Abstract

Several studies have demonstrated the advantages of the bilateral vs. unilateral cochlear implantation in listeners with bilateral severe to profound hearing loss. However, it remains unclear to what extent bilaterally implanted listeners have access to binaural cues, e.g., accurate processing of interaural timing differences (ITDs) for low-frequency sounds (<1.5 kHz) and interaural level differences (ILDs) for high frequencies (>3 kHz). We tested 25 adult listeners, bilaterally implanted with MED-EL cochlear implant (CI) devices, with and without fine-structure (FS) temporal processing as encoding strategy in the low-frequency channels. In order to assess whether the ability to process binaural cues was affected by fine-structure processing, we performed psychophysical ILD and ITD sensitivity measurements and free-field sound localization experiments. We compared the results of the bilaterally implanted listeners with different numbers of FS channels. All CI listeners demonstrated good sensitivity to ILDs, but relatively poor to ITD cues. Although there was a large variability in performance, some bilateral CI users showed remarkably good localization skills. The FS coding strategy for bilateral CI hearing did not improve fine-structure ITD processing for spatial hearing on a group level. However, some CI listeners were able to exploit weakly informative temporal cues to improve their low-frequency spatial perception.

Highlights

  • The research performed in bilateral cochlear implant (CI) listeners clearly showed that they outperform users with a unilateral CI

  • As shown in the presented study, many bilateral CI users have a remarkably good localization performance, which is mainly attributed to adequate interaural level differences (ILDs) processing

  • We argue that our data suggest that CI users may learn to successfully integrate even rudimentary binaural information

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

The research performed in bilateral cochlear implant (CI) listeners clearly showed that they outperform users with a unilateral CI. To study the effect of FSP, we grouped the patients according to the number of bilateral fine-structure channels: “FS4” refers to listeners with four (the maximum number) FS channels on both sides (n = 12); “FS2” to two FS channels on either side (n = 8); and “no-FSP” indicates either no FS channel at all or a non-matched low number (e.g., 0 and 1 on the right and left sides, respectively, n = 5). The latter group was considered as a control group within the CI users. Listeners had no visual and motor disorders and were naive about the purpose of the experiments

METHODS
DISCUSSION
Findings
ETHICS STATEMENT
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call