Clinical trial results with the med-el fine structure processing coding strategy in experienced cochlear implant users

ORL

Volumn 74, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 185-198

  Mller, Joachim ^a   Brill, Stefan ^b   Hagen, Rudolf ^b   Moeltner, Alexander ^b   Brockmeier, Steffi Johanna ^c,h   Stark, Thomas ^c,d   Helbig, Silke ^e   Maurer, Jan ^f   Zahnert, Thomas ^g   Zierhofer, Clemens ⁱ   Nopp, Peter ^j   Anderson, Ilona ^j  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WÜRZBURG   (Germany)

^c TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^d St Elisabeth Hospital Bochum   (Germany)

^e UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL FRANKFURT   (Germany)

^f Katholisches Klinikum Koblenz   (Germany)

^g DRESDEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^h UNIVERSITY OF BASEL   (Switzerland)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF INNSBRUCK   (Austria)

^j MED EL GmbH   (Austria)

more..

Author keywords

CIS+; Cochlear implant; Coding strategy; Fine structure processing; Music; OPUS; Pitch; Speech perception

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COCHLEA PROSTHESIS; CODING; FEMALE; FREQUENCY DISCRIMINATION; HEARING ACUITY; HUMAN; MALE; MICROPROCESSOR; MUSIC; PITCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TELEPHONE; TOOL USE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CLINICAL CODING; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; FEMALE; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUESTIONNAIRES; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION TESTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84863865491     PISSN: 03011569     EISSN: 14230275     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000337089     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Hilbert D: Grundzüge einer allgemeinen Theorie der linearen Integralgleichungen. Leipzig, Teubner, 1912.
2. Pickles JO: An Introduction to the Physiology of Hearing, ed 3. Bingley, Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, 2008.
3. Smith ZM, Delgutte B, Oxenham AJ: Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception. Nature 2002; 416: 87-90. (Pubitemid 34215405)
4. Eddington DK: Future Directions: Questions Deserving Attention. Conference on Implantable Auditory Prostheses, Asilomar Conference Center, Pacific Grove, August 1999.
5. Wilson BS: Strategies for representing speech information with cochlear implants; in Niparko JK, Kirk KI, Mellon NK, Robbins AM, Tucci DL, Wilson BS (eds): Cochlear Implants: Principles and Practices. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2000, pp 129-170.
6. Zeng FG, Nie K, Stickney G, Kong YY: Auditory perception with slowly-varying amplitude and frequency modulations; in Pressnitzer D, de Cheveigne A, McAdams S, and Collet L (eds): Auditory Signal Processing: Physiology, Psychoacoustics, and Models. New York, Springer, 2004, pp 282-290.
7. Wong A, Wong L: Tone perception of Cantonese speaking prelingually hearing impaired children with cochlear implants. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004; 130: 751-758. (Pubitemid 38881230)
8. Fu QJ, Chinchilla S, Galvin JJ: The role of spectral and temporal cues in voice gender discrimination by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol 2004; 5: 253-260. (Pubitemid 39332096)
9. McDermott H: Music perception with cochlear implants: a review. Trends Amplif 2004; 8: 49-82. (Pubitemid 39435144)
10. Von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Tillein J, Pfennigdorf T, Hartmann R, Stürzebecher E, Klinke R: Electric-acoustic stimulation of the auditory system. ORL 1999; 61: 334-340.
11. Kiefer J, Pok S, Adunka O, Sturzebecher E, Baumgartner W, Schmidt M, Tillein J, Ye Q, Gstoettner W: Combined electric and acoustic stimulation of the auditory system: results of a clinical study. Audiol Neurotol 2005; 10: 134-144. (Pubitemid 40663391)
12. Helms J, Müller J, Schön F, Winkler F, Shehata- Dieler W, Kastenbauer E, Baumann U, Rasp G, Schorn K, Ebetaer B, Baumgartner W, Hamzavi S, Gstöttner W, Westhofen M, Döring W, Dujardin H, Albegger K, Mair A, Zenner H, Haferkamp C, Schmitz-Salue C, Arold R, Sesterhenn G, Jahnke V, Wagner H, Gräbel S, Bockmühl U, Häusler R, Vischer M, Kompis M, Hildmann H, Radü H, Stark T, Engel A, Hildmann A, Streitberger C, Hüttenbrink K, Müller-Aschoff E, Hofmann G, Seeling K, Hloucal U, von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Pfennigdorf T, Gall V, Breitfuss A, Stelzig Y, Begall K, Hey M, Vorwerk W, Thumfart W, Gunkel A, Zorowka P, Stephan K, Gammert C, Mathis A, DeMin N, Freigang B, Ziese M, Stützel A, von Specht H, Arnold W, Brockmeier S, Ebenhoch H, Steinhoff A, Zierhofer C, Zwicknagl M, Stöbich B: Comparison of the TEMPO+ ear-level speech processor and the CIS PRO+ body-worn processor in adult MED-EL cochlear implant users. ORL 2001; 63: 31-40. (Pubitemid 32098515)
13. Zierhofer C: Electrical nerve stimulation based on channel specific sampling sequences. US patent No 6,594,525 B1, July 15, 2003.
14. Arnoldner C, Riss D, Brunner M, Durisin M, Baumgartner W, Hamzavi J: Speech and music perception with the new fine structure speech coding strategy: preliminary results. Acta Otolaryngol 2007; 127: 1298-1303. (Pubitemid 350175283)
15. Looi V, Winter P, Anderson I, Sucher C: A music quality rating test battery for cochlear implant users to compare the FSP and HDCIS strategies for music appreciation. Int J Audiol 2011; 50: 503-518.
16. Wilson BS, Lawson DT, Zerbi M, Finley CC: Virtual channels interleaved sampling (VCIS) processor. First Quarterly Progress Report, NIH Contract N01-DC-2-2401, Neural Prosthesis Program, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, 1992.
17. Wilson BS, Zerbi M, Lawson DT: Identification of virtual channels conditions on the basis of pitch. Third Quarterly Progress Report, NIH Contract N01-DC-2-2401, Neural Prosthesis Program, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, 1993.
18. Nobbe A, Schleich P, Zierhofer C, Nopp P: Frequency discrimination with sequential or simultaneous stimulation in MED-EL cochlear implants. Acta Otolaryngol 2007; 127: 1266-1272. (Pubitemid 350175278)
19. Wagener K, Kollmeier B, Kühnel V: Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests in deutscher Sprache. 1. Design des Oldenburger Satztests. Z Audiol 1999; 38: 4-15.
20. Wagener K, Brand T, Kollmeier B: Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests in deutscher Sprache. 2. Optimierung des Oldenburger Satztests. Z Audiol 1999; 38: 44-56.
21. Wagener K, Brand T, Kollmeier B: Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests in deutscher Sprache. 3. Evaluation des Oldenburger Satztests. Z Audiol 1999; 38: 86-95.
22. Hahlbrock KH: Wörter für Gehörprüfung mit Sprache; in Hahlbrock KH: Sprachaudiometrie, ed 2. Thieme, Stuttgart, 1970.
23. Helms J, Müller J, Schön F, Moser L, Arnold W, Janssen T, Ramsden R, von Ilberg C, Kiefer J, Pfennigdorf T, Gstöttner W, Baumgartner W, Ehrenberger K, Skarzynski H, Ribari O, Thumfart W, Stephan K, Mann W, Heinemann M, Zorowka P, Lippert KL, Zenner HP, Bohndorf M, Hüttenbrink K, Müller- Aschoff E, Hofmann G, Freigang B, Begall K, Ziese M, Forgbert O, Häusler R, Vischer M, Schlatter T, Schlöndorff G, Korves B, Döring H, Gerhardt HJ, Wagner H, Schorn K, Schilling V, Baumann U, Kastenbauer E, Albegger K, Mair A, Gammert C, Mathis A, Streitberger C, Hochmair-Desoyer I: Evaluation of performance with the COMBI40 cochlear implant in adults: a multicentric clinical study. ORL 1997; 59: 23-35. (Pubitemid 27129946)
24. Berger RL, Hsu JC: Bioequivalence trials, intersection- union tests and confidence sets. Stat Sci 1996; 11: 283-319. (Pubitemid 126706143)
25. Crystal D: The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1987.
26. Wells JC: German. http://www.phon.ucl. ac.uk/home/sampa/german.htm. Updated March 18, 2006 (accessed November 11, 2011).
27. Wells JC: English. http://www.phon.ucl. ac.uk/home/sampa/english.htm. Updated March 18, 2006 (accessed November 11, 2011).
28. Veekmans K, Ressel L, Mueller J, Vischer M, Brockmeier SJ: Comparison of music perception in bilateral and unilateral cochlear implant users and normal-hearing subjects. Audiol Neurootol 2009; 14: 315-326.
29. Anderson I, Baumgartner WD, Böheim K, Nahler A, Arnolder C, D'Haese P: Telephone use: what benefit do people with a cochlear implant receive? Int J Audiol 2006; 45: 446- 453. (Pubitemid 44477300)
30. Tyler RS, Gfeller K, Mehr MA: A preliminary investigation comparing one and eight channels at slow rates on music appraisal in adults with cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int 2000; 1: 82-87.
31. Brockmeier SJ, Nopp P, Vischer M, Baumgartner W, Stark T, Schön F, Müller J, Braunschweig T, Busch R, Getto M, Arnold W, Allum DJ: Correlation of speech and music perception in postlingually deaf Combi 40/40+ users; in Kubo T, Takahashi Y, Iwaki T (eds): Cochlear Implants: An Update: The Hague, Kugler Publications, 2002, pp 459- 464.
32. Brockmeier SJ, Grasmeder M, Passow S, Mawmann D, Vischer M, Jappel A, Baumgartner W, Stark T, Müller J, Brill S, Steffens T, Strutz J, Kiefer J, Baumann U, Arnold W: Comparison of musical activities of cochlear implant users with difference speech-coding strategies. Ear Hear 2007; 28(2 suppl):49S-51S. (Pubitemid 46673659)
33. Lorens A, Zgoda M, Obrycka A, Skarzynski H: Fine structure processing improves speech perception as well as objective and subjective benefits in pediatric MED-EL COMBI 40+ users. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2010; 74: 1372-1378.
34. Krenmayr A, Visser D, Schatzer R, Zierhofer C: The effects of fine structure stimulation on pitch pitch perception with cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int 2011; 12: 70-72.
35. Riss D, Hamzavi JS, Katzinger M, Baumgartner WD, Kaider A, Gstoettner W, Arnoldner C: Effects of fine structure and extended low frequencies in pediatric cochlear implant recipients. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2011; 75: 573-578.
36. Riss D, Arnoldner C, Reiss S, Baumgartner WD, Hamzavi JS: 1-year results using the Opus speech processor with the fine structure speech coding strategy. Acta Otolaryngol 2009; 129: 988-991.
37. Vermeire K, Kleine-Punte A, Van de Heyning P: Better speech recognition in noise with the fine structure processing coding strategy. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2010; 72: 305-311.