Comparisons of electrophysiological and psychophysical fitting methods for cochlear implants.
This study compared two different versions of an electrophysiology-based software-guided cochlear implant fitting method with a procedure employing standard clinical software. The two versions used electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) thresholds for either five or all twenty-two elec...
| Published in: | International Journal of Audiology Vol. 62; no. 2; pp. 118 - 129 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | research tables/charts randomized controlled trial Journal Article |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Feb2023
|
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=161761786&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 161761786 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 14992027 JW2 jtl: International Journal of Audiology issn: 14992027 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Feb2023 vid: 62 iid: 2 pid: 377 pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania artinfo: ui: 161761786 154423263 161761786 161761786 10.1080/14992027.2021.2015543 161761786 ppf: 118 ppct: 11 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Comparisons of electrophysiological and psychophysical fitting methods for cochlear implants. aug: au: Müller-Deile, Joachim Neben, Nicole Dillier, Norbert Büchner, Andreas Mewes, Alexander Junge, Friederike Lai, Waikong Schuessler, Mark Hey, Matthias affil: Audiology Consultant, Kiel-Holtenau, Germany sug: subj: Electrophysiology Psychophysics Cochlear Implant Hearing Aid Fitting Methods Human Prospective Studies Double-Blind Studies Repeated Measures Randomized Controlled Trials Multicenter Studies Crossover Design Male Female Adult Middle Age Aged Random Assignment Funding Source Adult: 19-44 years Middle Aged: 45-64 years Aged: 65+ years Male Female ab: This study compared two different versions of an electrophysiology-based software-guided cochlear implant fitting method with a procedure employing standard clinical software. The two versions used electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) thresholds for either five or all twenty-two electrodes to determine sound processor stimulation level profiles. Objective and subjective performance results were compared between software-guided and clinical fittings. Prospective, double-blind, single-subject repeated-measures with permuted ABCA sequences. 48 post linguistically deafened adults with ≤15 years of severe-to-profound deafness who were newly unilaterally implanted with a Nucleus device. Speech recognition in noise and quiet was not significantly different between software- guided and standard methods, but there was a visit/learning-effect. However, the 5-electrode method gave scores on the SSQ speech subscale 0.5 points lower than the standard method. Clinicians judged usability for all methods as acceptable, as did subjects for comfort. Analysis of stimulation levels and ECAP thresholds suggested that the 5-electrode method could be refined. Speech recognition was not inferior using either version of the electrophysiology-based software-guided fitting method compared with the standard method. Subject-reported speech perception was slightly inferior with the five-electrode method. Software-guided methods saved about 10 min of clinician's time versus standard fittings. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts randomized controlled trial Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|