Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Publication year range
1.
PLoS One ; 17(9): e0274435, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36103551

ABSTRACT

Spatial cues can facilitate segregation of target speech from maskers. However, in clinical practice, masked speech understanding is most often evaluated using co-located speech and maskers (i.e., without spatial cues). Many hearing aid centers in France are equipped with five-loudspeaker arrays, allowing masked speech understanding to be measured with spatial cues. It is unclear how hearing status may affect utilization of spatial cues to segregate speech and noise. In this study, speech reception thresholds (SRTs) for target speech in "diffuse noise" (target speech from 1 speaker, noise from the remaining 4 speakers) in 297 adult listeners across 9 Audilab hearing centers. Participants were categorized according to pure-tone-average (PTA) thresholds: typically-hearing (TH; ≤ 20 dB HL), mild hearing loss (Mild; >20 ≤ 40 dB HL), moderate hearing loss 1 (Mod-1; >40 ≤ 55 dB HL), and moderate hearing loss 2 (Mod-2; >55 ≤ 65 dB HL). All participants were tested without aided hearing. SRTs in diffuse noise were significantly correlated with PTA thresholds, age at testing, as well as word and phoneme recognition scores in quiet. Stepwise linear regression analysis showed that SRTs in diffuse noise were significantly predicted by a combination of PTA threshold and word recognition scores in quiet. SRTs were also measured in co-located and diffuse noise in 65 additional participants. SRTs were significantly lower in diffuse noise than in co-located noise only for the TH and Mild groups; masking release with diffuse noise (relative to co-located noise) was significant only for the TH group. The results are consistent with previous studies that found that hard of hearing listeners have greater difficulty using spatial cues to segregate competing speech. The data suggest that speech understanding in diffuse noise provides additional insight into difficulties that hard of hearing individuals experience in complex listening environments.


Subject(s)
Hearing Loss , Speech Perception , Adult , Hearing , Humans , Noise , Speech
2.
Brain Sci ; 12(3)2022 Mar 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35326347

ABSTRACT

Background: For hearing-impaired individuals, hearing aids are clinically fit according to subjective measures of threshold and loudness. The goal of this study was to evaluate objective measures of loudness perception that might benefit hearing aid fitting. Method: Seventeen adult hearing aid users and 17 normal-hearing adults participated in the study. Outcome measures including categorical loudness scaling, cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs), and pupillometry. Stimuli were 1-kHz tone bursts presented at 40, 60, and 80 dBA. Results: Categorical loudness scaling showed that loudness significantly increased with intensity for all participants (p < 0.05). For CAEPs, high intensity was associated with greater P1, N1, and P2 peak amplitude for all listeners (p < 0.05); a significant but small effect of hearing aid amplification was observed. For all participants, pupillometry showed significant effects of high intensity on pupil dilation (p < 0.05); there was no significant effect of hearing aid amplification. A Focused Principal Component analysis revealed significant correlations between subjective loudness and some of the objective measures. Conclusion: The present data suggest that intensity had a significant impact on loudness perception, CAEPs, and pupil response. The correlations suggest that pupillometry and/or CAEPs may be useful in determining comfortable amplification for hearing aids.

3.
PLoS One ; 15(9): e0239487, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32976532

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: For patients with single-sided deafness (SSD), restoration of binaural function via cochlear implant (CI) has been shown to improve speech understanding in noise. The objective of this study was to investigate changes in behavioral performance and cortical auditory responses following cochlear implantation. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. METHODS: Six adults with SSD were tested before and 12 months post-activation of the CI. Six normal hearing (NH) participants served as experimental controls. Speech understanding in noise was evaluated for various spatial conditions. Cortical auditory evoked potentials were recorded with /ba/ stimuli in quiet and in noise. Global field power and responses at Cz were analyzed. RESULTS: Speech understanding in noise significantly improved with the CI when speech was presented to the CI ear and noise to the normal ear (p<0.05), but remained poorer than that of NH controls (p<0.05). N1 peak amplitude measure in noise significantly increased after CI activation (p<0.05), but remained lower than that of NH controls (p<0.05) at 12 months. After 12 months of CI experience, cortical responses in noise became more comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: Binaural restoration in SSD patients via cochlear implantation improved speech performance noise and cortical responses. While behavioral performance and cortical auditory responses improved, SSD-CI outcomes remained poorer than that of NH controls in most cases, suggesting only partial restoration of binaural hearing.


Subject(s)
Auditory Cortex/physiology , Deafness/physiopathology , Hearing Loss, Unilateral/physiopathology , Speech Perception/physiology , Speech/physiology , Aged , Cochlear Implantation/methods , Cochlear Implants , Comprehension/physiology , Evoked Potentials, Auditory/physiology , Female , Hearing/physiology , Hearing Loss, Sensorineural/physiopathology , Hearing Tests/methods , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Noise , Prospective Studies , Sound Localization/physiology
4.
Audiol Neurootol ; 23(3): 187-197, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30352440

ABSTRACT

Cochlear implantation (CI) can benefit patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) in terms of sound localization, speech understanding in noise, tinnitus severity, and quality of life (QoL). In previous studies, CI outcomes have been largely reported for SSD patients with normal "unrestricted" hearing in the contralateral ear. However, SSD patients may often have some degree of hearing loss in the contralateral ear ("restricted" acoustic hearing). In this study, we report results from a French clinical trial for CI in in SSD patients (NCT02204618). Localization, speech reception thresholds (SRTs) in noise, tinnitus severity, and QoL were evaluated in 18 SSD patients 1 year after CI. Data were analyzed for 2 subject groups according to the pure-tone average thresholds in the non-implanted ear: unrestricted acoustic hearing (UNRES; ≤25 dB HL; n = 10) and restricted acoustic hearing (RES; > 25 dB HL; n = 8). Across all subjects, localization was significantly better with the CI on than off (p = 0.005); there was no significant difference between subject groups (p = 0.301). When speech and noise were co-located (S0N0), there was no significant difference in SRTs with the CI on or off (p = 0.480); SRTs were significantly better for the UNRES than for the RES group (p = 0.005). When speech and noise were spatially separated (SCINNH), SRTs were significantly better with the CI on than off (p < 0.001). While SRTs were better for the UNRES than for the RES group (p = 0.024), the CI benefit was more than 50% greater for the RES group due to the restoration of high-frequency speech cues. Questionnaire data showed that tinnitus severity was significantly reduced (p = 0.045) and QoL was significantly improved after one year of experience with the CI (p < 0.001). Age at testing was significantly correlated with SRTs for the S0N0 condition; duration of deafness was correlated with SRTs for the SCINNH condition. There were relatively few correlations between behavioral and subjective measures, suggesting that both were valuable when assessing CI benefits for SSD patients. The present data suggest that indications for CI should be expanded to include unilaterally deaf patients who have normal hearing or mild-to-moderate hearing loss in the non-implanted ear.


Subject(s)
Cochlear Implantation , Cochlear Implants , Deafness/rehabilitation , Hearing Loss, Unilateral/rehabilitation , Sound Localization , Speech Perception , Tinnitus/physiopathology , Aged , Comprehension , Cues , Deafness/physiopathology , Female , Hearing Loss, Unilateral/physiopathology , Hearing Tests , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Noise , Quality of Life , Speech , Speech Reception Threshold Test , Surveys and Questionnaires , Treatment Outcome
5.
PLoS One ; 13(9): e0204402, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30248131

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Adults with single sided deafness (SSD) have lost binaural function, which limits sound source localization, speech understanding in noise, and quality of life. For SSD patients, restoration of bilateral auditory input is possible only with a cochlear implant (CI). In this study, cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) and behavioral performance were measured in left-implanted (SSD-CI-L) and right-implanted (SSD-CI-R) patients before and after cochlear implantation. We hypothesized that improvements in behavioral performance would be accompanied by changes in CAEPs after cochlear implantation. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. METHOD: Nine right-handed adult SSD CI patients participated in the study. CAEPs were recorded before cochlear implantation and at 6 and 12 months post-implantation. CAEPs were elicited using speech stimuli (/ba/) delivered in sound field at 70 dBA. Global field power (GFP) latency and amplitude were calculated for P1, N1 and P2 peaks at each test session. CAEP were analyzed at frontocentral (Cz) and temporal (P7, P8, T7 and T8) and mastoid electrodes (M1 and M2) contralateral to the CI ear. Behavioral measures (sentence recognition in noise, with and without spatial cues) were collected at the same test sessions as for CAEPs. Speech performance and CAEPs were also measured in a control group of normal-hearing (NH) subjects. RESULTS: While increased N1 amplitude was observed in the scalp potential maps for GFP and Cz for SSD-CI-L patients after implantation, the changes were not statistically significant. Peak CAEP amplitude at electrodes to contralateral to the CI ear increased after cochlear implantation for all SSD-CI patients, but significant increases were observed only for mastoid sites. Peak latencies for some components at temporal and mastoid sites remained significantly longer than for the NH control group, even after cochlear implantation. For SSD-CI-R patients, P2 peak amplitude for baseline GFP and Cz was significantly lower than for the NH control group. A significant improvement for speech understanding in noise was observed at 12 months post-implantation when speech was presented to the CI ear and noise to the non-implanted ear. CONCLUSION: After cochlear implantation, speech understanding significantly improved when speech and noise were spatially separated. The increased N1 amplitude for SSD-CI-L patients and the increased bilateral activation for all SSD-CI patients may reflect cortical reorganization and restoration of binaural function after one year of experience with the CI. However, because of the limited number of SSD patients, significant changes in cortical activity after cochlear implantation were often difficult to observe.


Subject(s)
Cerebral Cortex/physiopathology , Cochlear Implants , Deafness/physiopathology , Deafness/rehabilitation , Neuronal Plasticity , Speech Perception/physiology , Aged , Cochlear Implantation , Deafness/surgery , Evoked Potentials, Auditory , Female , Functional Laterality , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Neuronal Plasticity/physiology , Phonetics , Postoperative Period , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
6.
Presse Med ; 46(11): 1033-1042, 2017 Nov.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29107467

ABSTRACT

Screening and early treatment of deafness regardless of age is essential. Deafness leads to social isolation, depression, and decreased cognitive function. The diagnosis requires an otoscopy and a confirmation of the type and degree of deafness by audiometry. Sudden deafness and meningitis are neuro-sensorial emergencies. Deafness may be the mode of disclosure of an autoimmune disease or part of the evolutionary profile. Hearing complaints with a normal classical audiogram may be the manifestation of a so-called "hidden" hearing loss and must be explored more carefully.


Subject(s)
Deafness , Adult , Deafness/diagnosis , Deafness/etiology , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...