Download PDF
J Am Acad Audiol 2021; 32(02): 099-106
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1718932
Research Article

Speech Recognition in Noise in Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Children on Using Adaptive Digital Microphone Technology

I. Speck
1   Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
,
T. Müller
1   Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
,
T. F. Jakob
1   Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
,
K. Wiebe
1   Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
,
A. Aschendorff
1   Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
,
S. Arndt
1   Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
,
T. Wesarg
1   Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
,
F. Hassepass
1   Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Previous research demonstrated benefits of adaptive digital microphone technologies (ADMTs) in adults with single-sided deafness (SSD) having a cochlear implant (CI). Children with SSD are especially affected by background noise because of their noise exposure in kindergarten and school.

Purpose This article aims to evaluate possible effects of ADMT on speech recognition in background noise in children with SSD who use a CI.

Study Sample Ten children between 5 and 11 years of age were included.

Data Collection and Analysis Speech recognition in noise was assessed for one frontal distant and two lateral speakers. The speech stimulus was presented at a speech level of 65 dB(A) and noise at a level of 55 dB(A). For the presentation condition with one frontal speaker, four listening conditions were assessed: (1) normal-hearing (NH) ear and CI turned off; (2) NH ear and CI; (3) NH ear and CI with ADMT; and (4) NH ear with ADMT and CI. Listening conditions (2) to (4) were also tested for each lateral speaker. The frontal speaker was positioned directly in front of the participant, whereas the lateral speakers were positioned at angles of 90 degrees and –90 degrees to the participant's head.

Results Children with SSD who use a CI significantly benefit from the application of ADMT in speech recognition in noise for frontal distant and for lateral speakers. Speech recognition improved significantly with ADMT at the CI and the NH ears.

Conclusion Application of ADMT significantly improves speech recognition in noise in children with SSD who use a CI and can therefore be highly recommended. The decision of whether to apply ADMT at the CI NH ear or bilaterally should be made for each child individually.

Keywords

cochlear implant - single-sided deafness - speech recognition in noise - remote wireless microphone system - children - pediatric

Note

The study was presented as a poster at the 14th European Symposium on Pediatric Cochlear Implantation (Bukarest, Romania), the 19th Conference on Implantable Auditory Prostheses 2019 (Lake Tahoe, California, USA), and 90th Annual Meeting of the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery 2019 (Berlin, Germany).




Publication History

Received: 13 February 2020

Accepted: 14 July 2020

Article published online:
15 December 2020

© 2020. American Academy of Audiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Arndt S, Laszig R, Aschendorff A, Hassepass F, Beck R, Wesarg T. Cochlea-Implantat-Versorgung von Patienten mit einseitiger Taubheit oder asymmetrischem Hörverlust. HNO 2017; 65 (Suppl. 02) 98-108
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Wie OB, Pripp AH, Tvete O. Unilateral deafness in adults: effects on communication and social interaction. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2010; 119 (11) 772-781
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lieu JEC, Tye-Murray N, Karzon RK, Piccirillo JF. Unilateral hearing loss is associated with worse speech-language scores in children. Pediatrics 2010; 125 (06) e1348-e1355
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Lieu JEC, Tye-Murray N, Fu Q. Longitudinal study of children with unilateral hearing loss. Laryngoscope 2012; 122 (09) 2088-2095
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Purcell PL, Shinn JR, Davis GE, Sie KCY. Children with unilateral hearing loss may have lower intelligence quotient scores: a meta-analysis. Laryngoscope 2016; 126 (03) 746-754
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Sangen A, Royackers L, Desloovere C, Wouters J, van Wieringen A. Single-sided deafness affects language and auditory development - a case-control study. Clin Otolaryngol 2017; 42 (05) 979-987
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Theunissen SCPM, Rieffe C, Kouwenberg M. et al. Behavioral problems in school-aged hearing-impaired children: the influence of sociodemographic, linguistic, and medical factors. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2014; 23 (04) 187-196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Kral A, Sharma A. Developmental neuroplasticity after cochlear implantation. Trends Neurosci 2012; 35 (02) 111-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kral A. Auditory critical periods: a review from system's perspective. Neuroscience 2013; 247: 117-133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Maslin MRD, Munro KJ, El-Deredy W. Source analysis reveals plasticity in the auditory cortex: evidence for reduced hemispheric asymmetries following unilateral deafness. Clin Neurophysiol 2013; 124 (02) 391-399
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Arndt S, Prosse S, Laszig R, Wesarg T, Aschendorff A, Hassepass F. Cochlear implantation in children with single-sided deafness: does aetiology and duration of deafness matter?. In: Audiology and Neurotology. S. Karger AG; 2015: 21-30
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Buechner A, Brendel M, Lesinski-Schiedat A. et al. Cochlear implantation in unilateral deaf subjects associated with ipsilateral tinnitus. Otol Neurotol 2010; 31 (09) 1381-1385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hassepass F, Schild C, Aschendorff A. et al. Clinical outcome after cochlear implantation in patients with unilateral hearing loss due to labyrinthitis ossificans. Otol Neurotol 2013; 34 (07) 1278-1283
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Távora-Vieira D, Marino R, Acharya A, Rajan GP. The impact of cochlear implantation on speech understanding, subjective hearing performance, and tinnitus perception in patients with unilateral severe to profound hearing loss. Otol Neurotol 2015; 36 (03) 430-436
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Vermeire K, Van de Heyning P. Binaural hearing after cochlear implantation in subjects with unilateral sensorineural deafness and tinnitus. Audiol Neurotol 2009; 14 (03) 163-171
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Cadieux JH, Firszt JB, Reeder RM. Cochlear implantation in nontraditional candidates: preliminary results in adolescents with asymmetric hearing loss. Otol Neurotol 2013; 34 (03) 408-415
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Fischer C, Lieu J. Unilateral hearing loss is associated with a negative effect on language scores in adolescents. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2014; 78 (10) 1611-1617
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Bertachini ALL, Pupo AC, Morettin M. et al. Frequency modulation system and speech perception in the classroom: a systematic literature review. CoDAS 2015; 27 (03) 292-300
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Schafer EC, Thibodeau LM. Speech recognition in noise in children with cochlear implants while listening in bilateral, bimodal, and FM-system arrangements. Am J Audiol 2006; 15 (02) 114-126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Wolfe J, Morais M, Schafer E, Agrawal S, Koch D. Evaluation of speech recognition of cochlear implant recipients using adaptive, digital remote microphone technology and a speech enhancement sound processing algorithm. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (05) 502-508
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Wesarg T, Arndt S, Wiebe K. et al. Speech recognition in noise in single-sided deaf cochlear implant recipients using digital remote wireless microphone technology. J Am Acad Audiol 2019; 30 (07) 607-618
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Wesarg T, Stelzig Y, Hilgert-Becker D. et al. Application of digital remote wireless microphone technology in single-sided deaf cochlear implant recipients. J Am Acad Audiol 2020; 31 (04) 246-256
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Busch T, Vanpoucke F, van Wieringen A. Auditory environment across the life span of cochlear implant users: Insights from data logging. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2017; 60 (05) 1362-1377
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Corbin NE, Bonino AY, Buss E, Leibold LJ. Development of open-set word recognition in children: speech-shaped noise and two-talker speech maskers. Ear Hear 2016; 37 (01) 55-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Stelmachowicz PG, Hoover BM, Lewis DE, Kortekaas RWL, Pittman AL. The relation between stimulus context, speech audibility, and perception for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired children. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2000; 43 (04) 902-914
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Vincent C, Arndt S, Firszt JB. et al. Identification and evaluation of cochlear implant candidates with asymmetrical hearing loss. In: Audiology and Neurotology. S. Karger AG; 2015: 87-89
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Neumann K, Baumeister N, Baumann U, Sick U, Euler HA, Weissgerber T. Speech audiometry in quiet with the Oldenburg Sentence Test for Children. Int J Audiol 2012; 51 (03) 157-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 De Ceulaer G, Bestel J, Mülder HE, Goldbeck F, de Varebeke SPJ, Govaerts PJ. Speech understanding in noise with the Roger Pen, Naida CI Q70 processor, and integrated Roger 17 receiver in a multi-talker network. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2016; 273 (05) 1107-1114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Thibodeau L. Comparison of speech recognition with adaptive digital and FM remote microphone hearing assistance technology by listeners who use hearing aids. Am J Audiol 2014; 23 (02) 201-210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Vroegop JL, Dingemanse JG, Homans NC, Goedegebure A. Evaluation of a wireless remote microphone in bimodal cochlear implant recipients. Int J Audiol 2017; 56 (09) 643-649
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Wolfe J, Morais M, Schafer E. et al. Evaluation of speech recognition of cochlear implant recipients using a personal digital adaptive radio frequency system. J Am Acad Audiol 2013; 24 (08) 714-724
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Bertachini ALL, Pupo AC, Morettin M. et al. Frequency modulation system and speech perception in the classroom: a systematic literature review. CoDAS 2015; 27 (03) 292-300
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Wolfe J, Schafer E, Martella N, Morais M, Mann M. Evaluation of extended-wear hearing technology for children with hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26 (07) 615-631
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Razza S, Zaccone M, Meli A, Cristofari E. Evaluation of speech reception threshold in noise in young Cochlear™ Nucleus® system 6 implant recipients using two different digital remote microphone technologies and a speech enhancement sound processing algorithm. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2017; 103: 71-75
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Thomas JP, Neumann K, Dazert S, Voelter C. Cochlear implantation in children with congenital single-sided deafness. Otol Neurotol 2017; 38 (04) 496-503
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Fitzpatrick EM, Whittingham J, Durieux-Smith A. Mild bilateral and unilateral hearing loss in childhood: a 20-year view of hearing characteristics, and audiologic practices before and after newborn hearing screening. Ear Hear 2014; 35 (01) 10-18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Fitzpatrick E, Grandpierre V, Durieux-Smith A. et al. Children with mild bilateral and unilateral hearing loss: parents' reflections on experiences and outcomes. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ 2016; 21 (01) 34-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Riga M, Korres G, Chouridis P, Naxakis S, Danielides V. Congenital cytomegalovirus infection inducing non-congenital sensorineural hearing loss during childhood; a systematic review. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2018; 115: 156-164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar