Sound localization with bilateral bone conduction devices.

PURPOSE: To investigate sound localization in patients bilaterally fitted with bone conduction devices (BCDs). Additionally, clinically applicable methods to improve localization accuracy were explored. METHODS: Fifteen adults with bilaterally fitted percutaneous BCDs were included. At baseline, sound localization, (un)aided pure-tone thresholds, device use, speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ) and York hearing-related quality of life (YHRQL) questionnaire were measured. Settings to optimize sound localizing were added to the BCDs. At 1 month, sound localization was assessed again and localization was practiced with a series of sounds with visual feedback. At 3 months¸ localization performance, device use and questionnaire scores were determined again. RESULTS: At baseline, one patient with congenital hearing loss demonstrated near excellent localization performance and four other patients (three with congenital hearing loss) localized sounds (quite) accurately. Seven patients with acquired hearing loss were able to lateralize sounds, i.e. identify whether sounds were coming from the left or right side, but could not localize sounds accurately. Three patients (one with congenital hearing loss) could not even lateralize sounds correctly. SSQ scores were significantly higher at 3 months. Localization performance, device use and YHRQL scores were not significantly different between visits. CONCLUSION: In this study, the majority of experienced bilateral BCD users could lateralize sounds and one third was able to localize sounds (quite) accurately. The localization performance was robust and stable over time. Although SSQ scores were increased at the last visit, optimizing device settings and a short practice session did not improve sound localization.

A mobile sound localization setup.

In this paper, a mobile sound localization setup is described that can be used to measure a persons' localization performance in a sophisticated way. With this mobile setup, researchers can travel to subjects, and studies are not limited by the willingness of participants to visit the clinic. In the setup, sounds are presented within a partial sphere in both the horizontal (-70° to 70° azimuth) and vertical (-35° to 40° elevation) plane. Participants are asked to indicate the perceived sound origin by pointing with a head-mounted LED. Head movements are recorded and instantly visualized (i.e. online target response plots). Depending on the research question, the setup can be adjusted for more advanced or simplified measurements, making the setup suitable for a wide range of research questions. The rationale for building this mobile setup was to test horizontal sound localization abilities (binaural hearing) and vertical sound localization abilities (monaural hearing) of children and patients who were otherwise not accessible for testing. In this setup loudspeakers are not visible and subjects are asked to indicate the perceived sound direction by a natural head-pointing response towards the perceived location. An advantage of the implemented pointing-method is the playful manner in which children are tested. They are 'shooting' at the perceived sound target location with a head-mounted LED and have fun while performing the test. •We present a mobile sound localization setup suitable for measuring horizontal and vertical sound localization in children and adult patients in the convenience of their own environment.

Improved directional hearing of children with congenital unilateral conductive hearing loss implanted with an active bone-conduction implant or an active middle ear implant.

Different amplification options are available for listeners with congenital unilateral conductive hearing loss (UCHL). For example, bone-conduction devices (BCDs) and middle ear implants. The present study investigated whether intervention with an active BCD, the Bonebridge, or a middle ear implant, the Vibrant Soundbridge (VSB), affected sound-localization performance of listeners with congenital UCHL. Listening with a Bonebridge or VSB might provide access to binaural cues. However, when fitted with the Bonebridge, but not with a VSB, binaural processing might be affected through cross stimulation of the contralateral normal hearing ear, and could interfere with processing of binaural cues. In the present study twenty-three listeners with congenital UCHL were included. To assess processing of binaural cues, we investigated localization abilities of broadband (BB, 0.5-20 kHz) filtered noise presented at varying sound levels. Sound localization abilities were analyzed separately for stimuli presented at the side of the normal-hearing ear, and for stimuli presented at the side of the hearing-impaired ear. Twenty-six normal hearing children and young adults were tested as control listeners. Sound localization abilities were measured under open-loop conditions by recording head-movement responses. We demonstrate improved sound localization abilities of children with congenital UCHL, when listening with a Bonebridge or VSB, predominantly for stimuli presented at the impaired (aided) side. Our results suggest that the improvement is not related to accurate processing of binaural cues. When listening with the Bonebridge, despite cross stimulation of the contralateral cochlea, localization performance was not deteriorated compared to listening with a VSB.

Hearing aid fitting for visual and hearing impaired patients with Usher syndrome type IIa.

OBJECTIVES: Usher syndrome is the leading cause of hereditary deaf-blindness. Most patients with Usher syndrome type IIa start using hearing aids from a young age. A serious complaint refers to interference between sound localisation abilities and adaptive sound processing (compression), as present in today's hearing aids. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of advanced signal processing on binaural hearing, including sound localisation. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: In this prospective study, patients were fitted with hearing aids with a nonlinear (compression) and linear amplification programs. Data logging was used to objectively evaluate the use of either program. Performance was evaluated with a speech-in-noise test, a sound localisation test and two questionnaires focussing on self-reported benefit. RESULTS: Data logging confirmed that the reported use of hearing aids was high. The linear program was used significantly more often (average use: 77%) than the nonlinear program (average use: 17%). The results for speech intelligibility in noise and sound localisation did not show a significant difference between type of amplification. However, the self-reported outcomes showed higher scores on 'ease of communication' and overall benefit, and significant lower scores on disability for the new hearing aids when compared to their previous hearing aids with compression amplification. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with Usher syndrome type IIa prefer a linear amplification over nonlinear amplification when fitted with novel hearing aids. Apart from a significantly higher logged use, no difference in speech in noise and sound localisation was observed between linear and nonlinear amplification with the currently used tests. Further research is needed to evaluate the reasons behind the preference for the linear settings.