Clinical evaluation of expanded input dynamic range in nucleus cochlear implants

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 163-176

  Dawson, P W ^a,b   Vandali, A E ^a   Knight, M R ^a,b   Heasman, J M ^a,b  

^a Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering   (Australia)

^b Research and Technology Labs   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRODE; HUMAN; SPEECH PERCEPTION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; WORD RECOGNITION;

EID: 34247627995     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3180312651     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Beranek, L. L. (1947). The design of speech communication systems. Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers, 35, 880-889.
2. Boothroyd, A., Erikson, F. N., Medwetsky, L. (1994). The hearing aid input: A phonemic approach to assessing the spectral distribution of speech. Ear & Hearing, 6, 432-442.
3. Chatterjee, M., Fu, Q. J., Shannon, R. V. (2000). Effects of phase duration and electrode separation on loudness growth in cochlear implant listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107, 1637-1644.
4. Cosendai, G., Pelizzone, M. (2001). Effects of the acoustical dynamic range on speech recognition with cochlear implants. Audiology, 40, 272-281.
5. Cox, R. M., Matesich, J. S., Moore, J. N. (1988). Distributions of short-term rms levels in conversational speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 84, 1100-1104.
6. Dunn, H. K., White, S. S. (1940). Statistical measurements on conversational speech. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 11, 278-288.
7. Fletcher, H. (1953). Speech and Hearing in Communication. New York: Van Nostrand.
8. James, C. J., Blamey, P. L., Martin, L., Swanson, B., Just, Y., MacFarlane, D. (2002). Adaptive dynamic range optimization for cochlear implants: A preliminary study. Ear & Hearing, 23(1S), 49S-58S.
9. James, C. J., Skinner, M. W., Martin, L. F. A., Holden, L. K., Galvin, K. L., Holden, T. A. (2003). An investigation of input level range for the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system: speech perception performance, program preference, and loudness comfort ratings. Ear & Hearing, 24, 157-174.
10. Kerlinger, F. N. (1986). Foundations of Behavioural Research (3rd ed.). Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
11. Kirk, R. E. (1995). Experimental Design: Procedures for the Behavioural Sciences (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
12. Max, L., Onghena, P. (1999). Some issues in the statistical analysis of completely randomised and repeated measures designs for speech, language and hearing research. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 42, 261-270.
13. McKay, C. M., Remine, M. D., McDermott, H. J. (2001). Loudness summation for pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea: Effects of rate, electrode separation, level, and mode of stimulation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110, 1514-1524.
14. Muller, C. G. (1981). Survey of cochlear implant work. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 70, S52.
15. Nelson, D. A., Schmitz, J. L., Donaldson, G. S., Viemeister, N. F., Javel, E. (1996). Intensity discrimination as a function of stimulus level with electric stimulation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 100, 2393-2414.
16. Pearsons, K. S., Bennett, R. L., Fidell, S. (1976). Speech levels in various environments. Bolt Beranek and Newman Report No. 321, Canoga Park, CA.
17. Peterson, G., Lehiste I. (1962). Revised CNC lists for auditory tests. Journal of Speech & Hearing Disorders, 27, 62-70.
18. Seligman, P., Whitford, L. (1995). Adjustment of appropriate signal levels in the Spectra 22 and Mini Speech Processors. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology, 104(Suppl. 166), 172-175.
19. Skinner, M. W., Clark, G. M., Whitford, L. A., Seligman, P. A., Staller, S. J., Shipp, D. B., Shallop, J. K., Everingham, C., Menapace, C. M., Arndt, P. L., Antogenelli, T., Brimacombe, J. A., Beiter, A. L. (1994). Evaluation of a new spectral peak (SPEAK) coding strategy for the Nucleus 22 channel cochlear implant system American Journal of Otology, 15(Suppl. 2), 15-27.
20. Skinner, M. W., Holden, L. K., Holden, T. A. (1997). Speech recognition at simulated soft, conversational and raised-toloud vocal efforts by adults with cochlear implants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 3766-3782.
21. Spahr, A. J., Dorman, M. F. (2005). Effects of minimum stimulation settings for the Med El Tempo+ speech processor on speech understanding. Ear & Hearing, 26, 2S-6S.
22. Stöbich, B, Zierhofer, C. M., Hochmair, E. S. (1999). Influence of automatic gain control parameter settings on speech understanding of cochlear implant users employing the continuous interleaved sampling strategy. Ear and Hearing, 20, 104-116.
23. Tong, Y. C., Black, R. C., Clark, G. M., Forster, J. B., Millar, J. B., O'Loughlin, B. J., Patrick, J. F. (1979). A preliminary report on a multiple-channel cochlear implant operation. Journal of Laryngology and Otology, 93, 679-695.
24. Tong, Y. C., Blamey, P. J., Dowell, R. C., Clark, G. M. (1983). Psychophysics studies evaluating the feasibility of a speech processing strategy for a multiple-channel cochlear implant. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 74, 73-80.
25. Vandali, A. E., Whitford, L. A., Plant, K. L., Clark, G. M. (2000). Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: Using the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Ear & Hearing, 21, 608-624.
26. Whitford, L. A., Seligman, P. M., Everingham, C. E., Antognelli, T., Skok, M. C., Hollow, R. D., Plant, K. L., Gerin, E. S., Staller, S. J., McDermott, H. J., Gibson, W. R., Clark, G. M. (1995). Evaluation of the Nucleus Spectra 22 processor and new speech processing strategy (SPEAK) in postlinguistically deafened adults. Acta Oto-laryngologica (Stockholm), 115, 629-637.
27. Wilson, B. S., Finley, C. C., Lawson, D. T., Wolford, R. D., Eddington, D. K., Rabinowitz, W. M. (1991). Better speech recognition with cochlear implants. Nature, 352, 236-238.
28. Zeng, F. G., Galvin, J. J. (1999). Amplitude mapping and phoneme recognition in cochlear implant listeners. Ear & Hearing, 20, 60-74.
29. Zeng, F. G., Grant, G., Niparko, J., Galvin, J., Shannon, R., Opie, J, et al. Speech dynamic range and its effect on cochlear implant performance. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, (2002);111, 377-386.
30. Zeng, F. G., Shannon, R. V. (1992). Loudness balance between electric and acoustic stimulation. Hearing Research, 60, 231-235.
31. Zeng, F. G., Shannon, R. V. (1994). Loudness-coding mechanisms inferred from electric stimulation of the auditory system. Science, 264, 564-566.
32. ANSI (1969) American National Standards Institute. (1969). American National Standard Methods for Calculation of the Articulation Index, (ANSI-S3.5). New York: ANSI.
33. ANSI (1997) American National Standards Institute. (1997). American National Standard Methods for Calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index, (ANSI-S3.5). New York: ANSI.
34. SPEAR3 Product brief - 3rd generation speech processor for electric and acoustic research. Cooperative Research Centre for Cochlear Implant and Hearing Aid Innovation (CRC - HEAR), Melbourne, Australia. Available at: http://www.hearworks. com.au. Accessed December 18, 2006.
35. Boothroyd, A, Hanin, L, Hnath, T. (1985). A sentence test of speech perception: reliability, set equivalence, and short term learning. Internal report, Speech & Hearing Sciences Research Center, City University of New York.