Objective measure of binaural processing: acoustic change complex in response to interaural phase differences

Abstract

Combining cochlear implants with binaural acoustic hearing via preserved hearing in the implanted ear(s) if commonly referred to as combined electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS). EAS fittings can provide patients with significant benefit for speech recognition in complex noise, perceived listening difficulty, and horizontal-plane localization as compared to traditional bimodal hearing conditions with contralateral and monaural acoustic hearing. However, EAS benefit varies across patients and the degree of benefit is not reliably related to the underlying audiogram. Previous research has indicated that EAS benefit for speech recognition in complex listening scenarios and localization is significantly correlated with the patients’ binaural cue sensitivity, namely interaural time differences (ITD). In the context of pure tones, interaural phase differences (IPD) and ITD can be understood as two perspectives on the same phenomenon. Through simple mathematical conversion, one can be transformed into the other, illustrating their inherent interrelation for spatial hearing abilities. However, assessing binaural cue sensitivity is not part of a clinical assessment battery as psychophysical tasks are time consuming, require training to achieve performance asymptote, and specialized programming and software all of which render this clinically unfeasible. In this study, we investigated the possibility of using an objective measure of binaural cue sensitivity by the acoustic change complex (ACC) via imposition of an IPD of varying degrees at stimulus midpoint. Ten adult listeners with normal hearing were assessed on tasks of behavioral and objective binaural cue sensitivity for carrier frequencies of 250 and 1000 Hz. Results suggest that 1) ACC amplitude increases with IPD; 2) ACC-based IPD sensitivity for 250 Hz is significantly correlated with behavioral ITD sensitivity; 3) Participants were more sensitive to IPDs at 250 Hz as compared to 1000 Hz. Thus, this objective measure of IPD sensitivity may hold clinical application for pre- and post-operative assessment for individuals meeting candidacy indications for cochlear implantation with low-frequency acoustic hearing preservation as this relatively quick and objective measure may provide clinicians with information identifying patients most likely to derive benefit from EAS technology.