Search

Objective: To evaluate and compare use of the Tactaid II+ and the Tactaid 7, in terms of speech perception, by adults with a hearing impairment., Design: Eight adults used one device daily for approximately 10 wk and attended seven training sessions. Performance was measured with tests of phonetic contrast perception, closed-set vowel and consonant identification, word and phoneme recognition in monosyllabic word lists, word recognition in sentences and speechtracking rate. A questionnaire was also administered. The protocol was repeated with the alternative device., Results: With each device, the group discriminated most phonetic contrasts at better-than-chance levels and demonstrated somewhat enhanced visual or auditory-visual perception when measured in terms of vowel identification, monosyllabic word recognition and speechtracking rate. An increase in speechtracking rate was also demonstrated for some individuals. Subjects generally reported little subjective improvement in speech perception and production, but were satisfied with the physical attributes of each device. Five of six subjects preferred the Tactaid 7., Conclusions: The Tactaid II+ and the Tactaid 7 provided suprasegmental and segmental information, enabling the group to discriminate phonetic contrasts and improve their perception of some speech materials. No consistent advantage was found for either device, thought most subjects preferred the Tactaid 7. Alternatives likely to provide a greater benefit to communication should be considered before a Tactaid fitting.

Objective: Use of wearable tactile speech perception devices is suggested to help overcome the difficulties in speech production resulting from severe and profound hearing impairment in children. This suggestion is based on the assumption that subjects can use tactile input in isolation, or in combination with information from residual aided hearing, to monitor and modify their speech. The present study evaluated the benefits to articulation provided through use of a multichannel electrotactile device ("Tickle Talker")., Design: Six profoundly hearing-impaired children were videotaped speaking with the Tickle Talker on and with the Tickle Talker off during conversations with their audiologist. Five of the subjects also wore their binaural hearing aids during all recorded conversations. The number of vowels, consonants, and overall phonemes correctly articulated by each child in the two conditions were compared., Results: One subject improved articulation of initial consonants and initial phonemes; one subject improved articulation of total vowels, total consonants, initial consonants, total phonemes, and initial phonemes; and a third subject improved articulation of total vowels and medial phonemes., Conclusions: Use of on-line tactile feedback from the Tickle Talker may benefit the articulation accuracy of some children, and the device may therefore be suitable to use with children who have not responded to more traditional speech training techniques.

A review of the literature suggests that, in order to maximize the benefits available through a tactile device, it must be accompanied by an effective and adaptive training program. There are a number of factors to consider in the design of such a training program, including the type of tasks and response formats to include, the amount of training, subject motivation and device use, the characteristics of the potential user population, the specific device to be used and the type of information it provides, and the evaluation procedures to be followed. The type and saliency of the information provided by a particular tactile device are highlighted as the most important yet neglected consideration in designing a training program. The training program used with the University of Melbourne's multiple-channel electrotactile device is presented to show how these important factors may be addressed, to indicate the flexibility required in a training program, and to provide a general framework on which researchers may base the development of programs for other tactile devices.

Four profoundly hearing-impaired adults who did not meet current selection criteria for implantation at the University of Melbourne were each fitted with a wearable multichannel electrotactile speech processor (Tickle Talker). The subjects were evaluated with a test battery of speech discrimination tests subsequent to training in use of the device. Thresholds for detection of pure tones were lower for the Tickle Talker than for hearing aids across the frequency range 250 to 4000 Hz. Mean speech detection thresholds for the Ling 5-sound test showed that all sounds were detected by users of the electrotactile device at normal conversational speech intensity levels. Mean speech discrimination scores were significantly higher (p less than 0.05) in the tactually aided condition as compared with the tactually unaided for identification of vowels and consonants, on open-set words, open-set sentences, and on connected discourse tracking. Mean scores increased by 20% for vowels, 19% for consonants, 30% for open-set words, and 25% for open-set sentences when the Tickle Talker was used in a multimodal combination with lipreading or lipreading and hearing aids. Speechtracking rates for three subjects showed increases of from 18 to 28 wpm when the tactile device was used. Comparison of tactually aided versus unaided tracking rates for two subjects with long-term experience shows continuing improvement with additional experience with the device. These results demonstrate that hearing-impaired adults not meeting selection criteria for cochlear implantation may benefit from use of an electrotactile speech processor, and highlight the potential benefits from integration of such devices into cochlear implant programs for profoundly hearing-impaired patients.