Clinical evaluation of expanded input dynamic range in Nucleus cochlear implants
- PMID: 17496668
- DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3180312651
Clinical evaluation of expanded input dynamic range in Nucleus cochlear implants
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate whether expanded instantaneous input dynamic ranges (IIDRs) in the Nucleus cochlear implant system benefit speech perception in the laboratory and listening in the real world.
Design: Until recently, Nucleus cochlear implants have used an IIDR of approximately 30 dB. In this study, an IIDR of 31 dB was compared with 46 dB and 56 dB in the SPEAR3 research processor with nine adult implant recipients. Subjects were given two, 2-wk blocks of take-home experience with each of the three IIDRs. A single IIDR setting was used in each trial period. During the take-home experience with the expanded IIDRs, subjects used two programs: a standard program (with clinically measured electrode dynamic ranges) and a program with adjusted thresholds (decreased T levels). After each block of take-home experience, speech perception testing was conducted for CNC words in quiet (at 45 dB and 55 dB SPL) and for CUNY sentences in the presence of multi-taker babble.
Results: On average, CNC word recognition at low presentation levels was significantly better with the 46 dB and 56 dB IIDRs, compared with the 31 dB IIDR; however, there was no significant difference between the 46 dB and 56 dB IIDR conditions. These benefits were greater for standard programs than for reduced T level programs. For CUNY sentences in babble, group results indicated no significant difference in performance across IIDR. The three IIDRs were rated similarly in real-life listening situations, and two of the subjects expressed tolerance problems with the expanded standard IIDRs.
Conclusions: IIDRs of 46 and 56 dB provided benefit in accessing low-level speech without a decrement in sentence perception in babble. Most subjects accepted the standard, wider IIDR programs in everyday life. No significant differences were found between the 46 dB and 56 dB IIDR programs.
Similar articles
-
An investigation of input level range for the nucleus 24 cochlear implant system: speech perception performance, program preference, and loudness comfort ratings.Ear Hear. 2003 Apr;24(2):157-74. doi: 10.1097/01.AUD.0000058107.64929.D6. Ear Hear. 2003. PMID: 12677112
-
Clinical evaluation of higher stimulation rates in the nucleus research platform 8 system.Ear Hear. 2007 Jun;28(3):381-93. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31804793ac. Ear Hear. 2007. PMID: 17485987
-
Effects of presentation level on phoneme and sentence recognition in quiet by cochlear implant listeners.Ear Hear. 2003 Oct;24(5):392-405. doi: 10.1097/01.AUD.0000090340.09847.39. Ear Hear. 2003. PMID: 14534410
-
The benefits of remote microphone technology for adults with cochlear implants.Ear Hear. 2009 Oct;30(5):590-9. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181acfb70. Ear Hear. 2009. PMID: 19561509
-
A systematic review of the impact of adjusting input dynamic range (IDR), electrical threshold (T) level and rate of stimulation on speech perception ability in cochlear implant users.Int J Audiol. 2019 Jun;58(6):317-325. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2018.1564844. Epub 2019 Apr 2. Int J Audiol. 2019. PMID: 30939068
Cited by
-
Speech comprehension across multiple CI processor generations: Scene dependent signal processing.Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2021 Jun 15;6(4):807-815. doi: 10.1002/lio2.564. eCollection 2021 Aug. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2021. PMID: 34401506 Free PMC article.
-
The Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential: From Laboratory to Clinic.Front Neurosci. 2017 Jun 23;11:339. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2017.00339. eCollection 2017. Front Neurosci. 2017. PMID: 28690494 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Benefits from upgrade to the CP810 sound processor for Nucleus 24 cochlear implant recipients.Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2014 Jan;271(1):49-57. doi: 10.1007/s00405-013-2381-8. Epub 2013 Feb 14. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2014. PMID: 23408020
-
Optimization of programming parameters in children with the advanced bionics cochlear implant.J Am Acad Audiol. 2012 May;23(5):302-12. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.23.5.2. J Am Acad Audiol. 2012. PMID: 22533974 Free PMC article.
-
Factors contributing to speech perception scores in long-term pediatric cochlear implant users.Ear Hear. 2011 Feb;32(1 Suppl):19S-26S. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181ffdb8b. Ear Hear. 2011. PMID: 21832887 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous