensitivity level GF and the ear simulator sensitivity level GC, were determined by loudness level comparisons between the headphone and a plane progressive wave in a free sound field. STUDY SAMPLE: The study was based on 17 otologically normal test subjects. RESULTS: Frequency-dependent free-field correction values are provided. The free-field correction of the speech level was determined to be 3.2 dB. CONCLUSIONS: Free-field correction values were determined for RadioEar DD65v2 audiometric headphones with an expanded measurement uncertainty.