Correlation between subjective and objective hearing tests after unilateral and bilateral cochlear implantation

Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the hearing implant sound quality index questionnaire (HISQUI19)

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to construct validity and reliability of the Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index Questionnaire (HISQUI19) in Turkish.

METHODS

This study was a methodologic study to validate HISQUI19 in Turkish. The study included 62 cochlear implant users. Guttman's split half-coefficient and Cronbach's alpha tests were used for construct validity and internal consistency. Pearson correlation test was used to assess the relationship of the HISQUI19 total score to the SSQ49 scales for CI users and to show test - retest reliability.

RESULTS

The Cronbach's α value was 0.94 overall score with high internal consistency (Guttman's split-half-coefficient: 0.912). Test-retest reliability results showed high repeatability and consistency of the measure across time (r = 0.708; P = 0.002). Support for conducting factor analysis was provided by the KMO test, with a value of 0.876, which is 'great'.

DISCUSSION

Subjective evaluation of cochlear implant users' daily life experiences is a useful tool to reveal the auditory benefits of cochlear implant usage.

CONCLUSION

Turkish version of the HISQUI19 is a reliable and valid assessment tool for adults with CIs. This questionnaire provides clinicians with a valuable, reliable, and valid tool for determining the subjective benefit of CI for patients.

Importance of age at 2nd implantation and interimplant interval to the outcome of bilateral prelingually deafened pediatric cochlear implantation

BACKGROUND

In Taiwan, the number of cases of sequential bilateral pediatric cochlear implantation (CI) is increasing but data regarding its effectiveness and impact of the reimbursement policy are lacking. We examined the speech perception and quality of life (QOL) of bilateral prelingually deaf children who underwent sequential CI, considering the effects of age at the time of second implantation and interimplant interval.

METHODS

We enrolled 124 Mandarin-speaking participants who underwent initial cochlear implant (CI1) in 2001-2019 and a second CI (CI2) in 2015-2020. Patients were followed up for ≥2 years and were categorized into groups based on age at the time of CI2 implantation (<3.5, 3.6-7, 7.1-10, 10.1-13, and 13.1-18 years) and interimplant interval (0.5-3, 3.1-5, 5.1-7, 7.1-10, and >10 years). We evaluated speech perception, device usage rates, and QOL using subjective questionnaires (Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing and Comprehension Cochlear Implant Questionnaire).

RESULTS

Speech perception scores of CI2 were negatively correlated with ages at the time of CI1 and CI2 implantation and interimplant interval. Older age and a longer interimplant interval were associated with higher nonuse rates for CI2 and worse auditory performance and QOL. Among individuals aged >13 years with interimplant intervals >10 years, up to 44% did not use their second ear. Patients aged 7.1 to 10 years had better speech perception and higher questionnaire scores than those aged 10.1 to 13 and 13.1 to 18 years. Furthermore, patients aged 10.1 to 13 years had a lower rate of continuous CI2 usage compared to those aged 7.1 to 10 years.

CONCLUSION

Timely implantation of CI2 is essential to achieve optimal outcomes, particularly among sequentially implanted patients with long-term deafness in the second ear and no improvement with hearing aids following CI1 implantation. For CI2 implantation, an upper limit of age of 10 years and interimplant interval of 7 years are essential to prevent suboptimal outcomes. These data can provide useful information to implant recipients, their families, and medical and audiological professionals, enabling a comprehensive understanding of the benefits and potential impacts of the timing of CI2 implantation.

Validity and reliability of the ERSA questionnaire in Turkish

This methodological study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Evaluation of the Impact of Hearing Loss in Adults (ERSA) questionnaire for individuals with treated hearing loss. The study involved 200 participants, and both exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used to examine structural validity. External validity was assessed by correlating ERSA scores with the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit (APHAB). Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were evaluated using Cronbach's alpha and the intraclass correlation coefficient, respectively. The Turkish ERSA demonstrated strong psychometric properties, with significant correlations between APHAB and ERSA scores and excellent internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The findings suggest that the Turkish ERSA is a valid and reliable tool for evaluating the impact of hearing loss in individuals.

Listening evaluation of cochlear implant users: comparison of subjective and objective evaluation by visual analogue scale

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to use short-form visual analogue scale cochlear implantation questionnaires to evaluate subjective aspects at each out-patient visit. The correlation between subjective hearing tests using the short-form visual analogue scale and objective hearing outcomes was evaluated.

METHOD

This study was conducted in a single centre. Cochlear implant users (n = 199) evaluated their hearing on a scale of 0 to 100 for the right, left and both ears. The Japanese speech perception test (CI-2004) Japanese monosyllable speech perception test (67-S) and cochlear implantation threshold were used for the objective cochlear implantation evaluation.

RESULTS

A significant correlation was found between the short-form visual analogue scale questionnaire and objective hearing outcome, for words (r = 0.64) and sentences (r = 0.62) in CI-2004 and 67-S (r = 0.56) tests. No significant correlation was found between the short-form visual analogue scale score and cochlear implantation threshold (r = -0.18).

CONCLUSION

Short-form visual analogue scale cochlear implantation questionnaires mean cochlear implant users spend less time answering subjective visual analogue scale questionnaires, and clinicians estimate a patient's cochlear implantation hearing and abnormality by chronological evaluation.

Associations between illness perceptions, word recognition, and perceived sound quality in cochlear implant users

OBJECTIVE

Illness perceptions refer to thoughts and ideas an individual has about an illness. The aim was to understand how cochlear implant (CI) users' illness perceptions, in addition to their monosyllabic word recognition abilities, are associated with their self-perceived sound quality.

DESIGN

Data were collected during routine CI check-up appointments. Participants completed the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (assessing their illness perceptions) and the Hearing Implant Sound Quality Index (assessing their subjective sound quality). Additionally, monosyllabic word recognition abilities were measured with the Freiburg Monosyllable Word Test. Hierarchical regression analysis were utilised to model users' sound quality ratings. Participants' age was entered first as a control variable. In the next step, monosyllabic word recognition was entered. Finally, participants' illness perceptions were entered.

STUDY SAMPLE

Fifty-five participants with unilateral CI provision.

RESULTS

Monosyllabic word recognition was significant in the second step. When illness perceptions and monosyllabic word recognition were both included in the third step, illness perceptions, but not monosyllabic word recognition, were significant. The model explained 22% of the variance of subjective sound quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Monosyllabic word recognition abilities and illness perceptions of CI users are important for their self-reported sound quality, but illness perceptions appear to be potentially more relevant.

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.

Cochlear implantation in unilateral hearing loss: impact of short- to medium-term auditory deprivation

Introduction

Single sided deafness (SSD) results in profound cortical reorganization that presents clinically with a significant impact on sound localization and speech comprehension. Cochlear implantation (CI) has been approved for two manufacturers' devices in the United States to restore bilateral function in SSD patients with up to 10 years of auditory deprivation. However, there is great variability in auditory performance and it remains unclear how auditory deprivation affects CI benefits within this 10-year window. This prospective study explores how measured auditory performance relates to real-world experience and device use in a cohort of SSD-CI subjects who have between 0 and 10 years of auditory deprivation.

Methods

Subjects were assessed before implantation and 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-CI activation via Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) word recognition and Arizona Biomedical Institute (AzBio) sentence recognition in varying spatial speech and noise presentations that simulate head shadow, squelch, and summation effects (S0N0, SSSDNNH, SNHNSSD; 0 = front, SSD = impacted ear, NH = normal hearing ear). Patient-centered assessments were performed using Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ), and Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI3). Device use data was acquired from manufacturer software. Further subgroup analysis was performed on data stratified by <5 years and 5-10 years duration of deafness.

Results

In the SSD ear, median (IQR) CNC word scores pre-implant and at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-implant were 0% (0-0%), 24% (8-44%), 28% (4-44%), and 18% (7-33%), respectively. At 6 months post-activation, AzBio scores in S0N0 and SSSDNNH configurations (n = 25) demonstrated statistically significant increases in performance by 5% (p = 0.03) and 20% (p = 0.005), respectively. The median HUI3 score was 0.56 pre-implant, lower than scores for common conditions such as anxiety (0.68) and diabetes (0.77), and comparable to stroke (0.58). Scores improved to 0.83 (0.71-0.91) by 3  months post-activation. These audiologic and subjective benefits were observed even in patients with longer durations of deafness.

Discussion

By merging CI-associated changes in objective and patient-centered measures of auditory function, our findings implicate central mechanisms of auditory compensation and adaptation critical in auditory performance after SSD-CI and quantify the extent to which they affect the real-world experience reported by individuals.

The relationship between preoperative factors and the pattern of longitudinal improvement in speech perception following cochlear implantation

BACKGROUND

Many studies have discussed the factors influencing hearing outcomes after cochlear implantation, but few have addressed improvements in speech perception for these patients over time.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the relationship between preoperative factors and the pattern of longitudinal improvement in speech perception following cochlear implantation (CI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study enrolled 83 patients (96 ears) who underwent CI at Shinshu University Hospital. The patients were assessed up to 12 months after CI by a monosyllable test, and showed either delayed improvement (DI), early improvement (EI), or stable improvement (SI) when compared with their preoperative score. Eight preoperative variables were also examined for their effects on speech perception over time.

RESULTS

The DI, EI, SI groups comprised 35.4%, 43.8%, and 20.8% of all patients, respectively. Patients in the DI group were older at surgery than those in the EI and SI groups, and their onset age were also older than that in the SI group. No other preoperative variables showed significant differences across the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE

Our findings revealed that age at implantation and age at onset of hearing loss significantly affected the improvement pattern of speech perception. Age may be useful in predicting recovery of speech perception after CI.

Self-reported hearing and awareness of age-related change : A domain-specific perspective

BACKGROUND

Impaired hearing is associated with disadvantages in developmental outcomes, such as compromised everyday social communication or reduced well-being. Hearing impairment might also have an impact on how individuals evaluate their own aging as deterioration in hearing can be interpreted as being age-related and as a phenomenon individuals attribute to getting older.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated how self-reported hearing is related to awareness of age-related change (AARC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

AARC is a multidimensional construct comprising perceived age-related gains and losses in general as well as across five functional domains (health and physical functioning, cognitive functioning, interpersonal relations, social cognitive and social emotional functioning, lifestyle and engagement). A sample of 423 individuals (age range 40-98 years; mean age, M = 62.9 years; standard deviation (SD) = 11.8 years) was assessed up to 3 times over approximately 5 years.

RESULTS

Based on longitudinal multilevel regression models, controlling for age, gender, subjective health and education, it was found that poorer self-reported hearing was associated with more perceived general AARC losses as well as with more AARC losses in health and physical functioning and in cognitive functioning at baseline. With an older age at baseline, poorer self-reported hearing was associated with a steeper decline in AARC gains regarding interpersonal relations over time, whereas in those who were younger at baseline poorer hearing was related to fewer gains in social cognitive and social emotional functioning at baseline.

DISCUSSION

Self-reported hearing reveals differential associations with AARC domains; however, changes in most AARC domains of gains and losses seem to be only weakly related to subjective hearing.

Relationships between behavioural and self-report measures in speech recognition in noise

OBJECTIVE

Using data from the n200-study, we aimed to investigate the relationship between behavioural (the Swedish HINT and Hagerman speech-in-noise tests) and self-report (Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Questionnaire (SSQ)) measures of listening under adverse conditions.

DESIGN

The Swedish HINT was masked with a speech-shaped noise (SSN), the Hagerman was masked with a SSN and a four-talker babble, and the subscales from the SSQ were used as a self-report measure. The HINT and Hagerman were administered through an experimental hearing aid.

STUDY SAMPLE

This study included 191 hearing aid users with hearing loss (mean PTA4 = 37.6, SD = 10.8) and 195 normally hearing adults (mean PTA4 = 10.0, SD = 6.0).

RESULTS

The present study found correlations between behavioural measures of speech-in-noise and self-report scores of the SSQ in normally hearing individuals, but not in hearing aid users.

CONCLUSION

The present study may help identify relationships between clinically used behavioural measures, and a self-report measure of speech recognition. The results from the present study suggest that use of a self-report measure as a complement to behavioural speech in noise tests might help to further our understanding of how self-report, and behavioural results can be generalised to everyday functioning.

New technology can benefit established middle ear implant users: Samba 2 vs previous models of audio processors for Vibrant Soundbridge

Introduction

The Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB) is a semi-implantable hearing aid for patients with various types of hearing loss and has been available for over 25 years. Recently, new audio processors with advanced signal processing, noise reduction, and multi-microphone technology have appeared. The aim of this study is to compare the benefits of using the newest Samba 2 processor to the previous generation processors in a group of experienced VSB users.

Methods

There were 22 experienced VSB users (mean time of using VSB was 9 years, SD = 2) who had their processor (D404 or Amadé) upgraded to the newest model (Samba 2). The mean age of the subjects was 56 years (SD = 20). Assessments were made by free-field audiometry, speech reception in quiet and noise, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs).

Results

Hearing tests in free field showed statistically significant improvements in hearing sensitivity and speech discrimination in quiet and noise with the Samba 2 audio processor compared to the earlier technology. PROMs confirmed the benefits of using the newest audio processor and there was more satisfaction in terms of usability.

Conclusions

Access to modern technology for VSB patients provides measurable benefits.

Neural responses to naturalistic audiovisual speech are related to listening demand in cochlear implant users

There is a weak relationship between clinical and self-reported speech perception outcomes in cochlear implant (CI) listeners. Such poor correspondence may be due to differences in clinical and “real-world” listening environments and stimuli. Speech in the real world is often accompanied by visual cues, background environmental noise, and is generally in a conversational context, all factors that could affect listening demand. Thus, our objectives were to determine if brain responses to naturalistic speech could index speech perception and listening demand in CI users. Accordingly, we recorded high-density electroencephalogram (EEG) while CI users listened/watched a naturalistic stimulus (i.e., the television show, “The Office”). We used continuous EEG to quantify “speech neural tracking” (i.e., TRFs, temporal response functions) to the show’s soundtrack and 8–12 Hz (alpha) brain rhythms commonly related to listening effort. Background noise at three different signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), +5, +10, and +15 dB were presented to vary the difficulty of following the television show, mimicking a natural noisy environment. The task also included an audio-only (no video) condition. After each condition, participants subjectively rated listening demand and the degree of words and conversations they felt they understood. Fifteen CI users reported progressively higher degrees of listening demand and less words and conversation with increasing background noise. Listening demand and conversation understanding in the audio-only condition was comparable to that of the highest noise condition (+5 dB). Increasing background noise affected speech neural tracking at a group level, in addition to eliciting strong individual differences. Mixed effect modeling showed that listening demand and conversation understanding were correlated to early cortical speech tracking, such that high demand and low conversation understanding occurred with lower amplitude TRFs. In the high noise condition, greater listening demand was negatively correlated to parietal alpha power, where higher demand was related to lower alpha power. No significant correlations were observed between TRF/alpha and clinical speech perception scores. These results are similar to previous findings showing little relationship between clinical speech perception and quality-of-life in CI users. However, physiological responses to complex natural speech may provide an objective measure of aspects of quality-of-life measures like self-perceived listening demand.

Objective and Subjective Outcomes in Patients with Hearing Aids: A Cross-Sectional, Comparative, Associational Study

INTRODUCTION

Outcome assessment for hearing aids (HAs) is an essential part of HA fitting and validation. There is no consensus about the best or standard approach for evaluating HA outcomes. And, the relationship between objective and subjective measures is ambiguous. This study aimed to determine the outcomes after HA fitting, explore correlations between subjective benefit and acoustic gain improvement as well as objective audiologic tests, and investigate several variables that may improve patients' perceived benefits.

METHODS

Eighty adults with bilateral symmetrical hearing loss using HAs for at least 1 month were included in this study. All subjects completed the pure tone average (PTA) threshold and word recognition score (WRS) tests in unaided and aided conditions. We also administered the Chinese version of International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA), to measure participants' subjective benefits. Objective HA benefit (acoustic gain improvement) was defined as the difference in thresholds or scores between aided and unaided conditions indicated with ΔPTA and ΔWRS. Thus, patients' baseline hearing levels were taken into account. Correlations were assessed among objective audiologic tests (PTA and WRS), acoustic gain improvement (ΔPTA and ΔWRS), multiple potential factors, and IOI-HA overall scores.

RESULTS

PTA decreased significantly, but WRS did not increase when aided listening was compared to unaided listening. Negative correlations between PTAs and IOI-HA scores were significant but weak (r = -0.370 and r = -0.393, all p < 0.05). Significant weak positive correlations were found between WRSs and IOI-HA (r = 0.386 and r = 0.309, all p < 0.05). However, there was no correlation among ΔPTA, ΔWRS, and IOI-HA (r = 0.056 and r = -0.086, all p > 0.05). Moreover, 2 nonaudiological factors (age and daily use time) were significantly correlated with IOI-HA (r = -0.269 and r = 0.242, all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Correlations among objective audiologic tests, acoustic gain, and subjective patient-reported outcomes were weak or absent. Subjective questionnaires and objective tests do not reflect the same hearing capability. Therefore, it is advisable to evaluate both objective and subjective outcomes when analyzing HA benefits on a regular basis and pay equal attention to nonaudiological and audiological factors.

Improvements in Hearing and in Quality of Life after Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implantation in a Consecutive Sample of Adult Patients with Severe-to-Profound Hearing Loss

Bilateral cochlear implantation is increasing worldwide. In adults, bilateral cochlear implants (BICI) are often performed sequentially with a time delay between the first (CI1) and the second (CI2) implant. The benefits of BICI have been reported for well over a decade. This study aimed at investigating these benefits for a consecutive sample of adult patients. Improvements in speech-in-noise recognition after CI2 were followed up longitudinally for 12 months with the internationally comparable Finnish matrix sentence test. The test scores were statistically significantly better for BICI than for either CI alone in all assessments during the 12-month period. At the end of the follow-up period, the bilateral benefit for co-located speech and noise was 1.4 dB over CI1 and 1.7 dB over CI2, and when the noise was moved from the front to 90 degrees on the side, spatial release from masking amounted to an improvement of 2.5 dB in signal-to-noise ratio. To assess subjective improvements in hearing and in quality of life, two questionnaires were used. Both questionnaires revealed statistically significant improvements due to CI2 and BICI. The association between speech recognition in noise and background factors (duration of hearing loss/deafness, time between implants) or subjective improvements was markedly smaller than what has been previously reported on sequential BICI in adults. Despite the relatively heterogeneous sample, BICI improved hearing and quality of life.

Pupillometry Assessment of Speech Recognition and Listening Experience in Adult Cochlear Implant Patients

Objective

The aim of the present study was to investigate the pupillary response to word identification in cochlear implant (CI) patients. Authors hypothesized that when task difficulty (i.e., addition of background noise) increased, pupil dilation markers such as the peak dilation or the latency of the peak dilation would increase in CI users, as already observed in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects.

Methods

Pupillometric measures in 10 CI patients were combined to standard speech recognition scores used to evaluate CI outcomes, namely, speech audiometry in quiet and in noise at +10 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). The main outcome measures of pupillometry were mean pupil dilation, maximal pupil dilation, dilation latency, and mean dilation during return to baseline or retention interval. Subjective hearing quality was evaluated by means of one self-reported fatigue questionnaire, and the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities (SSQ) of Hearing scale.

Results

All pupil dilation data were transformed to percent change in event-related pupil dilation (ERPD, %). Analyses show that the peak amplitudes for both mean pupil dilation and maximal pupil dilation were higher during the speech-in-noise test. Mean peak dilation was measured at 3.47 ± 2.29% noise vs. 2.19 ± 2.46 in quiet and maximal peak value was detected at 9.17 ± 3.25% in noise vs. 8.72 ± 2.93% in quiet. Concerning the questionnaires, the mean pupil dilation during the retention interval was significantly correlated with the spatial subscale score of the SSQ Hearing scale [r(8) = −0.84, p = 0.0023], and with the global score [r(8) = −0.78, p = 0.0018].

Conclusion

The analysis of pupillometric traces, obtained during speech audiometry in quiet and in noise in CI users, provided interesting information about the different processes engaged in this task. Pupillometric measures could be indicative of listening difficulty, phoneme intelligibility, and were correlated with general hearing experience as evaluated by the SSQ of Hearing scale. These preliminary results show that pupillometry constitutes a promising tool to improve objective quantification of CI performance in clinical settings.

Assessment of Hearing Aid Benefit Using Patient-Reported Outcomes and Audiologic Measures

PURPOSE

To determine the contributions to hearing aid benefit of patient-reported outcomes and audiologic measures.

METHODS

Independent review was conducted on audiologic and patient-reported outcomes of hearing aid benefit collected in the course of a middle ear implant FDA clinical trial. Unaided and aided data were extracted from the preoperative profiles of 95 experienced hearing aid users, and the relationships between a patient-reported outcome and audiologic measures were assessed. The following data were extracted: unaided and aided pure-tone or warble-tone thresholds (PTA), word recognition in quiet (NU-6), Speech Perception in Noise (low-/high-context SPIN), and patient-reported benefit (Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, APHAB). Hearing aid benefit was defined as the difference in thresholds or scores between unaided and aided conditions, as measured in the sound field. Correlations were computed among audiologic measures and global APHAB and subscale scores of hearing aid benefit.

RESULTS

Significant improvements in all audiologic measures and APHAB scores were observed comparing unaided to aided listening (all p < 0.001). However, correlations between audiologic and patient-reported measures of aided performance or hearing aid benefit were low-to-weak or absent. No significant correlations were found between aided audiologic measures (PTA, NU-6, SPIN) and any aided APHAB scores (all p > 0.0125), and significant relationships for hearing aid benefit were absent with only few exceptions. Hearing aid benefit defined by global APHAB using NU-6 and SPIN scores showed significant but weak positive correlations (r = 0.37, p < 0.001; r = 0.28, p = 0.005, respectively) and ease of communication APHAB subscale scores (r = 0.32, p < 0.001; r = 0.33, p = 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Hearing aid benefit assessed with audiologic measures were poor predictors of patient-reported benefit. Thus, patient-reported outcomes may provide a unique assessment of patient-perceived benefit from hearing aids, which can be used to direct hearing aid programming, training, or recommendations of alternative hearing services.

The relation of hearing-specific patient-reported outcome measures with speech perception measures and acceptable noise levels in cochlear implant users

Objective: To investigate the relation of a hearing-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) with speech perception and noise tolerance measurements. It was hypothesised that speech intelligibility in noise and noise tolerance may explain a larger part of the variance in PROM scores than speech intelligibility in quiet.Design: This cross-sectional study used the Speech, Spatial, Qualities (SSQ) questionnaire as a PROM. Speech recognition in quiet, the Speech Reception Threshold in noise and noise tolerance as measured with the acceptable noise level (ANL) were measured with sentences.Study sample: A group of 48 unilateral post-lingual deafened cochlear implant (CI) users.Results: SSQ scores were moderately correlated with speech scores in quiet and noise, and also with ANLs. Speech scores in quiet and noise were strongly correlated. The combination of speech scores and ANL explained 10-30% of the variances in SSQ scores, with ANLs adding only 0-9%.Conclusions: The variance in the SSQ as hearing-specific PROM in CI users was not better explained by speech intelligibility in noise than by speech intelligibility in quiet, because of the remarkably strong correlation between both measures. ANLs made only a small contribution to explain the variance of the SSQ. ANLs seem to measure other aspects than the SSQ.

The Correlation Analysis Between the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire (SHQ) and the Psychophysical Measurement of Spatial Hearing

The aim of the present study was examining the relationship between a psychophysical spatial hearing test (spatial word in noise test) and Spatial Hearing Questionnaire. Sixty-six adults (18-40 years old) were divided in three groups: normal subjects, subjects with mild and moderate hearing loss. Spatial word in noise test and Persian version of the spatial hearing questionnaire were evaluated and compared among these groups. According to Pearson's test, there was a significant positive correlation between the scores of spatial word in noise test and Persian version of the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire in three groups (r = 0.64-0.89). Hearing loss can deteriorate spatial hearing ability. Both objective and subjective spatial hearing tests are shown to be effective in detecting spatial hearing disorder.

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.

ForwardFocus with cochlear implant recipients in spatially separated and fluctuating competing signals - introduction of a reference metric

Objective: To clinically evaluate ForwardFocus in noise with experienced Nucleus^® cochlear implant (CI) recipients.Design: Listening performance with ForwardFocus was compared against the best in class directional microphone program (BEAM^®). Speech comprehension was tested with the Oldenburg sentence test with competing signals (stationary, three, six and 18-talker babble) in both co-located and spatially-separated listening environments. Additionally, normal hearing participants were tested monaurally in the same listening environments as a reference and to promote cross-study comparisons between CI clinical study outcomes.Study sample: Post-lingually deaf adult CI recipients (n = 20) who were experienced users of the Nucleus sound processor (Cochlear Limited).Results: Improved speech comprehension was found with the ForwardFocus program compared to the BEAM program in a co-located frontal listening environment for both stationary and fluctuating competing signals. In spatially-separated environments ForwardFocus provided significant speech reception threshold (SRT) improvements of 5.8 dB for three-talker competing signals, respectively.Conclusions: ForwardFocus was shown to significantly improve speech comprehension in a wide range of listening environments. This technology is likely to provide significant improvements in real-world listening for CI recipients, given the clinically relevant performance outcomes in challenging dynamic noise environments, bringing their performance closer to their normal hearing peers.

No Difference in Behavioral and Self-Reported Outcomes for Simultaneous and Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implantation: Evidence From a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective: The primary aim of this study was to longitudinally compare the behavioral and self-reported outcomes of simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation (simBiCI) and sequential BiCI (seqBiCI) in adults with severe-to-profound postlingual sensorineural hearing loss. Design: This study is a multicenter randomized controlled trial with a 4-year follow-up period after the first moment of implantation. Participants were allocated by randomization to receive bilateral cochlear implants (CIs) either, simultaneously (simBiCI group) or sequentially with an inter-implant interval of 2 years (UCI/seqBiCI group). All sequential patients where encouraged to use their hearing aid on the non-implanted ear over of the first 2 years. Patients were followed-up on an annual basis. The primary outcome was speech perception in noise coming from a source directly in front of the patient. Other behavioral outcome measures were speech intelligibility-in-noise from spatially separated sources, localization and speech perception in quiet. Self-reported outcome measures encompassed questionnaires on quality of life, quality of hearing and tinnitus. All outcome measures were analyzed longitudinally using a linear or logistic regression analysis with an autoregressive residual covariance matrix (generalized estimating equations type). Results: Nineteen participants were randomly allocated to the simBiCI group and 19 participants to the UCI/seqBiCI group. Three participants in the UCI/seqBiCI group did not proceed with their second implantation and were therefore unavailable for follow-up. Both study groups performed equally well on speech perception in noise from a source directly in front of the patient longitudinally. During all 4 years of follow-up the UCI/seqBiCI group performed significantly worse compared to the simBiCI group on spatial speech perception in noise in the best performance situation (8.70 dB [3.96 - 13.44], p < 0.001) and localization abilities (largest difference 60 degrees configuration: -44.45% [-52.15 - -36.74], p < 0.0001). Furthermore, during all years of follow-up, the UCI/seqBiCI group performed significantly worse on quality of hearing and quality of life questionnaires. The years of unilateral CI use were the reason for the inferior results in the UCI/SeqBiCI group. One year after receiving CI2, the UCI/seqBiCI group performance did not statistically differ from the performance of the simBiCI group on all these outcomes. Furthermore, no longitudinal differences were seen in tinnitus burden prevalence between groups. Finally, the complications that occurred during this trial were infection, dysfunction of CI, facial nerve palsy, tinnitus and vertigo. Conclusion: This randomized controlled trial on bilaterally severely hearing impaired participants found a significantly worse longitudinal performance of UCI/seqBiCI compared to simBiCI on multiple behavioral and self-reported outcomes regarding speech perception in noise and localization abilities. This difference is associated with the inferior performance of the UCI/seqBiCI participants during the years of unilateral CI use. After receiving the second CI however, the performance of the UCI/seqBiCI group did not significantly differ from the simBiCI group. Trial Registration: Dutch Trial Register NTR1722.

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.