Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010 Jan;21(1):44-51.
doi: 10.3766/jaaa.21.1.6.

Benefits of localization and speech perception with multiple noise sources in listeners with a short-electrode cochlear implant

Camille C Dunn  1 , Ann Perreau, Bruce Gantz, Richard S Tyler
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Benefits of localization and speech perception with multiple noise sources in listeners with a short-electrode cochlear implant

Camille C Dunn et al. J Am Acad Audiol. 2010 Jan.

Abstract

Background: Research suggests that for individuals with significant low-frequency hearing, implantation of a short-electrode cochlear implant may provide benefits of improved speech perception abilities. Because this strategy combines acoustic and electrical hearing within the same ear while at the same time preserving low-frequency residual acoustic hearing in both ears, localization abilities may also be improved. However, very little research has focused on the localization and spatial hearing abilities of users with a short-electrode cochlear implant.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate localization abilities for listeners with a short-electrode cochlear implant who continue to wear hearing aids in both ears. A secondary purpose was to document speech perception abilities using a speech-in-noise test with spatially separate noise sources.

Research design: Eleven subjects that utilized a short-electrode cochlear implant and bilateral hearing aids were tested on localization and speech perception with multiple noise locations using an eight-loudspeaker array. Performance was assessed across four listening conditions using various combinations of cochlear implant and/or hearing aid use.

Results: Results for localization showed no significant difference between using bilateral hearing aids and bilateral hearing aids plus the cochlear implant. However, there was a significant difference between the bilateral hearing aid condition and the implant plus use of a contralateral hearing aid for all 11 subjects. Results for speech perception showed a significant benefit when using bilateral hearing aids plus the cochlear implant over use of the implant plus only one hearing aid.

Conclusion: Combined use of both hearing aids and the cochlear implant show significant benefits for both localization and speech perception in noise for users with a short-electrode cochlear implant. These results emphasize the importance of low-frequency information in two ears for the purpose of localization and speech perception in noise.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Panel A: Individual and average implanted ear pure tone thresholds for all subjects. Panel B: Individual and average contralateral ear implanted pure tone thresholds for all subjects.
Figure 1
Figure 1
Panel A: Individual and average implanted ear pure tone thresholds for all subjects. Panel B: Individual and average contralateral ear implanted pure tone thresholds for all subjects.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Individual and average localization scores (RMS error in degrees) for the combined, hybrid, bimodal, and bilateral hearing aid listening conditions. Better performance is reflected by a lower RMS error score.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Recognition of Multiple jammers test individual and average signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio scores for combined, hybrid, and bimodal testing conditions. Lower scores (more negative) indicate better speech perception performance.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Carhart R. Monaural and binaural discrimination against competing sentences. International Audiology. 1965;4:5–10.
    1. Ching TY, Incerti P, Hill M. Binaural benefits for adults who use hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears. Ear and Hearing. 2004;25:9–21. - PubMed
    1. Ching TY, Psarros C, Hill M, Dillon H, Incerti P. Should children who use cochlear implants wear hearing aids in the opposite ear? Ear and Hearing. 2001;22(5):365–80. - PubMed
    1. Ching TY, van Wanrooy E, Dillon H. Binaural-bimodal fitting or bilateral implantation for managing severe to profound deafness: a review. Trends in Amplification. 2007;11(3):161–92. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chmiel RA, Clark J, Jerger J, Jenkins H, Freeman R. Speech perception and production in children wearing a cochlear implant in one ear and a hearing aid in the opposite ear. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, & Laryngology, Supplement. 1995;166:314–316. - PubMed

Publication types