ABSTRACT
Background: Recent developments in virtual acoustic technology has levered promising applications in the field of auditory sciences, especially in spatial perception. While conventional auditory spatial assessment using loudspeakers, interaural differences and/or questionnaires are limited by the availability and cost of instruments, the use of virtual acoustic space identification (VASI) test has widespread applications in spatial test battery as it overcomes these constraints. Purpose: The lack of test-retest reliability data of VASI test narrows its direct application in auditory spatial assessment, which is explored in the present study. Methods: Data from 75 normal-hearing young adults (mean age: 25.11 y ± 4.65 SD) was collected in three sessions: baseline, within 15 min of baseline (intra-session), and one week after baseline session (inter-session). Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV), and cluster plots. Results: The results showed excellent reliability for both accuracy and reaction time measures of VASI, with ICC values of 0.93 and 0.87, respectively. The CV values for overall VASI accuracy and reaction time 9.66% and 11.88%, respectively. This was also complemented by the cluster plot analyses, which showed 93.33% and 96.00% of temporal stability in the accuracy and reaction time measures, indicative of high test-retest reliability of VASI test in auditory spatial assessment. Conclusions: The high temporal stability (test-retest reliability) of VASI test validates its application in spatial hearing test battery.
ABSTRACT
Objective: The goal of this study was to evaluate the quality of life of parents of children who use hearing aids (HA) with those who use cochlear implants (CI) in the Indian context and document any differences found. Methods: The Kannada version of the AQoL-4D was administered in a modified fashion to 131 parents (87 HA and 44 CI). Sociodemographic details were collected for supplemental information on the intervention strategy used. Results: A total of 49 parents (29 HA and 20 CI) responded to the questionnaire sent. The mean total scores for both the groups were similar (HA group = 17.9 (SD = 5.5), CI group = 17.2 (SD = 3.4)), as was the score for the first subscale (HA group = 8.6 (SD = 2.9); CI group = 8.5 (SD = 2.6)) of the AQoL-4D. No significant differences were found between the two groups on either scores [Total Score: U (NHA = 29, NCI = 20) = 280.5, z = -0.194, p > 0.05; Subscale 1 Score: U (NHA = 29, NCI = 20) = 281.5, z = -0.176, p > 0.05]. The degree of hearing loss in the hearing aid group was equivalent to that of the cochlear implant group but this did not appear to influence parental quality of life. Conclusion: Parents of children with hearing aids and cochlear implants appear to be similar on several psychosocial factors in the realms of functional, social, and psychological well-being. In terms of parental quality of life, hearing aids and cochlear implants appear to be equally effective intervention techniques.
ABSTRACT
Auditory brainstem implantation (ABI) is a viable option for individuals with inner ear anomalies, or other retro-cochlear pathologies, where cochlear implantation is not a suitable option. Although ABI has its advantages in those populations, most often, ABI is not recommended or accepted by the patients because of its limitations and shortcoming such as open-set word recognition in auditory mode, limited infrastructures for carrying out ABI surgery, and the high cost of implantation. This review highlights the benefits in non-tumor patients with ABI surgery and possible reasons for the limited acceptance of the ABI device from an Indian perspective.
