Speech coding strategies and revised cochlear implant candidacy: An analysis of post-implant performance

Otology and Neurotology

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 228-233

  David, Eytan E ^a   Ostroff, Jodi M ^a,d   Shipp, David ^a   Nedzelski, Julian M ^a   Chen, Joseph M ^a   Parnes, Lorne S ^b   Zimmerman, Kim ^b   Schramm, David ^c   Seguin, Christiane ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^d SUNNYBROOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cochlear implants; Preimplant candidacy; Speech coding strategies

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDIOLOGY; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVICE; FEMALE; HEARING IMPAIRMENT; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TECHNOLOGY; WORD RECOGNITION;

AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION; COHORT STUDIES; COMMUNICATION AIDS FOR DISABLED; DEAFNESS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SELECTION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE CARE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0037339627     PISSN: 15317129     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00129492-200303000-00017     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Clark GM. Historical perspectives. In: Clark GM, Cowan RSC, Cowell RC, eds. Cochlear Implantation for Infants and Children. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group, 1997:9-27.
2. Cowan RSC, Brown D, Whitford LA, et al. Speech perception in children using the advanced SPEAK speech coding strategy. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 1995;166:318-321.
3. Skinner MW, Clark Gm, Whitford LA, et al. Evaluation of a new spectral peak coding strategy for the Nucleus 22 channel cochlear implant system. Am J Otol Suppl 1994;2:15-27.
4. Whitford LA, Seligman PM, Everingham CE, et al. Evaluation of the nucleus spectra 22 processor and new speech coding strategy (SPEAK) in postlinguistically deafened adults. Acta Oto (Stockh) 1995;115:629-637.
5. Skinner MW, Arndt PL, Staller S. Nucleus 24 advanced encoder conversion study: Performance versus preference. Ear Hearing Suppl 2002;23:2-17.
6. Shipp DB, Nedzelski JM, Chen JM, et al. Comparison of postlingually deafened adults using the SPEAK and CIS coding strategies. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 2000;57:425-9.
7. Gantz BJ, Tyler RS, Knutson JF, et al. Evaluation of five different cochlear implant designs: Audiologic assessment and predictors of performance. Laryngoscope 1988;98:1100-6.
8. Gantz BJ, Woodworth GG, Abbas PJ, et al. Multivariate predictors of audiological success with multichannel cochlear implants. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1993;102:909-16.
9. Cohen NL, Waltzman SB, Fisher SG. The Department of Veterans Affairs Cochlear Implant Study Group: A prospective randomized study of cochlear implants. N Engl J Med 1993;328:233-7.
10. Cohen NL, Waltzman SB. Influence of processing strategies on cochlear implant performance. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1995;104(Suppl 165):9-14.
11. Skinner M, Holden L, Holden T, et al. Performance of postlinguistically deaf adults with the wearable speech processor (WSP III) and mini speech processor (MSP) of the Nucleus multi-channel cochlear implant. Ear Hear 1991;12:3-22.
12. Dowell RC, Dawson RW, Dettman SJ, et al. Multichannel cochlear implantation in children: A summary of current work at the University of Melbourne. Am J Otol 1991;12:137-43.
13. Staller S, Menapace C, Domico E, et al. Speech perception abilities of adult and pediatric Nucleus implant recipients using the Spectral Peak (SPEAK) coding strategy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;117:236-42.
14. Patient Selection Criteria. Nucleus Cochlear Implant System Physician's Package Insert for Nucleus 24 Contour. Englewood; 2001.
15. Shipp DB, Nedzelski JM, Chen JM, et al. Prognostic indicators of speech recognition performance in post linguistically deafened adult cochlear implant users. Adv Otorhinolaryngol 1997;52:74-7.
16. 16.Shipp DB, Nedzelski JM. Prognostic indicators of speech recognition performance in adult cochlear implant users: A prospective analysis. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 1995;166:194-6.
17. Waltzman SB, Niparko JK, Fisher SG, et al. Predictors of postoperative performance with cochlear implants. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1995;104(Suppl 165):15-8.
18. Rubinstein JT, Parkinson WS, Tyler RS, et al. Residual speech recognition and cochlear implant performance: Effects of implantation criteria. Am J Otol 1999;20:445-52.
19. Waltzman SB, Cohen NL, Roland JT Jr. A comparison of the growth of open-set speech perception between the Nucleus 22 and Nucleus 24 cochlear implant systems. Am J Otol 1999;20:435-41.
20. Skinner MW, Holden LK, Whitford LA, et al. Speech recognition with the Nucleus SPEAK, ACE, and CIS speech coding strategies in newly implanted adults. Ear Hear 2002;23:207-223.