Unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants and the implant-plus-hearing-aid profile: comparing self-assessed and measured abilities

Validation of the Pediatric Spatial Hearing Questionnaire

PURPOSE

Spatial hearing is necessary for adequate sound awareness and speech perception abilities; however, research indicates that children have difficulties on these spatial hearing tasks that affect functioning in their daily environment. The purpose of this study was to validate a pediatric version of the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (P-SHQ) for determining binaural hearing benefits and spatial hearing ability in children.

METHOD

We recruited parents and guardians of 68 children ages kindergarten through eighth grade to participate. Parents completed the P-SHQ, the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale-Parent version, and a demographic questionnaire. To determine the factor structure of the P-SHQ, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis and reliability was assessed by calculating correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

Three factors emerged during factor analysis: Factor 1 = sound localization, Factor 2 = speech-in-noise perception, and Factor 3 = speech perception in quiet. The P-SHQ has good internal consistency reliability (α = .97), and high item-total correlations were found. The correlation between scores from the P-SHQ questionnaire and the SSQ-Spatial subscale questionnaire provides evidence for the construct validity of the P-SHQ.

CONCLUSIONS

The P-SHQ is a reliable and valid questionnaire to assess spatial hearing ability in children. This quick-to-administer tool can be incorporated into audiological care to determine the spatial hearing skills of a child and assist in counseling, making it a valuable assessment for hearing health care professionals.

A Guinea Pig Model Suggests That Objective Assessment of Acoustic Hearing Preservation in Human Ears With Cochlear Implants Is Confounded by Shifts in the Spatial Origin of Acoustically Evoked Potential Measurements Along the Cochlear Length

OBJECTIVES

Our recent empirical findings have shown that the auditory nerve compound action potential (CAP) evoked by a low-level tone burst originates from a narrow cochlear region tuned to the tone burst frequency. At moderate to high sound levels, the origins shift to the most sensitive audiometric regions rather than the extended high-frequency regions of the cochlear base. This means that measurements evoked from extended high-frequency sound stimuli can shift toward the apex with increasing level. Here we translate this study to understand the spatial origin of acoustically evoked responses from ears that receive cochlear implants, an emerging area of research and clinical practice that is not completely understood. An essential step is to first understand the influence of the cochlear implant in otherwise naive ears. Our objective was to understand how function of the high-frequency cochlear base, which can be excited by the intense low-frequency sounds that are frequently used for objective intra- and postoperative monitoring, can be influenced by the presence of the cochlear implant.

DESIGN

We acoustically evoked responses and made measurements with an electrode placed near the guinea pig round window. The cochlear implant was not utilized for either electrical stimulation or recording purposes. With the cochlear implant in situ, CAPs were acoustically evoked from 2 to 16 kHz tone bursts of various levels while utilizing the slow perfusion of a kainic acid solution from the cochlear apex to the cochlear aqueduct in the base, which sequentially reduced neural responses from finely spaced cochlear frequency regions. This cochlear perfusion technique reveals the spatial origin of evoked potential measurements and provides insight on what influence the presence of an implant has on acoustical hearing.

RESULTS

Threshold measurements at 3 to 11 kHz were elevated by implantation. In an individual ear, thresholds were elevated and lowered as cochlear implant was respectively inserted and removed, indicative of "conductive hearing loss" induced by the implant. The maximum threshold elevation occurred at most sensitive region of the naive guinea pig ear (33.66 dB at 8 kHz), making 11 kHz the most sensitive region to acoustic sounds for guinea pig ears with cochlear implants. Conversely, the acute implantation did not affect the low-frequency, 500 Hz thresholds and suprathreshold function, as shown by the auditory nerve overlapped waveform. As the sound pressure level of the tone bursts increased, mean data show that the spatial origin of CAPs along the cochlear length shifted toward the most sensitive cochlear region of implanted ears, not the extended high-frequency cochlear regions. However, data from individual ears showed that after implantation, measurements from moderate to high sound pressure levels originate in places that are unique to each ear.

CONCLUSIONS

Alterations to function of the cochlear base from the in situ cochlear implant may influence objective measurements of implanted ears that are frequently made with intense low-frequency sound stimuli. Our results from guinea pigs advance the interpretation of measurements used to understand how and when residual acoustic hearing is lost in human ears receiving a cochlear implant.

Listening effort and fatigue among cochlear implant users: a scoping review

Introduction

In challenging listening situations, speech perception with a cochlear implant (CI) remains demanding and requires high levels of listening effort, which can lead to increased levels of listening-related fatigue. The body of literature on these topics increases as the number of CI users rises. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of the existing literature on listening effort, fatigue, and listening-related fatigue among CI users and the measurement techniques to evaluate them.

Methods

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statements were used to conduct the scoping review. The search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify all relevant studies.

Results

In total, 24 studies were included and suggests that CI users experience higher levels of listening effort when compared to normal hearing controls using scales, questionnaires and electroencephalogram measurements. However, executing dual-task paradigms did not reveal any difference in listening effort between both groups. Uncertainty exists regarding the difference in listening effort between unilateral, bilateral, and bimodal CI users with bilateral hearing loss due to ambiguous results. Only five studies were eligible for the research on fatigue and listening-related fatigue. Additionally, studies using objective measurement methods were lacking.

Discussion

This scoping review highlights the necessity for additional research on these topics. Moreover, there is a need for guidelines on how listening effort, fatigue, and listening-related fatigue should be measured to allow for study results that are comparable and support optimal rehabilitation strategies.

Validation of the Norwegian Version of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ)

INTRODUCTION

The main objective of the study was to validate the Norwegian translation of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) and investigate the SSQ disability profiles in a cochlear implant (CI) user population.

METHODS

The study involved 152 adult CI users. The mean age at implantation was 55 (standard deviation [SD] = 16), and the mean CI experience was 5 years (SD = 4.8). The cohort was split into three groups depending on the hearing modality: bilateral CIs (BCIs), a unilateral CI (UCI), and bimodal (CI plus contralateral hearing aid; HCI). The SSQ disability profiles of each group were compared with those observed in similar studies using the English version and other translations of the SSQ. Standard values, internal consistency, sensitivity, and floor and ceiling effects were investigated, and the missing-response rates to specific questions were calculated. Relationships to speech perception were measured using monosyllabic word scores and the Norwegian Hearing in Noise Test scores.

RESULTS

In the BCI group, the average scores were around 5.0 for the speech and spatial sections and 7.0 for the qualities section (SD ∼2). The average scores of the UCI and HCI groups were about one point lower than those of the BCI group. The SSQ disability profiles were comparable to the profiles in similar studies. The slopes of the linear regression lines measuring the relationships between the SSQ speech and monosyllabic word scores were 0.8 per 10% increase in the monosyllabic word score for the BCI group (explaining 35% of the variation) and 0.4 for the UCI and HCI groups (explaining 22-23% of the variation).

CONCLUSION

The Norwegian version of the SSQ measures hearing disability similar to the original English version, and the internal consistency is good. Differences in the recipients' pre-implantation variables could explain some variations we observed in the SSQ responses, and such predictors should be investigated. Data aggregation will be possible using the SSQ as a routine clinical assessment in global CI populations. Moreover, pre-implantation variables should be systematically registered so that they can be used in mixed-effects models.

Interaural speech asymmetry predicts bilateral speech intelligibility but not listening effort in adults with bilateral cochlear implants

Introduction

Bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) can facilitate improved speech intelligibility in noise and sound localization abilities compared to a unilateral implant in individuals with bilateral severe to profound hearing loss. Still, many individuals with BiCIs do not benefit from binaural hearing to the same extent that normal hearing (NH) listeners do. For example, binaural redundancy, a speech intelligibility benefit derived from having access to duplicate copies of a signal, is highly variable among BiCI users. Additionally, patients with hearing loss commonly report elevated listening effort compared to NH listeners. There is some evidence to suggest that BiCIs may reduce listening effort compared to a unilateral CI, but the limited existing literature has not shown this consistently. Critically, no studies to date have investigated this question using pupillometry to quantify listening effort, where large pupil sizes indicate high effort and small pupil sizes indicate low effort. Thus, the present study aimed to build on existing literature by investigating the potential benefits of BiCIs for both speech intelligibility and listening effort.

Methods

Twelve BiCI adults were tested in three listening conditions: Better Ear, Poorer Ear, and Bilateral. Stimuli were IEEE sentences presented from a loudspeaker at 0° azimuth in quiet. Participants were asked to repeat back the sentences, and responses were scored by an experimenter while changes in pupil dilation were measured.

Results

On average, participants demonstrated similar speech intelligibility in the Better Ear and Bilateral conditions, and significantly worse speech intelligibility in the Poorer Ear condition. Despite similar speech intelligibility in the Better Ear and Bilateral conditions, pupil dilation was significantly larger in the Bilateral condition.

Discussion

These results suggest that the BiCI users tested in this study did not demonstrate binaural redundancy in quiet. The large interaural speech asymmetries demonstrated by participants may have precluded them from obtaining binaural redundancy, as shown by the inverse relationship between the two variables. Further, participants did not obtain a release from effort when listening with two ears versus their better ear only. Instead, results indicate that bilateral listening elicited increased effort compared to better ear listening, which may be due to poor integration of asymmetric inputs.

Listening Effort in Prelingual Cochlear Implant Recipients: Effects of Spectral and Temporal Auditory Processing and Contralateral Acoustic Hearing

OBJECTIVE

Considering the impact of listening effort (LE) on auditory perception, attention, and memory, it is a significant aspect in the daily hearing experiences of cochlear implant (CI) recipients. Reduced spectral and temporal information on an acoustic signal can make listening more difficult; as a result, it is important to understand the relationship between LE and spectral and temporal auditory processing capacities in CI receivers.

STUDY DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS

This study used spectral ripple discrimination and temporal modulation transfer function to evaluate 20 prelingually deafened and early implanted CI recipients. The speech perception in noise test (primary) and the digit recall task (DRT-secondary) were used to assess LE using the dual-task paradigm. To assess the effects of acoustic hearing, contralateral acoustic hearing thresholds between 125 Hz and 8 kHz with a hearing aid were also acquired. To examine the relationship between the research variables, correlation coefficients were generated. Furthermore, the Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare unilateral and bimodal users.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant correlation between LE and spectral ripple discrimination (r = 0.56; p = 0.011), 125 Hz (r = 0.51; p = 0.020), 250 Hz (r = 0.48; p = 0.030), 500 Hz (r = 0.45; p = 0.045), 1,000 Hz (r = 0.51; p = 0.023), 2000 Hz (r = 0.48; p = 0.031), and 4,000 Hz (r = 0.48; p = 0.031), whereas no statistically significant correlations were observed between temporal modulation transfer function in four frequencies and LE. There was no statistically significant difference between unilateral and bimodal CI recipients ( p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

As a result of the improved signal-to-noise ratio in the auditory environment, CI users with better spectral resolutions and acoustic hearing have a reduced LE. On the other hand, temporal auditory processing, as measured by temporal modulation detection, does not contribute to the LE.

Single-Sided Deafness: Emotional and Social Handicap, Impact on Health Status and Quality of Life, Functional Hearing, and the Effects of Cochlear Implantation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the functional and subjective outcomes in individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD) treated with a cochlear implant (CI).

METHODS

Eighty-one adult CI users with SSD participated in this study. Functional assessments consisted of speech in noise testing and localization. Subjective assessments consisted of the Speech Spatial Quality of Hearing Scale, the Tinnitus Reaction Questionnaire, the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit questionnaire, the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults questionnaire, and the Glasgow Health Status Inventory and the Glasgow Benefit Inventory questionnaires.

RESULTS

SSD has remarkable consequences on quality of life (QoL) and imposes a substantial emotional and social handicap on the individuals. Self-reported QoL improved after CI with tinnitus intrusion significantly reduced as early as 3 months post-CI. A significant improvement was seen in all speech understanding in noise configurations. Localization ability significantly improved with CI on.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that SSD reduces social and psychological QoL and imposes a remarkable level of handicap as per general and specific self-assessments tool. CI provided a significant improvement in function including speech understanding in noise and localization ability, as well as improved QoL and reduced tinnitus significantly in both the early and long terms.

Cochlear Implantation Improves Both Speech Perception and Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Prospective Follow-Up Study of Treatment Benefits among Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients

Cochlear implantation is considered the best treatment option for patients with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss for whom conventional hearing aids are insufficient. We used a repeated measures longitudinal approach to evaluate speech recognition and patient-reported outcomes after cochlear implantation in an unbiased cohort of Danish adult patients in a prospective cohort study. We assessed 39 recipients before and two times after implantation using a battery of tests that included Dantale I, the Danish Hearing in Noise Test, the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, and the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale. The study group improved significantly on all outcome measures following implantation. On average, Dantale I scores improved by 29 percentage points and Hearing in Noise Test scores improved by 22 percentage points. Most notably, the average Dantale score improved from 26 to 70% in the CI in quiet condition and from 12 to 42% in the cochlear implantation in noise condition when tested monaurally. Dantale demonstrated a significant positive correlation with Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire and Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale scores, while Hearing in Noise Test had no significant correlation with the patient-reported outcome measures. Patients improved significantly at 4 months and marginally improved further at 14 months, indicating that they were approaching a plateau. Our study’s use of audiometric and patient-reported outcome measures provides evidence of the treatment benefits of cochlear implantation in adults, which may help physicians advise patients on treatment decisions and align treatment benefit expectations, as well as serve as a foundation for the development of new cochlear implantation selection criteria.

The Impact of Synchronized Cochlear Implant Sampling and Stimulation on Free-Field Spatial Hearing Outcomes: Comparing the ciPDA Research Processor to Clinical Processors

OBJECTIVES

Bilateral cochlear implant (BiCI) listeners use independent processors in each ear. This independence and lack of shared hardware prevents control of the timing of sampling and stimulation across ears, which precludes the development of bilaterally-coordinated signal processing strategies. As a result, these devices potentially reduce access to binaural cues and introduce disruptive artifacts. For example, measurements from two clinical processors demonstrate that independently-running processors introduce interaural incoherence. These issues are typically avoided in the laboratory by using research processors with bilaterally-synchronized hardware. However, these research processors do not typically run in real-time and are difficult to take out into the real-world due to their benchtop nature. Hence, the question of whether just applying hardware synchronization to reduce bilateral stimulation artifacts (and thereby potentially improve functional spatial hearing performance) has been difficult to answer. The CI personal digital assistant (ciPDA) research processor, which uses one clock to drive two processors, presented an opportunity to examine whether synchronization of hardware can have an impact on spatial hearing performance.

DESIGN

Free-field sound localization and spatial release from masking (SRM) were assessed in 10 BiCI listeners using both their clinical processors and the synchronized ciPDA processor. For sound localization, localization accuracy was compared within-subject for the two processor types. For SRM, speech reception thresholds were compared for spatially separated and co-located configurations, and the amount of unmasking was compared for synchronized and unsynchronized hardware. There were no deliberate changes of the sound processing strategy on the ciPDA to restore or improve binaural cues.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in localization accuracy between unsynchronized and synchronized hardware (p = 0.62). Speech reception thresholds were higher with the ciPDA. In addition, although five of eight participants demonstrated improved SRM with synchronized hardware, there was no significant difference in the amount of unmasking due to spatial separation between synchronized and unsynchronized hardware (p = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Using processors with synchronized hardware did not yield an improvement in sound localization or SRM for all individuals, suggesting that mere synchronization of hardware is not sufficient for improving spatial hearing outcomes. Further work is needed to improve sound coding strategies to facilitate access to spatial hearing cues. This study provides a benchmark for spatial hearing performance with real-time, bilaterally-synchronized research processors.

Development and Critical Evaluation of a Condition-Specific Preference-Based Measure Sensitive to Binaural Hearing in Adults: The York Binaural Hearing-Related Quality-of-Life System

OBJECTIVES

The widely-used generic preference-based measures of health-related quality of life-the EuroQol Descriptive System (EQ-5D) and the Health Utilities Index (HUI3)-are limited in their response to technologies that improve hearing. The EQ-5D lacks construct validity for hearing, while the HUI3 is restricted by a ceiling effect and by using speech reception as the only evidence of the ability to hear. Consequently, neither measure consistently registers benefits from binaural hearing, such as those from bilateral versus unilateral cochlear implantation. The objectives were to test whether informants value binaural hearing, to develop a condition-specific preference-based measure sensitive to binaural hearing, to assess the psychometric properties of the new instrument, and to determine whether it meets requirements for informing judgments of cost-effectiveness: does it measure greater gains than do the generic preference-based measures, while avoiding exaggerating losses, and displaying sensitivity to side effects?

DESIGN

Three levels of function, ranging from no difficulty to great difficulty, were defined on each of three dimensions where listening is easier or more successful when hearing is binaural rather than monaural: perception of speech in spatially separated noise, localization of sounds, and effort and fatigue. Informants (N = 203) valued the 27 combinations of levels and dimensions in a time trade-off task with a 10-year time frame to provide a value of binaural-related quality of life ("binaural utility") for each combination. A questionnaire was compiled to allow respondents to report their level of function on each dimension so that a value of binaural utility could be assigned to them. The questionnaire and the age-standardized valuations constitute The York Binaural Hearing-Related Quality-of-Life System (YBHRQL). Adult users of unilateral implants (N = 8), bilateral implants (N = 11), or bimodal aiding (N = 9) undertook performance tests of spatial listening and completed the HUI3, EQ-5D, and Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing (SSQ) questionnaires. They completed the YBHRQL questionnaire 24 and 38 mo later.

RESULTS

Despite long intervals between measurements, the YBHRQL demonstrated desirable psychometric properties: good construct validity evidenced by significant correlations with performance measures and the SSQ index; a greater ability than the EQ-5D or HUI3 to distinguish unilateral, bimodal, and bilateral listening; and good reproducibility. The YBHRQL did not exaggerate losses of utility but was insensitive to a potential side effect of implantation (pain/discomfort). It measured a gain in utility from bilateral compared with unilateral implantation (median = 0.11, interquartile range, 0.03 to 0.16) that was greater than the gain measured by the EQ-5D (0.00, 0.00 to 0.00) but not the HUI3 (0.00, 0.00 to 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

The YBHRQL summarizes the contribution of binaural hearing to quality of life by combining the functional status of a listener with the preferences of independent informants. It would be an efficient clinical outcome measure. In addition, if used alongside the EQ-5D or HUI3, it would provide evidence which could beneficially modulate confidence in the cost-effectiveness of interventions. Further research on its sensitivity to side effects, and on the size of the gains in utility which it measures, is needed to determine whether it could stand alone to inform resource-allocation decisions.

Dichotic listening performance and effort as a function of spectral resolution and interaural symmetry

One potential benefit of bilateral cochlear implants is reduced listening effort in speech-on-speech masking situations. However, the symmetry of the input across ears, possibly related to spectral resolution, could impact binaural benefits. Fifteen young adults with normal hearing performed digit recall with target and interfering digits presented to separate ears and attention directed to the target ear. Recall accuracy and pupil size over time (used as an index of listening effort) were measured for unprocessed, 16-channel vocoded, and 4-channel vocoded digits. Recall accuracy was significantly lower for dichotic (with interfering digits) than for monotic listening. Dichotic recall accuracy was highest when the target was less degraded and the interferer was more degraded. With matched target and interferer spectral resolution, pupil dilation was lower with more degradation. Pupil dilation grew more shallowly over time when the interferer had more degradation. Overall, interferer spectral resolution more strongly affected listening effort than target spectral resolution. These results suggest that interfering speech both lowers performance and increases listening effort, and that the relative spectral resolution of target and interferer affect the listening experience. Ignoring a clearer interferer is more effortful.

Self-assessment of unilateral and bimodal cochlear implant experiences in daily life

Objective

The subjective experiences were assessed of cochlear implant (CI) users either wearing or not wearing a hearing aid (HA) at the contralateral ear.

Design

Unilateral CI-recipients were asked to fill out a set of daily-life questionnaires on bimodal HA use, hearing disability, hearing handicap and general quality of life.

Study sample

Twenty-six CI-recipients who regularly use a contralateral HA (bimodal group) and twenty-two CI-recipients who do not use a HA in the contralateral ear (unilateral group).

Results

Comparisons between both groups (bimodal versus unilateral) showed no difference in self-rated disability, hearing handicap or general quality of life. However within the group of bimodal listeners, participants did report a benefit of bimodal hearing ability in various daily life listening situations.

Conclusions

Bimodal benefit in daily life can consistently be experienced and reported within the group of bimodal users.

Face and content validity analysis of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale for Parents (SSQ-P) when used in a clinical service without interviews or week-long observation periods

OBJECTIVES

To assess the face and content validity of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale for Parents (SSQ-P) when used in a clinical setting without the recommended interviews and observation periods.

METHODS

SSQ-P responses completed by 145 parents of children with bilateral cochlear implants (aged between 5 and 16 years old) were analysed. To assess face validity, the proportion of missing/ambiguous and alternative responses was recorded for each of the 23 items. Where additional written comments were included in responses, a thematic-based analysis was used to identify reasons for the missing/ambiguous or alternative responses. Content validity was assessed using item response theory (IRT), with items having information score less than 0.5 and discrimination score less than 2.0 identified as poorly performing items.

RESULTS

All items of the SSQ-P exhibited some proportion of missing/ambiguous or alternative responses, with six items having >10% missing/ambiguous or alternative responses. IRT identified thirteen items that performed poorly in terms of information and discrimination. These included four of the six items with the most missing/ambiguous or alternative responses.

CONCLUSIONS

SSQ-P items that performed worse tended to describe scenarios that parents perceived as too specific, too vague or hazardous. Without the recommended administration via interviews following three week-long observation periods, parents found these items difficult to complete. The SSQ-P is therefore not recommended for use without the recommended administration method. However, several items performed well in terms of face and content validity, despite independent parent completion without formal observation periods. Thematic analysis suggested that minor re-wording might improve the face validity of items with high content validity but a high proportion of missing/ambiguous or alternative responses. Therefore, the results of the analyses form the basis on which a shortened version of the SSQ-P, more suitable for use in a clinical setting, could be developed in future studies.

Short-Term Test-Retest Reliability of Electrically Evoked Cortical Auditory Potentials in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients

Background: Late latency auditory evoked potentials (LLAEPs) provide objective evidence of an individual's central auditory processing abilities. Electrically evoked cortical auditory evoked potentials (eCAEPs) are a type of LLAEP that provides an objective measure of aided speech perception and auditory processing abilities in cochlear implant (CI) recipients. Aim: To determine the short-term test-retest reliability of eCAEPs in adult CI recipients. Design: An explorative, within-subject repeated measures research design was employed. Study Sample: The study sample included 12 post-lingually deafened, unilaterally implanted adult CI recipients with at least 9 months of CI experience. Method: eCAEPs representing basal, medial and apical cochlear regions were recorded in the implanted ears of each participant. Measurements were repeated 7 days after the initial assessment. Results: No significant differences between either median latencies or amplitudes at test and retest sessions (p > 0.05) were found when results for apical, medial and basal electrodes were averaged together. Mean intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) scores averaged across basal, medial and apical cochlear stimulus regions indicated that both consistency and agreement were statistically significant and ranged from moderate to good (ICC = 0.58-0.86, p < 0.05). ICC confidence intervals did demonstrate considerable individual variability in both latency and amplitudes. Conclusion: eCAEP latencies and amplitudes demonstrated moderate to good short-term test-retest reliability. However, confidence intervals indicated individual variability in measurement consistency which is likely linked to attention and listening effort required from the CI recipients.

Does bimodal hearing increase self-assessed abilities and hearing outcomes when compared to unilateral cochlear implantation?

Objective: The primary objective of this study was to compare the applicability and benefit of providing unilateral cochlear implant (CI) users with a contralateral hearing aid (HA).Design: This retrospective (case-control) study was conducted in a hospital-based CI centre. Participants self-assessed their hearing via two questionnaires (SSQ₁₂ and HISQUI₁₉). Objective postoperative speech perception was assessed via aided thresholds and speech perception tests (monosyllabic words, disyllabic words, and sentences) in quiet and noise.Study sample: A CI-only group (n = 113, mean age 55.1 ± 14.2 years) and a bimodal group (n = 50, mean age 56.7 ± 15.2) participated in the study.Results: No significant difference in SSQ₁₂ or HISQUI₁₉ scores was observed between groups. The bimodal group had a significantly better aided hearing level (p = 0.020) and speech discrimination score (p = 0.019).Conclusions: Bimodal (CI + HA) users have significantly better speech understanding than unilateral CI-only users, although this benefit may not be reflected in self-assessed outcomes. Counselling about bimodal hearing must cover expectations about potential benefits.

Effects of Bimodal and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Use on a Nonauditory Working Memory Task: Reading Span Tests Over 2 Years Following Cochlear Implantation

Purpose A growing body of evidence indicates that treatment of hearing loss by provision of hearing aids leads to improvements in auditory and visual working memory. The purpose of this study was to assess whether similar working memory benefits are observed following provision of cochlear implants (CIs). Method Fifteen adults with postlingually acquired severe bilateral sensorineural hearing loss completed the prospective longitudinal study. Participants were candidates for bilateral cochlear implantation with some aidable hearing in each ear. Implantation surgeries were carried out sequentially, approximately 1 year apart. Working memory was measured with the visual Reading Span Test (Daneman & Carpenter, 1980) at 5 time points: pre-operatively following a 6-month bilateral hearing aid trial, after 6 and 12 months of bimodal (CI plus contralateral hearing aid) listening experience following the 1st CI surgery and activation, and again after 6 and 12 months of bilateral CI listening experience following the 2nd CI surgery and activation. Results Compared to the preoperative baseline, CI listening experience yielded significant improvements in participants' ability to recall test words in the correct serial order after 12 months in the bimodal condition. Individual performance outcomes were variable, but almost all participants showed increases in task performance over the course of the study. Conclusions These results suggest that, similar to appropriate interventions with hearing aids, treatment of hearing loss with CIs can yield working memory benefits. A likely mechanism is the freeing of cognitive resources previously devoted to effortful listening.

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

Objective

The aim of the study was to conduct a scale-based evaluation of the hearing skills of unilateral, bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant (CI) users, including distinguishing, orientating and locating speech and environmental sounds in their surrounding environment that they are exposed to in different contexts of everyday life. The scale results were compared between groups.

Methods

A total of 74 cochlear implant users, 30 unilateral, 30 bimodal and 14 bilateral, were included in the study. Their ages ranged from 11 to 64 years. Participants were assessed using the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ).

Results

Bilateral CI users' subjective ratings of their own hearing skills were found to be significantly better than those of bimodal and unilateral CI users; bimodal users' subjective ratings were also found to be significantly better than those of unilateral CI users. Paired comparisons showed statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of total scores of Speech, Spatial, Qualities of Hearing and General SSQ (p<0.05).

Conclusion

Our findings show that bilateral use of cochlear implants should be recommended for those presently using bimodal and unilateral devices. Moreover, subjective tests should be used regularly along with objective tests for evaluating CI patients.

Effect of Auditory Task Type on Physiological and Subjective Measures of Listening Effort in Individuals With Normal Hearing

Purpose Listening effort has traditionally been measured using subjective rating scales and behavioral measures. Recent physiological measures of listening effort have utilized pupil dilation. Using a combination of physiological and subjective measures of listening effort, this study aimed to identify differences in listening effort during 2 auditory tasks: sentence recognition and word recognition. Method Pupil dilation and subjective ratings of listening effort were obtained for auditory tasks utilizing AzBio sentences recognition and Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 words recognition, across 3 listening situations: in quiet, at +6 dB signal-to-noise ratio, and at 0 dB signal-to-noise ratio. Task accuracy was recorded for each of the 6 conditions, as well as peak pupil dilation and a subjective rating of listening effort. Results A significant impact of listening situation (quiet vs. noise) and task type (sentence recognition vs. word recognition) on both physiological and subjective measures was found. There was a significant interaction between listening situation and task type, suggesting that contextual cues may only be beneficial when audibility is uncompromised. The current study found no correlation between the physiological and subjective measures, possibly suggesting that these measures analyze different aspects of cognitive effort in a listening task.

Effects of Additional Low-Pass-Filtered Speech on Listening Effort for Noise-Band-Vocoded Speech in Quiet and in Noise

Objectives:

Residual acoustic hearing in electric–acoustic stimulation (EAS) can benefit cochlear implant (CI) users in increased sound quality, speech intelligibility, and improved tolerance to noise. The goal of this study was to investigate whether the low-pass–filtered acoustic speech in simulated EAS can provide the additional benefit of reducing listening effort for the spectrotemporally degraded signal of noise-band–vocoded speech.

Design:

Listening effort was investigated using a dual-task paradigm as a behavioral measure, and the NASA Task Load indeX as a subjective self-report measure. The primary task of the dual-task paradigm was identification of sentences presented in three experiments at three fixed intelligibility levels: at near-ceiling, 50%, and 79% intelligibility, achieved by manipulating the presence and level of speech-shaped noise in the background. Listening effort for the primary intelligibility task was reflected in the performance on the secondary, visual response time task. Experimental speech processing conditions included monaural or binaural vocoder, with added low-pass–filtered speech (to simulate EAS) or without (to simulate CI).

Results:

In Experiment 1, in quiet with intelligibility near-ceiling, additional low-pass–filtered speech reduced listening effort compared with binaural vocoder, in line with our expectations, although not compared with monaural vocoder. In Experiments 2 and 3, for speech in noise, added low-pass–filtered speech allowed the desired intelligibility levels to be reached at less favorable speech-to-noise ratios, as expected. It is interesting that this came without the cost of increased listening effort usually associated with poor speech-to-noise ratios; at 50% intelligibility, even a reduction in listening effort on top of the increased tolerance to noise was observed. The NASA Task Load indeX did not capture these differences.

Conclusions:

The dual-task results provide partial evidence for a potential decrease in listening effort as a result of adding low-frequency acoustic speech to noise-band–vocoded speech. Whether these findings translate to CI users with residual acoustic hearing will need to be addressed in future research because the quality and frequency range of low-frequency acoustic sound available to listeners with hearing loss may differ from our idealized simulations, and additional factors, such as advanced age and varying etiology, may also play a role.

A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study of Tinnitus Awareness and Impact in a Population of Adult Cochlear Implant Users

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Objectives:

The primary aim was to identify the proportion of individuals within the adult cochlear implant population who are aware of tinnitus and those who report a negative impact from this perception, using a bespoke questionnaire designed to limit bias. A secondary aim was to use qualitative analysis of open-text responses to identify themes linked to tinnitus perception in this population.

Design:

A cross-sectional questionnaire study of a large clinical population who received an implant from Cambridge University Hospitals, United Kingdom.

Results:

Seventy-five percent of respondents reported tinnitus awareness. When impact scores for six areas of difficulty were ranked, 13% of individuals ranked tinnitus their primary concern and nearly a third ranked tinnitus in the top two positions. Tinnitus impact was not found to reduce with duration since implantation. The most common open-text responses were linked to a general improvement postimplantation and acute tinnitus alleviation specific to times when the device was in use.

Conclusions:

Tinnitus is a problem for a significant proportion of individuals with a cochlear implant. Clinicians, scientists, and cochlear implant manufacturers should be aware that management of tinnitus may be a greater priority for an implantee than difficulties linked to speech perception. Where a positive effect of implantation was reported, there was greater evidence for masking of tinnitus via the implant rather than reversal of maladaptive plasticity.

The Benefits of Bimodal Aiding on Extended Dimensions of Speech Perception: Intelligibility, Listening Effort, and Sound Quality

The benefits of combining a cochlear implant (CI) and a hearing aid (HA) in opposite ears on speech perception were examined in 15 adult unilateral CI recipients who regularly use a contralateral HA. A within-subjects design was carried out to assess speech intelligibility testing, listening effort ratings, and a sound quality questionnaire for the conditions CI alone, CIHA together, and HA alone when applicable. The primary outcome of bimodal benefit, defined as the difference between CIHA and CI, was statistically significant for speech intelligibility in quiet as well as for intelligibility in noise across tested spatial conditions. A reduction in effort on top of intelligibility at the highest tested signal-to-noise ratio was found. Moreover, the bimodal listening situation was rated to sound more voluminous, less tinny, and less unpleasant than CI alone. Listening effort and sound quality emerged as feasible and relevant measures to demonstrate bimodal benefit across a clinically representative range of bimodal users. These extended dimensions of speech perception can shed more light on the array of benefits provided by complementing a CI with a contralateral HA.

Individual Variations in Effort: Assessing Pupillometry for the Hearing Impaired

Assessing effort in speech comprehension for hearing-impaired (HI) listeners is important, as effortful processing of speech can limit their hearing rehabilitation. We examined the measure of pupil dilation in its capacity to accommodate the heterogeneity that is present within clinical populations by studying lexical access in users with sensorineural hearing loss, who perceive speech via cochlear implants (CIs). We compared the pupillary responses of 15 experienced CI users and 14 age-matched normal-hearing (NH) controls during auditory lexical decision. A growth curve analysis was applied to compare the responses between the groups. NH listeners showed a coherent pattern of pupil dilation that reflects the task demands of the experimental manipulation and a homogenous time course of dilation. CI listeners showed more variability in the morphology of pupil dilation curves, potentially reflecting variable sources of effort across individuals. In follow-up analyses, we examined how speech perception, a task that relies on multiple stages of perceptual analyses, poses multiple sources of increased effort for HI listeners, wherefore we might not be measuring the same source of effort for HI as for NH listeners. We argue that interindividual variability among HI listeners can be clinically meaningful in attesting not only the magnitude but also the locus of increased effort. The understanding of individual variations in effort requires experimental paradigms that (a) differentiate the task demands during speech comprehension, (b) capture pupil dilation in its time course per individual listeners, and (c) investigate the range of individual variability present within clinical and NH populations.

Cochlear Implantation for Children and Adults with Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss

Cochlear implants (CIs) have proven to be a useful treatment option for individuals with severe-to-profound hearing loss by providing improved access to one's surrounding auditory environment. CIs differ from traditional acoustic amplification by providing information to the auditory system via electrical stimulation. Both postlingually deafened adults and prelingually deafened children can benefit from a CI; however, outcomes with a CI can vary. Numerous factors can impact performance outcomes with a CI. It is important for the audiologist to understand what factors might play a role and impact performance outcomes with a CI so that they can effectively counsel the recipient and their family, as well as establish appropriate and realistic expectations with a CI. This review article will discuss the CI candidacy process, CI programming and postoperative follow-up care, as well as considerations across the lifespan that may affect performance outcomes with a CI.

Patient Benefit Following Bimodal CI-provision: Self-reported Abilities vs. Hearing Status

Objectives: Patient-reported outcomes gain importance for the assessment of auditory abilities in cochlear implant users and for the evaluation of auditory rehabilitation. Aims of the study were to explore the interrelation of self-reported improvements in auditory ability with improvements in speech comprehension and to identify factors other than audiological improvement that affect self-reported auditory ability.

Study Design: Explorative prospective analysis using a within-subjects repeated measures design.

Setting: Academic tertiary care center.

Participants: Twenty-seven adult participants with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who received a HiRes 90K CI and continued use of a HA at the non-implanted ear (bimodal hearing).

Intervention: Cochlear implantation.

Main Outcome Measures: Self-reported auditory ability/disability assessed by the comparative version of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ-B), and monosyllable as well as sentence comprehension in quiet and within speech modulated noise from different directions assessed pre- as well as 3 and 6 months post-implantation.

Results: Data of 17 individuals were analyzed. At the endpoint of the study, improvement of self-reported auditory ability was significant. Regarding audiometric measures, significant improvement was seen for CI-aided pure tone thresholds, for monaural CI-assisted and bimodal sentence comprehension in quiet and in speech-modulated noise that was presented from the same source or at the side of the HA-ear. Correlations between self-reported and audiometric improvements remained weak, with the exception of the improvement seen for monaural CI-aided sentence comprehension in quiet and self-perceived improvement of sound quality. Considerable correlations existed between self-reported improvements and current level of depression and anxiety, and with general self-efficaciousness. Regression analyses substantiated a positive influence of self-efficaciousness on self-reported improvement in speech comprehension and between the improvement of monaural CI-aided sentence comprehension in quiet and perceived sound quality as well as a negative influence of anxiety on self-reported improvement in spatial hearing. Self-reported improvements were significantly better in the subgroup with intensive as compared to regular rehabilitation.

Conclusions: Self-reported auditory ability/disability represents an important measure for the success of bimodal CI-provision. It is influenced by personal and mental health factors that may improve CI-rehabilitation results if addressed during rehabilitation.

Listening Effort Measured in Adults with Normal Hearing and Cochlear Implants

BACKGROUND

Studies have examined listening effort in individuals with hearing loss to determine the extent of the impairment. Regarding cochlear implants (CIs), results suggest that listening effort is improved using bilateral CIs compared to unilateral CIs. Few studies have investigated listening effort and outcomes related to the hybrid CI.

PURPOSE

Here, we compared listening effort across three CI groups, and to a normal-hearing control group. The impact of listener traits, that is, age, age at onset of hearing loss, duration of CI use, and working memory capacity, were examined relative to listening effort.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The participants completed a dual-task paradigm with a primary task identifying sentences in noise and a secondary task measuring reaction time on a Stroop test. Performance was assessed for all participant groups at different signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), ranging in 2-dB steps from 0 to +10 dB relative to an individual's SNR-50, at which the speech recognition performance is 50% correct. Participants completed three questions on listening effort, the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire, and a reading span test.

STUDY SAMPLE

All 46 participants were adults. The four participant groups included (1) 12 individuals with normal hearing, (2) 10 with unilateral CIs, (3) 12 with bilateral CIs, and (4) 12 with a hybrid short-electrode CI and bilateral residual hearing.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Results from the dual-task experiment were compared using a mixed 4 (hearing group) by 6 (SNR condition) analysis of variance (ANOVA). Questionnaire results were compared using one-way ANOVAs, and correlations between listener traits and the objective and subjective measures were compared using Pearson correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

Significant differences were found in speech perception among the normal-hearing and the unilateral and the bilateral CI groups. There was no difference in primary task performance among the hybrid CI and the normal-hearing groups. Across the six SNR conditions, listening effort improved to a greater degree for the normal-hearing group compared to the CI groups. However, there was no significant difference in listening effort between the CI groups. The subjective measures revealed significant differences between the normal-hearing and CI groups, but no difference among the three CI groups. Across all groups, age was significantly correlated with listening effort. We found no relationship between listening effort and the age at the onset of hearing loss, age at implantation, the duration of CI use, and working memory capacity for these participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Listening effort was reduced to a greater degree for the normal-hearing group compared to the CI users. There was no significant difference in listening effort among the CI groups. For the CI users in this study, age was a significant factor with regard to listening effort, whereas other variables such as the duration of CI use and the age at the onset of hearing loss were not significantly related to listening effort.

Neural and behavioral changes after the use of hearing aids

OBJECTIVE

Individuals with age-related hearing loss (ARHL) can restore some loss of the auditory function with the use of hearing aids (HAs). However, what remains unknown are the physiological mechanisms that underlie how the brain changes with exposure to amplified sounds though the use of HAs. We aimed to examine behavioral and physiological changes induced by HAs.

METHODS

Thirty-five older-adults with moderate ARHL with no history of hearing aid use were fit with HAs tested in aided and unaided conditions, and divided into experimental and control groups. The experimental group used HAs during a period of six months. The control group did not use HAs during this period, but were given the opportunity to use them after the completion of the study. Both groups underwent testing protocols six months apart. Outcome measures included behavioral (speech-in-noise measures, self-assessment questionnaires) and electrophysiological brainstem recordings (frequency-following responses) to the speech syllable /ga/ in two quiet conditions and in six-talker babble noise.

RESULTS

The experimental group reported subjective benefits on self-assessment questionnaires. Significant physiological changes were observed in the experimental group, specifically a reduction in fundamental frequency magnitude, while no change was observed in controls, yielding a significant time × group interaction. Furthermore, peak latencies remained stable in the experimental group but were significantly delayed in the control group after six months. Significant correlations between behavioral and physiological changes were also observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that HAs may alter subcortical processing and offset neural timing delay; however, further investigation is needed to understand cortical changes and HA effects on cognitive processing.

SIGNIFICANCE

The findings of the current study provide evidence for clinicians that the use of HAs may prevent further loss of auditory function resulting from sensory deprivation.

Effects of Hearing Impairment and Hearing Aid Amplification on Listening Effort: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To undertake a systematic review of available evidence on the effect of hearing impairment and hearing aid amplification on listening effort. Two research questions were addressed: Q1) does hearing impairment affect listening effort? and Q2) can hearing aid amplification affect listening effort during speech comprehension?

DESIGN

English language articles were identified through systematic searches in PubMed, EMBASE, Cinahl, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO from inception to August 2014. References of eligible studies were checked. The Population, Intervention, Control, Outcomes, and Study design strategy was used to create inclusion criteria for relevance. It was not feasible to apply a meta-analysis of the results from comparable studies. For the articles identified as relevant, a quality rating, based on the 2011 Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Working Group guidelines, was carried out to judge the reliability and confidence of the estimated effects.

RESULTS

The primary search produced 7017 unique hits using the keywords: hearing aids OR hearing impairment AND listening effort OR perceptual effort OR ease of listening. Of these, 41 articles fulfilled the Population, Intervention, Control, Outcomes, and Study design selection criteria of: experimental work on hearing impairment OR hearing aid technologies AND listening effort OR fatigue during speech perception. The methods applied in those articles were categorized into subjective, behavioral, and physiological assessment of listening effort. For each study, the statistical analysis addressing research question Q1 and/or Q2 was extracted. In seven articles more than one measure of listening effort was provided. Evidence relating to Q1 was provided by 21 articles that reported 41 relevant findings. Evidence relating to Q2 was provided by 27 articles that reported 56 relevant findings. The quality of evidence on both research questions (Q1 and Q2) was very low, according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Working Group guidelines. We tested the statistical evidence across studies with nonparametric tests. The testing revealed only one consistent effect across studies, namely that listening effort was higher for hearing-impaired listeners compared with normal-hearing listeners (Q1) as measured by electroencephalographic measures. For all other studies, the evidence across studies failed to reveal consistent effects on listening effort.

CONCLUSION

In summary, we could only identify scientific evidence from physiological measurement methods, suggesting that hearing impairment increases listening effort during speech perception (Q1). There was no scientific, finding across studies indicating that hearing aid amplification decreases listening effort (Q2). In general, there were large differences in the study population, the control groups and conditions, and the outcome measures applied between the studies included in this review. The results of this review indicate that published listening effort studies lack consistency, lack standardization across studies, and have insufficient statistical power. The findings underline the need for a common conceptual framework for listening effort to address the current shortcomings.

Matching Automatic Gain Control Across Devices in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to improve bimodal benefit in listeners using a cochlear implant (CI) and a hearing aid (HA) in contralateral ears, by matching the time constants and the number of compression channels of the automatic gain control (AGC) of the HA to the CI. Equivalent AGC was hypothesized to support a balanced loudness for dynamically changing signals like speech and improve bimodal benefit for speech understanding in quiet and with noise presented from the side(s) at 90 degree.

DESIGN

Fifteen subjects participated in the study, all using the same Advanced Bionics Harmony CI processor and HA (Phonak Naida S IX UP). In a 3-visit crossover design with 4 weeks between sessions, performance was measured using a HA with a standard AGC (syllabic multichannel compression with 1 ms attack time and 50 ms release time) or an AGC that was adjusted to match that of the CI processor (dual AGC broadband compression, 3 and 240 msec attack time, 80 and 1500 msec release time). In all devices, the AGC was activated above the threshold of 63 dB SPL. The authors balanced loudness across the devices for soft and loud input sounds in 3 frequency bands (0 to 548, 548 to 1000, and >1000 Hz). Speech understanding was tested in free field in quiet and in noise for three spatial speaker configurations, with target speech always presented from the front. Single-talker noise was either presented from the CI side or the HA side, or uncorrelated stationary speech-weighted noise or single-talker noise was presented from both sides. Questionnaires were administered to assess differences in perception between the two bimodal fittings.

RESULTS

Significant bimodal benefit over the CI alone was only found for the AGC-matched HA for the speech tests with single-talker noise. Compared with the standard HA, matched AGC characteristics significantly improved speech understanding in single-talker noise by 1.9 dB when noise was presented from the HA side. AGC matching increased bimodal benefit insignificantly by 0.6 dB when noise was presented from the CI implanted side, or by 0.8 (single-talker noise) and 1.1 dB (stationary noise) in the more complex configurations with two simultaneous maskers from both sides. In questionnaires, subjects rated the AGC-matched HA higher than the standard HA for understanding of one person in quiet and in noise, and for the quality of sounds. Listening to a slightly raised voice, subjects indicated increased listening comfort with matched AGCs. At the end of the study, 9 of 15 subjects preferred to take home the AGC-matched HA, 1 preferred the standard HA and 5 subjects had no preference.

CONCLUSION

For bimodal listening, the AGC-matched HA outperformed the standard HA in speech understanding in noise tasks using a single competing talker and it was favored in questionnaires and in a subjective preference test. When noise was presented from the HA side, AGC matching resulted in a 1.9 dB SNR additional benefit, even though the HA was at the least favorable SNR side in this speaker configuration. Our results possibly suggest better binaural processing for matched AGCs.

Development of a Squelch Effect in Adult Patients After Simultaneous Bilateral Cochlear Implantation

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether a squelch effect occurs in the first 3 years after simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation and to investigate whether this effect increases during follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective study as part of a multicenter randomized controlled trial that compares simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation to sequential and unilateral cochlear implantation.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Nineteen postlingually deafened adults.

INTERVENTION

Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The squelch effect, measured yearly with a speech-intelligibility-in-noise test with spatially separated sources. Bilateral results were compared to unilateral results in which the cochlear implant at the noise side was turned off. The squelch effect was investigated for the patients' best performing ear and for the left and right ears separately.

RESULTS

In 13 individual patients, a squelch effect was present after 1 year. This number increased during follow-up years. On group level, a squelch effect was present in patients' best performing ear after 2 and 3 years (1.9 dB). A squelch effect was present in both ears after 3 years (AS: 1.7 dB, AD: 1.3 dB).

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation developed a measurable benefit from the squelch effect after 2 years in their best performing ear and after 3 years in both ears. These observations suggest that the brain learns to use interaural differences to segregate sound from noise after simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation. The squelch effect increased over time which suggests a growth in cortical integration and differentiation of inputs from bilateral CIs due to brain plasticity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register NTR1722.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1b.

Development of a Shortened Version of the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ-S) for Screening Spatial-Hearing Ability

PURPOSE

The Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ) was developed to address how to measure spatial-hearing ability in complex listening situations (Tyler, Perreau, & Ji, 2009). It has been translated and validated into various languages, including Chinese, Dutch, French, and Persian. Although the SHQ contains only 24 items, it could be time-consuming in a busy clinic to administer. The purposes of this study were to develop and validate a shortened version of the SHQ (SHQ-S) and to compare self-perceived spatial-hearing ability across adults with normal hearing (NH), hearing loss (HL), and cochlear implants (CIs).

METHOD

This was a retrospective study. The full version of the SHQ was administered to measure self-perceived spatial-hearing ability for 51 adults with NH at Augustana College, 47 adults with essentially mild to moderately severe sensorineural HL at Illinois State University, and 72 adult CI users at the University of Iowa. Exploratory factor analysis was performed for the full version for the data collected from adults with NH and HL. Appropriate items were chosen to develop the SHQ-S from the results of the exploratory factor analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis was then applied to test the factor structure of the SHQ-S for all participants. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the self-perceived spatial-hearing performance scores between the 3 groups.

RESULTS

The exploratory factor analysis revealed scores loaded on 2 factors. Six items from the full version were chosen accordingly. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis indicated that that a shortened version of 6 items is sufficient to measure spatial-hearing ability. The internal consistency reliability of the SHQ-S was high. The main effect of the one-way analysis of variance was significant for the groups, F(2, 167) = 36.0, p < .0001. The comparisons with the Tukey adjustment indicated that the NH group reported significantly better spatial-hearing ability than either the HL or the CI group (both adjusted p values < .05). There was no significant difference between the participants with HL and CI users.

CONCLUSIONS

The psychometric characteristics of the 6-item SHQ-S were similar to those of the full version of the SHQ. We conclude that the SHQ-S is a reliable and valid tool for measuring spatial-hearing ability and screening for spatial-hearing difficulties. Participants with NH reported better spatial-hearing ability than those with HL or with CIs, whereas the CI users and participants with HL perceived similar spatial-hearing ability in the present study.

Patient-Related Benefits for Adults with Cochlear Implantation: A Multicultural Longitudinal Observational Study

OBJECTIVES

To assess subjectively perceived, real-world benefits longitudinally for unilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipients in a multinational population treated routinely. To identify possible predictors of self-reported benefits.

DESIGN

This was a prospective, multicenter, repeated-measures study. Self-assessment of performance at preimplantation and postimplantation at 1, 2, and 3 years using standardized, validated, local language versions of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ), and the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) was performed. Outcomes were analyzed using a longitudinal mixed-effects model incorporating country effect. Patient demographics were explored for associations with change over time.

SUBJECTS

Two hundred ninety-one routinely treated, unilateral CI recipients, aged 13-81 years, from 9 clinics across 4 countries.

RESULTS

Highly significant improvements were observed for all outcome measures (p < 0.0001). Postimplantation, mean outcome scores remained stable beyond 1 year, with notable individual variability. A significant association for one or more outcomes with preimplantation contralateral hearing aid use, telephone use, age at implantation, implantation side, preimplantation comorbidities, dizziness, and tinnitus was observed (p < 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Longitudinal benefits of CI treatment can be measured using clinically standardized self-assessment tools to provide a holistic view of patient-related benefits in routine clinical practice for aggregated data from multinational populations. Self-reported outcomes can provide medical-based evidence regarding CI treatment to support decision-making by health service providers.

Music perception improves in children with bilateral cochlear implants or bimodal devices

The objectives of this study were to determine if music perception by pediatric cochlear implant users can be improved by (1) providing access to bilateral hearing through two cochlear implants or a cochlear implant and a contralateral hearing aid (bimodal users) and (2) any history of music training. The Montreal Battery of Evaluation of Musical Ability test was presented via soundfield to 26 bilateral cochlear implant users, 8 bimodal users and 16 children with normal hearing. Response accuracy and reaction time were recorded via an iPad application. Bilateral cochlear implant and bimodal users perceived musical characteristics less accurately and more slowly than children with normal hearing. Children who had music training were faster and more accurate, regardless of their hearing status. Reaction time on specific subtests decreased with age, years of musical training and, for implant users, better residual hearing. Despite effects of these factors on reaction time, bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant users' responses were less accurate than those of their normal hearing peers. This means children using bilateral cochlear implants and bimodal devices continue to experience challenges perceiving music that are related to hearing impairment and/or device limitations during development.

Partial Visual Loss Affects Self-reports of Hearing Abilities Measured Using a Modified Version of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Questionnaire

We assessed how visually impaired (VI) people perceived their own auditory abilities using an established hearing questionnaire, the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ), that was adapted to make it relevant and applicable to VI individuals by removing references to visual aspects while retaining the meaning of the original questions. The resulting questionnaire, the SSQvi, assessed perceived hearing ability in diverse situations including the ability to follow conversations with multiple speakers, assessing how far away a vehicle is, and the ability to perceptually segregate simultaneous sounds. The SSQvi was administered to 33 VI and 33 normally sighted participants. All participants had normal hearing or mild hearing loss, and all VI participants had some residual visual ability. VI participants gave significantly higher (better) scores than sighted participants for: (i) one speech question, indicating less difficulty in following a conversation that switches from one person to another, (ii) one spatial question, indicating less difficulty in localizing several talkers, (iii) three qualities questions, indicating less difficulty with segregating speech from music, hearing music more clearly, and better speech intelligibility in a car. These findings are consistent with the perceptual enhancement hypothesis, that certain auditory abilities are improved to help compensate for loss of vision, and show that full visual loss is not necessary for perceived changes in auditory ability to occur for a range of auditory situations. For all other questions, scores were not significantly different between the two groups. Questions related to effort, concentration, and ignoring distracting sounds were rated as most difficult for VI participants, as were situations involving divided-attention contexts with multiple streams of speech, following conversations in noise and in echoic environments, judging elevation or distance, and externalizing sounds. The questionnaire has potential clinical applications in assessing the success of clinical interventions and setting more realistic goals for intervention for those with auditory and/or visual losses. The results contribute toward providing benchmark scores for VI individuals.

Trials of a Contralateral Hearing Aid After Long-Term Unilateral Cochlear Implant Use in Early-Onset Deafness

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the practicability of binaural hearing by adding a contralateral hearing aid (HA) after long-term cochlear implant (CI) use in prelingually deaf adults.

METHOD

Five individuals with 1 CI volunteered for a 3-week bimodal (CI + HA) trial. HA gain was set low until sound was tolerable, then increased as listeners acclimated. Participants logged their daily listening experiences and were closely monitored by the audiologist. Measures included pre- and posttrial consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) word and phoneme scores and self-reports of satisfaction and listening ability in difficult situations.

RESULTS

Acoustic stimulation was initially unpleasant, but approached comfort at target gain within the 3-week period. Benefit was demonstrated in continued voluntary HA use and higher bimodal phoneme scores compared to CI alone (8%-31% increases) for 4 of the participants.

CONCLUSIONS

When a second CI is not a consideration, a contralateral HA should be pursued as the standard of care for prelingually deaf adults despite substantial auditory deprivation in the previously unaided ear, unpleasant sensations at initial HA fit, or lack of dramatic objective test gains. Frequent audiologist contact, repeated HA adjustments, and client journals are valuable in promoting favorable outcomes with bimodal hearing (adaptation, acceptance, and benefit) for this population.

The Timing and Effort of Lexical Access in Natural and Degraded Speech

Understanding speech is effortless in ideal situations, and although adverse conditions, such as caused by hearing impairment, often render it an effortful task, they do not necessarily suspend speech comprehension. A prime example of this is speech perception by cochlear implant users, whose hearing prostheses transmit speech as a significantly degraded signal. It is yet unknown how mechanisms of speech processing deal with such degraded signals, and whether they are affected by effortful processing of speech. This paper compares the automatic process of lexical competition between natural and degraded speech, and combines gaze fixations, which capture the course of lexical disambiguation, with pupillometry, which quantifies the mental effort involved in processing speech. Listeners' ocular responses were recorded during disambiguation of lexical embeddings with matching and mismatching durational cues. Durational cues were selected due to their substantial role in listeners' quick limitation of the number of lexical candidates for lexical access in natural speech. Results showed that lexical competition increased mental effort in processing natural stimuli in particular in presence of mismatching cues. Signal degradation reduced listeners' ability to quickly integrate durational cues in lexical selection, and delayed and prolonged lexical competition. The effort of processing degraded speech was increased overall, and because it had its sources at the pre-lexical level this effect can be attributed to listening to degraded speech rather than to lexical disambiguation. In sum, the course of lexical competition was largely comparable for natural and degraded speech, but showed crucial shifts in timing, and different sources of increased mental effort. We argue that well-timed progress of information from sensory to pre-lexical and lexical stages of processing, which is the result of perceptual adaptation during speech development, is the reason why in ideal situations speech is perceived as an undemanding task. Degradation of the signal or the receiver channel can quickly bring this well-adjusted timing out of balance and lead to increase in mental effort. Incomplete and effortful processing at the early pre-lexical stages has its consequences on lexical processing as it adds uncertainty to the forming and revising of lexical hypotheses.

Bimodal Hearing Aid Retention after Unilateral Cochlear Implantation

The goal of this study was to investigate contralateral hearing aid (HA) use after unilateral cochlear implantation and to identify factors of influence on the occurrence of a unilateral cochlear implant (CI) recipient becoming a bimodal user. A retrospective cross-sectional chart review was carried out among 77 adult unilateral CI recipients 1 year after implantation. A bimodal HA retention rate of 64% was observed. Associations with demographics, hearing history, residual hearing and speech recognition ability were investigated. Better pure-tone thresholds and unaided speech scores in the non-implanted ear, as well as a smaller difference in speech recognition scores between both ears, were significantly associated with HA retention. A combined model of HA retention was proposed, and cut-off points were determined to identify those CI recipients who were most likely to become bimodal users. These results can provide input to clinical guidelines concerning bimodal CI candidacy.

From hearing with a cochlear implant and a contralateral hearing aid (CI/HA) to hearing with two cochlear implants (CI/CI): a within-subject design comparison

OBJECTIVE

To compare within-subject bilateral-binaural and bimodal complementary abilities between bimodal (cochlear implant and hearing aid; CI/HA) and bilateral CI hearing (CI/CI), thereby enabling better-informed counseling of experienced CI/HA users contemplating contralateral implantation.

STUDY DESIGN

Comparative within-subject case review.

SETTING

Outpatient hearing clinic.

PATIENTS

Ten experienced adult CI/HA users with severe-to-profound hearing loss in the HA ear, who converted to CI/CI between 2 and 11 years after initial implantation.

INTERVENTION

Task-specific testing of bilateral-binaural hearing (sound lateralization, binaural summation/redundancy/unmasking, head-shadow effect), bimodal complementary benefit (contribution of low-frequency information), and a self-report Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing (SSQ) questionnaire, all before and 1 year after contralateral cochlear implantation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Test result differences between CI/HA and CI/CI conditions.

RESULTS

CI/CI hearing was better than CI/HA for speech lateralization and for perception of semantically unpredictable sentences in speech noise with speech at 0 degrees and noise at +90 degrees azimuth on the old CI side. CI/HA was better than CI/CI only for differences between perception of natural prosody speech and of speech with flattened fundamental frequency (F0) contour with speech and noise in front (at 0 degrees azimuth). Total scores on the SSQ questionnaire were higher in CI/CI than in CI/HA users.

CONCLUSION

Counseling regarding contralateral implantation for CI/HA users with severe-to-profound hearing loss in the HA ear, though generally positive, should consider individual functional needs, and cover expectations about the expected trade-off between gaining improved understanding and speech lateralization in challenging listening conditions and losing some low-frequency cues still available with CI/HA hearing.

Adaptation of the speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing scale for use with children, parents, and teachers

Subjective assessment of hearing ability in everyday life complements more objective forms of evaluation. A broad evaluation of the additional benefit provided to children by a second bilateral cochlear implant required such an assessment. As no paediatric tool provided detailed evaluation of performance in the areas of daily listening in which benefit was likely to be demonstrated, an adult questionnaire was adapted. Items of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) focused mainly, although not exclusively, on hearing functions requiring the binaural system. The adapted child, parent, and teacher versions of the SSQ retained the structure of rating listening performance in everyday scenarios across the domains of speech perception, spatial hearing, and other qualities of hearing. Modifications were minimized, although deletion of some items and wording changes were required, and some subdomains could not be included. Observation periods were introduced so that parents and teachers observe performance prior to providing ratings. The suggested minimum age is 11 years for the child version and 5 years for the parent and teacher versions. Instructions indicate interview-style administration in which interpretation of the described listening scenarios can be clarified and use of the ruler-style response format demonstrated. Researchers applying the SSQ for parents have reported higher performance ratings for bilateral over unilateral cochlear implants, particularly in the spatial hearing domain. Further research should provide evidence for the target age range, compare child and parent responses, and evaluate modifications for use with younger children.

Transitioning from bimodal to bilateral cochlear implant listening: speech recognition and localization in four individuals

PURPOSE

The use of bilateral stimulation is becoming common for cochlear implant (CI) recipients with either (a) a CI in one ear and a hearing aid (HA) in the nonimplanted ear (CI&HA-bimodal) or (b) CIs in both ears (CI&CI-bilateral). The objective of this study was to evaluate 4 individuals who transitioned from bimodal to bilateral stimulation.

METHOD

Participants had completed a larger study of bimodal hearing and subsequently received a second CI. Test procedures from the bimodal study, including roaming speech recognition, localization, and a questionnaire (the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale; Gatehouse & Noble, 2004) were repeated after 6-7 months of bilateral CI experience.

RESULTS

Speech recognition and localization were not significantly different between bimodal and unilateral CI. In contrast, performance was significantly better with CI&CI compared with unilateral CI. Speech recognition with CI&CI was significantly better than with CI&HA for 2 of 4 participants. Localization was significantly better for all participants with CI&CI compared with CI&HA. CI&CI performance was rated as significantly better on the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale compared with CI&HA.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a strong preference for CI&CI for all participants. The variability in speech recognition and localization, however, suggests that performance under these stimulus conditions is individualized. Differences in hearing and/or HA history may explain performance differences.

Self-reported spatial hearing abilities across different cochlear implant profiles

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to determine how self-reported spatial hearing abilities differ across various cochlear implant (CI) profiles and to examine the degree of subjective benefit following cochlear implantation across different groups of CI users.

METHOD

This was a retrospective study of subjective spatial hearing ability of CI recipients. The subjects consisted of 99 unilateral CI users, 49 bilateral CI users, 32 subjects with a CI and contralateral hearing aid (bimodal users), and 37 short-electrode CI users. All subjects completed the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (Tyler, Perreau, & Ji, 2009), a questionnaire assessing spatial hearing ability, after implantation, and a subset of the subjects completed the questionnaire pre- and postimplantation.

RESULTS

Subjective spatial hearing ability was rated higher for the bilateral and short electrode CI users compared to the unilateral and bimodal users. There was no significant difference in subjective spatial hearing performance between the bilateral and short electrode CI users and the unilateral CI and bimodal users. A separate analysis of pre- and postimplant performance revealed that all CI groups reported significant improvements in spatial hearing ability after implantation.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that there are substantial differences in perceived spatial hearing ability among unilateral and bimodal CI users compared with bilateral and short electrode CI users.

Quality of life in bimodal hearing users (unilateral cochlear implants and contralateral hearing aids)

The main objective was to evaluate the bimodal self-rated benefits on auditory performance under real conditions and the quality of life in two groups of cochlear-implanted adults, with or without a contralateral hearing aid. The secondary objective was to investigate correlations between the use of a hearing aid and residual hearing on the non-implanted ear. This retrospective study was realized between 2000 and 2010 in two referral centers. A population of 183 postlingually deaf adults, implanted with a cochlear experience superior to 6 months, was selected. The Speech, Spatial, and other Qualities of Hearing Scale were administered to evaluate the auditory performances, and the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire to evaluate the quality of life. The population was divided into two groups: a group with unilateral cochlear implants (Cochlear Implant-alone, n = 54), and a bimodal group with a cochlear implant and a contralateral hearing aid (n = 62). Both groups were similar in terms of auditory deprivation duration, duration of cochlear implant use, and pure-tone average on the implanted ear. There was a significant difference in terms of pure-tone average on low and low-to-mid frequencies on the non-implanted ear. The scores on both questionnaires showed an improvement in the basic sound perception and quality of social activities for the bimodal group. The results suggest that the bimodal stimulation (cochlear implant and contralateral hearing aid) improved auditory perception in quiet and the quality of life domain of social activities.

Effects of unilateral input and mode of hearing in the better ear: self-reported performance using the speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate effects of hearing mode (normal hearing, cochlear implant, or hearing aid) on everyday communication among adult unilateral listeners using the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Individuals with one good, naturally hearing ear were expected to have higher overall ratings than unilateral listeners dependent on a cochlear implant or hearing aid. The authors anticipated that listening environments reliant on binaural processing for successful communication would be rated most disabling by all unilateral listeners. Regardless of hearing mode, all hearing-impaired participants were expected to have lower ratings than individuals with normal hearing bilaterally. A secondary objective was to compare post-treatment SSQ results of participants who subsequently obtained a cochlear implant for the poorer hearing ear with those of participants with a single normal-hearing ear.

DESIGN

Participants were 87 adults recruited as part of ongoing research investigating asymmetric hearing effects. Sixty-six participants were unilateral listeners who had one unaided/nonimplanted severe to profound hearing-loss ear and were grouped based on hearing mode of the better ear: 30 had one normal-hearing ear (i.e., unilateral hearing-loss participants); 20 had a unilateral cochlear implant; and 16 had a unilateral hearing aid. Data were also collected from 21 normal-hearing individuals, as well as a subset of participants who subsequently received a cochlear implant in the poorer ear and thus became bilateral listeners. Data analysis was completed at the domain and subscale levels.

RESULTS

A significant mode-of-hearing group effect for the hearing-impaired participants (i.e., with unilateral hearing loss, unilateral cochlear implant, or unilateral hearing aid) was identified for two domains (Speech and Qualities) and six subscales (Speech in Quiet, Speech in Noise, Speech in Speech Contexts, Multiple Speech Stream Processing and Switching, Identification of Sound and Objects, and Sound Quality and Naturalness). There was no significant mode-of-hearing group effect for the Spatial domain or the other four subscales (Localization, Distance and Movement, Segregation of Sounds, and Listening Effort). Follow-up analysis indicated the unilateral normal-hearing ear group had significantly higher ratings than the unilateral cochlear implant or hearing aid groups for the Speech domain and four of the ten subscales; neither the cochlear implant nor hearing aid group had subscale ratings significantly higher than each other or the unilateral hearing loss group. Audibility and sound quality imparted by hearing mode were identified as factors related to subjective listening experience. After cochlear implantation to restore bilateral hearing, SSQ ratings for bilateral cochlear implant or cochlear implant plus hearing aid participants were significantly higher than those of the unilateral hearing-loss group for Speech in Quiet, Speech in Noise, Localization, Distance and Movement, Listening Effort, and the Spatial domain. Hearing-impaired individuals had significantly poorer ratings in all areas compared with those with bilateral normal hearing.

CONCLUSIONS

Adults reliant on a single ear, irrespective of better ear hearing mode, including those with one normal hearing ear, are at a disadvantage in all aspects of everyday listening and communication. Audibility and hearing mode were shown to differentially contribute to listening experience.

Comparison of the benefits of cochlear implantation versus contra-lateral routing of signal hearing aids in adult patients with single-sided deafness: study protocol for a prospective within-subject longitudinal trial

BACKGROUND

Individuals with a unilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss, or single-sided deafness, report difficulty with listening in many everyday situations despite having access to well-preserved acoustic hearing in one ear. The standard of care for single-sided deafness available on the UK National Health Service is a contra-lateral routing of signals hearing aid which transfers sounds from the impaired ear to the non-impaired ear. This hearing aid has been found to improve speech understanding in noise when the signal-to-noise ratio is more favourable at the impaired ear than the non-impaired ear. However, the indiscriminate routing of signals to a single ear can have detrimental effects when interfering sounds are located on the side of the impaired ear. Recent published evidence has suggested that cochlear implantation in individuals with a single-sided deafness can restore access to the binaural cues which underpin the ability to localise sounds and segregate speech from other interfering sounds.

METHODS/DESIGN

The current trial was designed to assess the efficacy of cochlear implantation compared to a contra-lateral routing of signals hearing aid in restoring binaural hearing in adults with acquired single-sided deafness. Patients are assessed at baseline and after receiving a contra-lateral routing of signals hearing aid. A cochlear implant is then provided to those patients who do not receive sufficient benefit from the hearing aid. This within-subject longitudinal design reflects the expected care pathway should cochlear implantation be provided for single-sided deafness on the UK National Health Service. The primary endpoints are measures of binaural hearing at baseline, after provision of a contra-lateral routing of signals hearing aid, and after cochlear implantation. Binaural hearing is assessed in terms of the accuracy with which sounds are localised and speech is perceived in background noise. The trial is also designed to measure the impact of the interventions on hearing- and health-related quality of life.

DISCUSSION

This multi-centre trial was designed to provide evidence for the efficacy of cochlear implantation compared to the contra-lateral routing of signals. A purpose-built sound presentation system and established measurement techniques will provide reliable and precise measures of binaural hearing.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN33301739 (05/JUL/2013).

The spatial hearing questionnaire: data from individuals with normal hearing

PURPOSE

Although a number of questionnaires are available to assess hearing aid benefit and general hearing disability, relatively few investigate spatial hearing ability in more complex listening situations. The aim of this study was to document the performance of individuals with normal hearing using the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ; Tyler, Perreau, & Ji, 2009) and to compare performance with published data from cochlear implant (CI) users.

METHOD

Fifty-one participants with normal hearing participated. All participants completed the 24-item SHQ. Also, a factor analysis and reliability tests were performed.

RESULTS

Performance on the SHQ was high (87%) for the participants with normal hearing. Subjective ratings varied across different listening situations: Understanding speech in quiet (98%) was rated higher than sound localization (84%) and understanding speech in a background of noise (85%). Compared with previously published data (Tyler, Perreau, & Ji, 2009), listeners with normal hearing rated their spatial hearing ability significantly better than bilateral and unilateral CI users. Results confirmed that the SHQ is a reliable measure of spatial hearing ability for listeners with normal hearing.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, results indicated that the SHQ is able to capture expected differences between individuals with normal hearing and CI users. These new data can be used as targets following the provision of hearing devices.

A factor analysis of the SSQ (Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale)

OBJECTIVE

The speech, spatial, and qualities of hearing questionnaire (SSQ) is a self-report test of auditory disability. The 49 items ask how well a listener would do in many complex listening situations illustrative of real life. The scores on the items are often combined into the three main sections or into 10 pragmatic subscales. We report here a factor analysis of the SSQ that we conducted to further investigate its statistical properties and to determine its structure.

DESIGN

Statistical factor analysis of questionnaire data, using parallel analysis to determine the number of factors to retain, oblique rotation of factors, and a bootstrap method to estimate the confidence intervals.

STUDY SAMPLE

1220 people who have attended MRC IHR over the last decade.

RESULTS

We found three clear factors, essentially corresponding to the three main sections of the SSQ. They are termed "speech understanding", "spatial perception", and "clarity, separation, and identification". Thirty-five of the SSQ questions were included in the three factors. There was partial evidence for a fourth factor, "effort and concentration", representing two more questions.

CONCLUSIONS

These results aid in the interpretation and application of the SSQ and indicate potential methods for generating average scores.