Search

Purpose: The primary purpose of this study was to derive spatial release from masking (SRM) performance-azimuth functions for bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users to provide a thorough description of SRM as a function of target/distracter spatial configuration. The secondary purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of the microphone location for SRM in a within-subject study design., Method: Speech recognition was measured in 12 adults with bilateral CIs for 11 spatial separations ranging from -90° to +90° in 20° steps using an adaptive block design. Five of the 12 participants were tested with both the behind-the-ear microphones and a T-mic configuration to further investigate the effect of mic location on SRM., Results: SRM can be significantly affected by the hemifield origin of the distracter stimulus-particularly for listeners with interaural asymmetry in speech understanding. The greatest SRM was observed with a distracter positioned 50° away from the target. There was no effect of mic location on SRM for the current experimental design., Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that the traditional assessment of SRM with a distracter positioned at 90° azimuth may underestimate maximum performance for individuals with bilateral CIs.

Objective: The primary objective of this study was to assess the effect of electric and acoustic overlap for speech understanding in typical listening conditions using semidiffuse noise., Design: This study used a within-subjects, repeated measures design including 11 experienced adult implant recipients (13 ears) with functional residual hearing in the implanted and nonimplanted ear. The aided acoustic bandwidth was fixed and the low-frequency cutoff for the cochlear implant (CI) was varied systematically. Assessments were completed in the R-SPACE sound-simulation system which includes a semidiffuse restaurant noise originating from eight loudspeakers placed circumferentially about the subject's head. AzBio sentences were presented at 67 dBA with signal to noise ratio varying between +10 and 0 dB determined individually to yield approximately 50 to 60% correct for the CI-alone condition with full CI bandwidth. Listening conditions for all subjects included CI alone, bimodal (CI + contralateral hearing aid), and bilateral-aided electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS; CI + bilateral hearing aid). Low-frequency cutoffs both below and above the original "clinical software recommendation" frequency were tested for all patients, in all conditions. Subjects estimated listening difficulty for all conditions using listener ratings based on a visual analog scale., Results: Three primary findings were that (1) there was statistically significant benefit of preserved acoustic hearing in the implanted ear for most overlap conditions, (2) the default clinical software recommendation rarely yielded the highest level of speech recognition (1 of 13 ears), and (3) greater EAS overlap than that provided by the clinical recommendation yielded significant improvements in speech understanding., Conclusions: For standard-electrode CI recipients with preserved hearing, spectral overlap of acoustic and electric stimuli yielded significantly better speech understanding and less listening effort in a laboratory-based, restaurant-noise simulation. In conclusion, EAS patients may derive more benefit from greater acoustic and electric overlap than given in current software fitting recommendations, which are based solely on audiometric threshold. These data have larger scientific implications, as previous studies may not have assessed outcomes with optimized EAS parameters, thereby underestimating the benefit afforded by hearing preservation.

The benefit of spatial separation for talkers in a multi-talker environment is well documented. However, few studies have examined the effect of talker motion on speech recognition. In the current study, we evaluated the effects of (1) motion of the target or distracters, (2) a priori information about the target and distracter spatial configurations, and (3) target and distracter location. In total, seventeen young adults with normal hearing were tested in a large anechoic chamber in two experiments. In Experiment 1, seven stimulus conditions were tested using the Coordinate Response Measure (Bolia et al., 2000) speech corpus, in which subjects were required to report the key words in a target sentence presented simultaneously with two distracter sentences. As in previous studies, there was a significant improvement in key word identification for conditions in which the target and distracters were spatially separated as compared to the co-located conditions. In addition, 1) motion of either talker or distracter resulted in improved performance compared to stationary presentation (talker motion yielded significantly better performance than distracter motion) 2) a priori information regarding stimulus configuration was not beneficial, and 3) performance was significantly better with key words at 0° azimuth as compared to -60° (on the listener's left). Experiment 2 included two additional conditions designed to assess whether the benefit of motion observed in Experiment 1 was due to the motion itself or to the fact that the motion conditions introduced small spatial separations in the target and distracter key words. Results showed that small spatial separations (on the order of 5-8°) resulted in improved performance (relative to co-located key words) whether the sentences were moving or stationary. These results suggest that in the presence of distracting messages, motion of either target or distracters and/or small spatial separation of the key words may be beneficial for sound source segregation and thus for improved speech recognition., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite improvements in cochlear implants (CIs), CI recipients continue to experience significant communicative difficulty in background noise. Many potential solutions have been proposed to help increase signal-to-noise ratio in noisy environments, including signal processing and external accessories. To date, however, the effect of microphone location on speech recognition in noise has focused primarily on hearing aid users., Purpose: The purpose of this study was to (1) measure physical output for the T-Mic as compared with the integrated behind-the-ear (BTE) processor mic for various source azimuths, and (2) to investigate the effect of CI processor mic location for speech recognition in semi-diffuse noise with speech originating from various source azimuths as encountered in everyday communicative environments., Research Design: A repeated-measures, within-participant design was used to compare performance across listening conditions., Study Sample: A total of 11 adults with Advanced Bionics CIs were recruited for this study., Data Collection and Analysis: Physical acoustic output was measured on a Knowles Experimental Mannequin for Acoustic Research (KEMAR) for the T-Mic and BTE mic, with broadband noise presented at 0 and 90° (directed toward the implant processor). In addition to physical acoustic measurements, we also assessed recognition of sentences constructed by researchers at Texas Instruments, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the Stanford Research Institute (TIMIT sentences) at 60 dBA for speech source azimuths of 0, 90, and 270°. Sentences were presented in a semi-diffuse restaurant noise originating from the R-SPACE 8-loudspeaker array. Signal-to-noise ratio was determined individually to achieve approximately 50% correct in the unilateral implanted listening condition with speech at 0°. Performance was compared across the T-Mic, 50/50, and the integrated BTE processor mic., Results: The integrated BTE mic provided approximately 5 dB attenuation from 1500-4500 Hz for signals presented at 0° as compared with 90° (directed toward the processor). The T-Mic output was essentially equivalent for sources originating from 0 and 90°. Mic location also significantly affected sentence recognition as a function of source azimuth, with the T-Mic yielding the highest performance for speech originating from 0°., Conclusions: These results have clinical implications for (1) future implant processor design with respect to mic location, (2) mic settings for implant recipients, and (3) execution of advanced speech testing in the clinic., (American Academy of Audiology.)