Journals / Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology / 2019 / Cilt: 57 - Sayı: 3

Evaluation of Speech, Spatial Perception and Hearing Quality in Unilateral, Bimodal and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users

Pages
149–153
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Moreover, subjective tests should be used regularly alongwith objective tests for evaluating CI patients.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of the study was to conduct ascale-based evaluation of the hearing skills of unilateral, bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users, including distinguishing, orientating and locatingspeech and environmental sounds in their surrounding environment that they are exposed to in differentcontexts of everyday life.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The scale results were compared between groups.Methods: A total of 74 cochlear implant users, 30unilateral, 30 bimodal and 14 bilateral, were includedin the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Moreover, subjective tests should be used regularly alongwith objective tests for evaluating CI patients.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: The aim of the study was to conduct ascale-based evaluation of the hearing skills of unilateral, bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users, including distinguishing, orientating and locatingspeech and environmental sounds in their surrounding environment that they are exposed to in differentcontexts of everyday life. The scale results were compared between groups.Methods: A total of 74 cochlear implant users, 30unilateral, 30 bimodal and 14 bilateral, were includedin the study. Their ages ranged from 11 to 64 years.Participants were assessed using the Speech, Spatialand Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ).Results: Bilateral CI users’ subjective ratings of theirown hearing skills were found to be significantly better than those of bimodal and unilateral CI users; bimodal users' subjective ratings were also found to besignificantly better than those of unilateral CI users.Paired comparisons showed statistically significantdifferences between the groups in terms of total scoresof Speech, Spatial, Qualities of Hearing and GeneralSSQ (p<0.05).Conclusion: Our findings show that bilateral use ofcochlear implants should be recommended for thosepresently using bimodal and unilateral devices. Moreover, subjective tests should be used regularly alongwith objective tests for evaluating CI patients.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERDEM, B. K., CİPRUT, A. (2019). Evaluation of Speech, Spatial Perception and Hearing Quality in Unilateral, Bimodal and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users. Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology, Cilt: 57 - Sayı: 3, 149–153. https://ajindex.com/articles/368954

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Litovsky RY, Parkinson A, Arcaroli J. Spatial hearing and speech intelligibility in bilateral cochlear implant users. Ear Hear 2009
  2. [CrossRef] 2. Noble W, Tyler RS, Dunn CC, Bhullar N. Younger-and older-age adults with unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants: Speech and spatial hearing self-ratings and performance. Otol Neurotol 2009
  3. [CrossRef] 3. Searle CL, Braida LD, Davis MF, Colburn HS. Model for auditory localization. J Acoust Soc Am 1976
  4. [CrossRef] 4. Blauert J. Spatial Hearing. The Psychophysics of Human Sound Localization. Revised ed. Massachusetts, MA: The MIT Press
  5. 1996 5. Hawley ML, Litovsky RY, Colburn HS. Speech intelligibility and localization in a multi-source environment. J Acoust Soc Am 1999
  6. [CrossRef] 6. Hawley ML, Litovsky RY, Culling JF. The benefit of binaural hearing in a cocktail party: Effect of location and type of interferer. J Acoust Soc Am 2004
  7. [CrossRef] 7. Culling JF, Hawley ML, Litovsky RY. The role of head-induced interaural time and level differences in the speech reception threshold for multiple interfering sound sources. J Acoust Soc Am 2004
  8. [CrossRef] 8. Noble W, Tyler R, Dunn C, Bhullar N. Unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants and the implant-plus-hearing-aid profile: comparing self-assessed and measured abilities. Int J Audiol 2008
  9. [CrossRef] 9. Capretta NR, Moberly AC. Does quality of life depend on speech recognition performance for adult cochlear implant users? The Laryngoscope 2016
  10. [CrossRef] 10. Ramakers GG, Smulders YE, van Zon A, Van Zanten GA, Grolman W, Stegeman I. Correlation between subjective and objective hearing tests after unilateral and bilateral cochlear implantation. BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord 2017
  11. [CrossRef] 11. Noble W, Gatehouse S. Interaural asymmetry of hearing loss, speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ) disabilities, and handicap. Int J Audiol 2004
  12. [CrossRef] 12. Kılıç N. Normalization and adaptation of “speech, spatial and quality of hearing scale (SSQ) for Turkish language and evaluation of adults with normal hearing and sensorineural hearing loss by SSQ [in Turkish] Gazi University Institute of Health Sciences, MSc Thesis. 2017. 13. Laske RD, Veraguth D, Dillier N, Binkert A, Holzmann D, Huber AM. Subjective and objective results after bilateral cochlear implantation in adults. Otol Neurotol 2009
  13. [CrossRef] 14. Gaylor JM, R