Head Shadow Research Articles

Spatial Release From Informational and Energetic Masking in Bimodal and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users.

Purpose Spatially separating speech and background noise improves speech understanding in normal-hearing listeners, an effect referred to as spatial release from masking (SRM). In cochlear implant (CI) users, SRM has often been demonstrated using asymmetric noise configurations, which maximize benefit from head shadow and the potential availability of binaural cues. In contrast, SRM in symmetrical configurations has been minimal to absent in CI users. We examined the interaction between two types of maskers (informational and energetic) and SRM in bimodal and bilateral CI users. We hypothesized that SRM would be absent or "negative" using symmetrically separated noise maskers. Second, we hypothesized that bimodal listeners would exhibit greater release from informational masking due to access to acoustic information in the non-CI ear. Method Participants included 10 bimodal and 10 bilateral CI users. Speech understanding in noise was tested in 24 conditions: 3 spatial configurations (S0N0, S0N45&315, S0N90&270) × 2 masker types (speech, signal-correlated noise) × 2 listening configurations (best-aided, CI-alone) × 2 talker gender conditions (different-gender, same-gender). Results In support of our first hypothesis, both groups exhibited negative SRM with increasing spatial separation. In opposition to our second hypothesis, both groups exhibited similar magnitudes of release from informational masking. The magnitude of release was greater for bimodal listeners, though this difference failed to reach statistical significance. Conclusions Both bimodal and bilateral CI recipients exhibited negative SRM. This finding is consistent with CI signal processing limitations, the audiologic factors associated with SRM, and known effects of behind-the-ear microphone technology. Though release from informational masking was not significantly different across groups, the magnitude of release was greater for bimodal listeners. This suggests that bimodal listeners may be at least marginally more susceptible to informational masking than bilateral CI users, though further research is warranted.

Bilateral Cochlear Implants or Bimodal Hearing for Children with Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss

This review describes speech perception and language outcomes for children using bimodal hearing (cochlear implant (CI) plus contralateral hearing aid) as compared to children with bilateral CIs and contrasts said findings with the adult literature. There is a lack of clinical evidence driving recommendations for bimodal versus bilateral CI candidacy and as such, clinicians are often unsure about when to recommend a second CI for children with residual acoustic hearing. Thus the goal of this review is to identify scientific information that may influence clinical decision making for pediatric CI candidates with residual acoustic hearing. Bilateral CIs are considered standard of care for children with bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss. For children with aidable acoustic hearing-even in just the low frequencies-an early period of bimodal stimulation has been associated with significantly better speech perception, vocabulary, and language development. HA audibility, however, is generally poorer than that offered by a CI resulting in interaural asymmetry in speech perception, head shadow, as well as brainstem and cortical activity and development. Thus there is a need to optimize "two-eared" hearing while maximizing a child's potential with respect to hearing, speech, and language while ensuring that we limit asymmetrically driven auditory neuroplasticity. A recent large study of bimodal and bilateral CI users suggested that a period of bimodal stimulation was only beneficial for children with a better-ear pure tone average (PTA) ≤ 73 dB HL. This 73-dB-HL cutoff applied even to children who ultimately received bilateral CIs. Though we do not yet have definitive guidelines for determining bimodal versus bilateral CI candidacy, there is increasing evidence that 1) bilateral CIs yield superior outcomes for children with bilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss and, 2) an early period of bimodal stimulation is beneficial for speech perception and language development, but only for children with better-ear PTA ≤ 73 dB HL. For children with residual acoustic hearing, even in just the low-frequency range, rapid sequential bilateral cochlear implantation following a trial period with bimodal stimulation will yield best outcomes for auditory, language, and academic development. Of course, there is also an increasing prevalence of cochlear implantation with acoustic hearing preservation allowing for combined electric and acoustic stimulation even following bilateral implantation.

Comparison of Speech Recognition and Localization Ability in Single-sided Deaf Patients Implanted With Different Cochlear Implant Electrode Array Designs.

Choice of electrode array (EA) design and differences in outcome are major concerns both to patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) and to surgeons before cochlear implant (CI) surgery. The present work investigates the effects of EA design on 1) insertion depths, and 2) audiological outcomes of SSD CI recipients. Retrospective study. Tertiary academic center. Forty patients with acquired SSD matched according to duration of deafness MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:: Fourteen CI recipients were implanted with a perimodiolar electrode (cochlear perimodiolar [CPM]), 12 with a shorter lateral wall electrode (cochlear lateral wall [CLW]), and 14 with a longer lateral wall electrode array (medEl lateral wall [MLW]). Postoperative rotational tomography was evaluated to determine cochlear size and EA angle of insertion depth (AID). Binaural speech comprehension in noise (in three configuration presentations) and localization ability were assessed 12 months postoperatively with CI. AID was significantly deeper in MLW (mean 527.94 degrees) compared with the CPM (mean 366.35 degrees) and CLW groups (mean 367.01 degrees). No significant difference in AID was seen between the CPM and CLW groups (difference 0.66 degrees). Cochlear sizes revealed no significant differences between any groups. All three groups showed significant improvement in head shadow effect (difference on average CPM: 6.3 dB SPL, CLW 5 dB SPL, and MLW 4.05 dB SPL) and localization ability at 12 months postoperatively (difference on average CPM: 19.72 degrees, CLW: 24 degrees, and MLW: 12.9 degrees). No significant difference in the extent of audiological benefit was observed between any groups. No effect on binaural benefit was apparent from the selection of the three EA designs in SSD CI recipients. Further studies focusing on subjective results, sound quality, and music perception depending on EA design in SSD CI recipients are needed.

Speech Understanding With Bimodal Stimulation Is Determined by Monaural Signal to Noise Ratios: No Binaural Cue Processing Involved.

To investigate the mechanisms behind binaural and spatial effects in speech understanding for bimodal cochlear implant listeners. In particular, to test our hypothesis that their speech understanding can be characterized by means of monaural signal to noise ratios, rather than complex binaural cue processing such as binaural unmasking. We applied a semantic framework to characterize binaural and spatial effects in speech understanding on an extensive selection of the literature on bimodal listeners. In addition, we performed two experiments in which we measured speech understanding in different masker types (1) using head-related transfer functions, and (2) while adapting the broadband signal to noise ratios in both ears independently. We simulated bimodal hearing with a vocoder in one ear (the cochlear implant side) and a low-pass filter in the other ear (the hearing aid side). By design, the cochlear implant side was the main contributor to speech understanding in our simulation. We found that spatial release from masking can be explained as a simple trade-off between a monaural change in signal to noise at the cochlear implant side (quantified as the head shadow effect) and an opposite change in signal to noise at the hearing aid side (quantified as a change in bimodal benefit). In simulated bimodal listeners, we found that for every 1 dB increase in signal to noise ratio at the hearing aid side, the bimodal benefit improved by approximately 0.4 dB in signal to noise ratio. Although complex binaural cue processing is often implicated when discussing speech intelligibility in adverse listening conditions, performance can simply be explained based on monaural signal to noise ratios for bimodal listeners.

Improved binaural speech reception thresholds through small symmetrical separation of speech and noise.

Speech perception in noise is challenging and is improved by binaural hearing. Since signal processing of assistive hearing devices often modifies or masks the peripheral binaural head-shadow or better-ear effects, central binaural processing should be measured separately. In a prospective study, 10 listeners with normal hearing were tested with the German matrix sentence test in a set-up with two loudspeakers located at opposite angles in the horizontal plane with respect to S0N0. The speech reception threshold (SRT) was investigated depending on the separation angle between speech and noise. The lowest (best) SRT was obtained for a separation of target and interfering source from S0N0 at an angle of about S±60°N∓60°. The derived normative curve was comparable to SRTs predicted by the binaural-speech-intelligibility-model. The systematic separation of signal and noise showed a significant improvement in speech intelligibility for normal-hearing people even for small separation angles. This experimental setting was verified. This study aimed to assess the effect of small sound source separation on binaural hearing and speech perception.

Rerouting Hearing Aid Systems for Overcoming Simulated Unilateral Hearing in Dynamic Listening Situations.

Unilateral hearing loss increases the risk of academic and behavioral challenges for school-aged children. Previous research suggests that remote microphone (RM) systems offer the most consistent benefits for children with unilateral hearing loss in classroom environments relative to other nonsurgical interventions. However, generalizability of previous laboratory work is limited because of the specific listening situations evaluated, which often included speech and noise signals originating from the side. In addition, early studies focused on speech recognition tasks requiring limited cognitive engagement. However, those laboratory conditions do not reflect characteristics of contemporary classrooms, which are cognitively demanding and typically include multiple talkers of interest in relatively diffuse background noise. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential effects of rerouting amplification systems, specifically a RM system and a contralateral routing of signal (CROS) system, on speech recognition and comprehension of school-age children in a laboratory environment designed to emulate the dynamic characteristics of contemporary classrooms. It was expected that listeners would benefit from the CROS system when the head shadow limits audibility (e.g., monaural indirect listening). It was also expected that listeners would benefit from the RM system only when the RM was near the talker of interest. Twenty-one children (10 to 14 years, M = 11.86) with normal hearing participated in laboratory tests of speech recognition and comprehension. Unilateral hearing loss was simulated by presenting speech-shaped masking noise to one ear via an insert earphone. Speech stimuli were presented from 1 of 4 loudspeakers located at either 0°, +45°, -90°, and -135° or 0°, -45°, +90°, and +135°. Cafeteria noise was presented from separate loudspeakers surrounding the listener. Participants repeated sentences (sentence recognition) and also answered questions after listening to an unfamiliar story (comprehension). They were tested unaided, with a RM system (microphone near the front loudspeaker), and with a CROS system (ear-level microphone on the ear with simulated hearing loss). Relative to unaided listening, both rerouting systems reduced sentence recognition performance for most signals originating near the ear with normal hearing (monaural direct loudspeakers). Only the RM system improved speech recognition for midline signals, which were near the RM. Only the CROS system significantly improved speech recognition for signals originating near the ear with simulated hearing loss (monaural indirect loudspeakers). Although the benefits were generally small (approximately 6.5 percentage points), the CROS system also improved comprehension scores, which reflect overall listening across all four loudspeakers. Conversely, the RM system did not improve comprehension scores relative to unaided listening. Benefits of the CROS system in this study were small, specific to situations where speech is directed toward the ear with hearing loss, and relative only to a RM system utilizing one microphone. Although future study is warranted to evaluate the generalizability of the findings, the data demonstrate both CROS and RM systems are nonsurgical interventions that have the potential to improve speech recognition and comprehension for children with limited useable unilateral hearing in dynamic, noisy classroom situations.

Progress in the treatment of single-sided deafness with artificial hearing aids

Single-sided deafness（SSD） is a common disease. Compared with normal hearing people, unilateral deaf patients often suffer from the loss of sound source localization ability and speech recognition in complex environments due to the lack of binaural summation effect, squelch effect, spatial demasking effect, and the presence of head shadow effect. Patients' quality of life and professional activities are always poor. Therefore, this article will review the related definitions of SSD, epidemiology, hazards, and artificial hearing aids in the application of SSD patients.

Aplicación de la tecnología de enrutamiento inalámbrico contralateral de la señal (CROS) en usuarios de implante coclear unilateral

IntroductionSingle cochlear implantation usually provides substantial speech intelligibility benefits but bilaterally deaf, unilaterally implanted subjects will continue to experience limitations due to the head shadow effect, like single-sided deaf individuals. In the treatment of individuals with single-sided deafness one option is contralateral routing of signal (CROS) devices, which constitute a non-surgical intervention of the second ear in unilaterally implanted individuals. MethodTwelve experienced adult cochlear implant users with Naída Q70 processor and the CROS device used in combination participated in the study. For the study 3 conditions were provided: cochlear implant only, omnidirectional microphone mode (CROS deactivated); cochlear implant plus CROS activated, omnidirectional microphone mode and cochlear implant plus CROS activated, UltraZoom mode. Speech reception thresholds were determined in quiet and noise. Subjective feedback regarding the practical usability of the CROS device and the perceived benefit were collected. ResultsThere was a 27.6% improvement in speech understanding in quiet and 32.5% improvement in noise when CROS device was activated. Using advanced directional microphones, a statistically significant benefit of 35% was obtained. The responses to the questionnaires revealed that the subjects perceived benefit in their everyday lives when using the CROS device with their cochlear implants. ConclusionThe investigated CROS device used by unilateral CI recipients in cases where bilateral implantation is not an option provides both subjective and objective speech recognition benefit when the signal is directed to the CROS device. Unfavourable conditions where speech is presented from the cochlear implant side and noise from the CROS side or diffusely were not included in this evaluation since the CROS device adds additional noise and performance is expected to decrease as has previously been shown.

Evaluating the Decision for Cochlear Implantation in Individuals With Single-Sided Deafness (SSD); Implementing the SSD Consensus Protocol Into Clinical Routine.

To implement a unified testing framework into clinical routine that can be used by adults with single-sided deafness (SSD) to assess alternative treatment options before cochlear implantation. Retrospective data analysis. Tertiary referral center with a large CI program. Thirty four participants underwent the new implemented testing procedure, including a test trial with contralateral routing of the signal (CROS) hearing aids and bone conduction devices (BCD) on a headband, before deciding whether to proceed with cochlear implantation. A test battery was used to assess speech in noise, binaural effects (head shadow, squelch, summation, spatial release from masking), sound localization, and quality of life. For participants that chose a CI, the same test battery was repeated during the 6 and 12 months follow-up appointments. Of the 34 participants involved in the study, 11 were implanted with a CI and finished their 12 month evaluation. Sixteen participants decided to stop after the CROS/BCD trial. In the CI-recipient group, a significant head shadow effect of 5.1 to 7.1 dB was achieved with the CI. Recipients in this group received only a limited benefit with either CROS or BCD before implantation. In the non-CI-recipient group, a significant difference between the CROS and BCD, in favor for the CROS device, was found calculating the head shadow and squelch effect. Localization abilities with the CI improved significantly in the CI-recipient group, even between the 6- and 12-month follow-up appointments. In the non-CI-recipient group, localization was significantly better with the BCD during the trial period. Higher scores were obtained from the speech and spatial categories of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing (SSQ) questionnaire with the CI. No subjective difference could be determined in the non-CI-recipient group. Implementing the unified testing framework into a clinical routine was challenging but provided helpful insight into the best treatment option for each individual.

Long-term audiologic outcomes after cochlear implantation for single-sided deafness.

To evaluate the long-term audiometric outcomes, sound localization abilities, binaural benefits, and tinnitus assessment of subjects with cochlear implant (CI) after a diagnosis of unilateral severe-to-profound hearing loss. The study group consisted of 60 (mean age 52 years, range 19-84) subjects with profound hearing loss in one ear and normal to near-normal hearing in the other ear who underwent CI. Data analysis included pre- and postoperative Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant (CNC) Word scores, AzBio Sentence scores, pure tone thresholds, sound localization, and Iowa Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire scores. Preoperative average duration of deafness was 3.69 years (standard deviation 4.31), with an average follow-up time of 37.9 months (range 1-87). CNC and AzBio scores significantly improved (both P < 0.001) postoperatively among the entire cohort, and there was much heterogeneity in outcomes with respect to deafness etiology subgroup analysis. Sound localization abilities tended to improve longitudinally in the entire cohort. Binaural benefits using an adaptive Hearing in Noise Test test showed a significant (P < 0.001) improvement with head shadow effect. Utilizing the Iowa Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire, there was significant improvement in social, physical, and emotional well-being (P = 0.011), along with hearing abilities (P = 0.001). This case series is the largest cohort of CI SSD subjects to date and systematically analyzes their functional outcomes. Subjects have meaningful improvement in word understanding, and sound localization tends to gradually improve over time. Binaural benefit analysis showed significant improvement with head shadow effect, which likely provides ease of listening. 4 Laryngoscope, 130:1805-1811, 2020.

Redundant Information Is Sometimes More Beneficial Than Spatial Information to Understand Speech in Noise.

To establish a framework to unambiguously define and relate the different spatial effects in speech understanding: head shadow, redundancy, squelch, spatial release from masking (SRM), and so on. Next, to investigate the contribution of interaural time and level differences to these spatial effects in speech understanding and how this is influenced by the type of masking noise. In our framework, SRM is uniquely characterized as a linear combination of head shadow, binaural redundancy, and binaural squelch. The latter two terms are combined into one binaural term, which we define as binaural contrast: a benefit of interaural differences. In this way, SRM is a simple sum of a monaural and a binaural term. We used the framework to quantify these spatial effects in 10 listeners with normal hearing. The participants performed speech intelligibility tasks in different spatial setups. We used head-related transfer functions to manipulate the presence of interaural time and level differences. We used three spectrally matched masker types: stationary speech-weighted noise, a competing talker, and speech-weighted noise that was modulated with the broadband temporal envelope of the competing talker. We found that (1) binaural contrast was increased by interaural time differences, but reduced by interaural level differences, irrespective of masker type, and (2) large redundancy (the benefit of having identical information in two ears) could reduce binaural contrast and thus also reduce SRM. Our framework yielded new insights in binaural processing in speech intelligibility. First, interaural level differences disturb speech intelligibility in realistic listening conditions. Therefore, to optimize speech intelligibility in hearing aids, it is more beneficial to improve monaural signal-to-noise ratios rather than to preserve interaural level differences. Second, although redundancy is mostly ignored when considering spatial hearing, it might explain reduced SRM in some cases.

The Effect of Nonlinear Amplitude Growth on the Speech Perception Benefits Provided by a Single-Sided Vocoder.

Purpose For listeners with single-sided deafness, a cochlear implant (CI) can improve speech understanding by giving the listener access to the ear with the better target-to-masker ratio (TMR; head shadow) or by providing interaural difference cues to facilitate the perceptual separation of concurrent talkers (squelch). CI simulations presented to listeners with normal hearing examined how these benefits could be affected by interaural differences in loudness growth in a speech-on-speech masking task. Method Experiment 1 examined a target-masker spatial configuration where the vocoded ear had a poorer TMR than the nonvocoded ear. Experiment 2 examined the reverse configuration. Generic head-related transfer functions simulated free-field listening. Compression or expansion was applied independently to each vocoder channel (power-law exponents: 0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, or 2). Results Compression reduced the benefit provided by the vocoder ear in both experiments. There was some evidence that expansion increased squelch in Experiment 1 but reduced the benefit in Experiment 2 where the vocoder ear provided a combination of head-shadow and squelch benefits. Conclusions The effects of compression and expansion are interpreted in terms of envelope distortion and changes in the vocoded-ear TMR (for head shadow) or changes in perceived target-masker spatial separation (for squelch). The compression parameter is a candidate for clinical optimization to improve single-sided deafness CI outcomes.

Disentangling the contribution of head shadow, loudness summation, and binaural unmasking to spatial release from masking in children

Segregating target speech from noise is crucial for children’s ability to communicate effectively in everyday environments. Past research clearly shows that when target sources are spatially separated from maskers, compared with target-masker being co-located, children as young as 2–3 years old demonstrate improved speech understanding. This effect is known as spatial release from masking (SRM). Generally, studies have used free-field or dichotic listening; hence, the contributions of head shadow, loudness summation, and binaural unmasking to SRM are unknown in children. This study aimed to quantify these factors in virtual auditory space. By varying the target-masker spatial configurations (co-located versus separated) and ear conditions (monaural versus binaural), speech understanding benefit was defined as improvement in the signal-to-noise ratio to achieve an accuracy of 50%. Results from 29 children with normal hearing (6–15 years old) show that head shadow cues are dominant in providing benefit, followed by binaural unmasking. Loudness summation, through increased intensity by listening with both ears, provided little to no benefit. No age effects were found. Results also suggest a re-balancing between cues depending on listening strategies adopted by children. For example, children who relied more on binaural unmasking received less benefit for speech understanding from head shadow. [Work supported by NIH-NIDCD.]

Evaluation of a wireless contralateral routing of signal (CROS) device with the Advanced Bionics Naída CI Q90 sound processor

Objectives: Cochlear implants (CIs) usually provide severe to profoundly deaf recipients with speech intelligibility in quiet. In difficult listening situations such as background noise however, communication often remains challenging. For unilateral CI recipients with a bilateral hearing loss, speech intelligibility for speech sources on the non-implanted side is further impaired by the head-shadow effect. One possibility to overcome this impairment is the use of Contralateral Routing of Signal (CROS) systems, which capture sounds from the non-implanted side and (wirelessly) transmit them to the implant processor, therefore increasing audibility. Such a CROS system was evaluated in this study.Methods: Speech intelligibility in noise was measured in several spatial listening setups using the Oldenburg matrix sentence test in ten cochlear implant users. Performance was compared between listening with the CI alone and listening with the CI in combination with a wireless CROS device. Following an extended trial phase, subjective feedback regarding the device benefit in everyday life was collected via the Bern Benefit in Single Sided Deafness (BBSS) questionnaire.Results: The addition of the wireless CROS device significantly improved speech intelligibility by 7.2 dB (median) in spatial noise. Using advanced directional microphones, a statistically significant benefit of 4.4 dB (median) could be shown in a diffuse noise field. Responses to the BBSS questionnaire revealed that subjects perceived benefit in their everyday lives when using the CROS device with their CI.Conclusion: The investigated CROS system presents a valuable addition to a unilateral CI in cases where bilateral implantation is not an option.

Binaural hearing advantages for children with bimodal fitting

ObjectivesBimodal fitting (BF) allows children with cochlear implant to benefit from binaural hearing advantages. Three major binaural hearing advantages, which enhance hearing function of people with normal hearing, are head shadow effect (HSE), binaural squelch effect (BSQ) and binaural summation effect (BSU). This study in pediatric patients attempting to measure the auditory benefits of bimodal stimulation in children with long-standing use of a cochlear implant (CI), and residual hearing on the contralateral side. MethodsThis cross-sectional study investigated binaural advantages in 24 children of 8–12 years who had undergone cochlear implantation in a cochlear implant center in Tehran and continuously used BF. Improved score of speech perception in noise (SPiN) under BF condition, as compared to the application of cochlear implant alone, was a binaural advantage found in this study. Each binaural advantage was measured by obtaining the SPiN score under different listening and noise conditions, using relevant formulas. The measured value of each advantage reflects the improved score of SPiN, caused by that certain advantage. ResultsIn this study, improved mean SPiN score caused by the HSE, BSQ and BSU was, respectively, 3.13, 1.42 and 2.04 dB, indicating greater binaural advantages and hence improved SPiN, under BF condition in comparison with cochlear implant alone. ConclusionChildren with unilateral cochlear implant and measurable residual hearing in non-implanted ear can benefit from binaural advantages and better SPiN when hearing aid is used in the unaided ear.

Cochlear Implantation for Single-Sided Deafness: A New Treatment Paradigm.

Unilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL), also known as single sided deafness (SSD), is a problem that affects both children and adults, and can have severe and detrimental effects on multiple aspects of life including music appreciation, speech understanding in noise, speech and language acquisition, performance in the classroom and/or the workplace, and quality of life. Additionally, the loss of binaural hearing in SSD patients affects those processes that rely on two functional ears including sound localization, binaural squelch and summation, and the head shadow effect. Over the last decade, there has been increasing interest in cochlear implantation for SSD to restore binaural hearing. Early data are promising that cochlear implantation for SSD can help to restore binaural functionality, improve quality of life, and may faciliate reversal of neuroplasticity related to auditory deprivation in the pediatric population. Additionally, this new patient population has allowed researchers the opportunity to investigate the age-old question "what does a cochlear implant (CI) sound like?."

Binaural advantages in using a cochlear implant for adults with profound unilateral hearing loss

Background: Recent studies of cochlear implants (CIs) in profound unilateral hearing loss (UHL) patients have demonstrated a restoration of some binaural hearing.Aims/Objectives: The objective was to evaluate three possible advantages of binaural hearing in CIs adult users with UHL including single-side deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL) subgroups.Material and methods: A prospective study was conducted that included 70 sequentially implanted patients. Subgroups of these subjects included 64 with a postlingual onset of a profound hearing loss on the implanted side and 6 with a prelingual onset of that loss. Three binaural effects – redundancy, head shadow, and squelch – were evaluated.Results: Significant differences between the ‘CI on’ and ‘CI off’ conditions were found for all three binaural effects for the study group as a whole and for the postlingual subgroup. However, results for the subjects in the prelingual subgroup did not demonstrate any of the binaural advantages.Conclusion and significance: Patients with a postlingual onset of a profound hearing loss in one ear and normal hearing or only a moderate loss in the other ear are able to make the effective use of a CI in the profound-loss ear in conjunction with acoustic stimulation of the other ear.

The MAndarin spoken word-Picture IDentification test in noise-Adaptive (MAPID-A) measures subtle speech-recognition-in-noise changes and spatial release from masking in very young children.

BackgroundSpatial release of masking (SRM) is a measure of an individual’s ability to perform speech-noise segregation, which is usually quantified by the extent of improvement of the individual’s speech recognition performance when the noise is switched from a spatially co-located position (e.g., speech and noise both presented from the front) to a spatially separated position (e.g., speech presented from the front and noise presented from the right side) with reference to the target speech. SRM is a combined measure of head shadow and binaural unmasking benefits. SRM has only been investigated in young children at group level but not at individual participant level in the international literature due to the lack of reliable speech recognition test materials able to detect subtle statistically significant within-participant changes in speech-recognition-in-noise thresholds.MethodThe performance to signal-to-noise ratio (P-SNR) functions of twenty-four disyllabic words were obtained from 40 native Mandarin-speaking children aged 3.6–6.2 years with reported normal speech, language and hearing. The test items’ difficulty levels were homogenized by adjusting the speech intensity level of each item so that the adjusted signal-to-noise ratio for 50% correct score (SNR-50%) point of each item would overlap at the mean SNR-50% point of all test items. In the MAPID-A, the homogenized test items were randomly presented in an adaptive testing procedure at a fixed noise intensity level, but the speech intensity level of the upcoming test item varied in 2-dB SNR steps depending on the recognition result of the previous test item. The SNR reversal point is marked by a change from a decrease to an increase in the SNR or vice versa. Two successive SNR reversal points marked the boundaries of an excursion. The mid-points from 12 excursions (in dB SNR) were averaged to produce the adaptive SNR-50% measure (aSNR-50%).ResultsThe aSNR-50% results were obtained from another 12 children aged 4.8–5.3 years with reported normal speech, language and hearing. The average 99% confidence interval (CI) of all participants’ mean aSNR-50% values was ±1.61 dB SNR; therefore, 3.22 dB SNR was the average critical difference required to confirm a significant difference in the scores obtained from the same participant between two test conditions. Statistically significant within-participant SRM was identified in 95% of the participants; in other words, aSNR-50% obtained from the spatially separated condition outperformed aSNR-50% obtained from the spatially co-located condition. The adaptive testing procedure was highly reliable, with an within-participant test-retest reliability of 90.6%. and significantly limited testing time to an average of 4.2 min. This research study has fulfilled its aim on detecting subtle within-participant SRM in very young children starting from 4 years of age with a reliable statistical procedure. MAPID-A offers a reliable and efficient clinical tool to investigate speech-recognition-in-noise and SRM performances in young Mandarin-speaking children.ConclusionsThe narrow CIs, high test-retest reliability, and short testing time has proven that the MAPID-A is a promising sensitive, reliable and time-efficient clinical tool to detect subtle within-participant speech-recognition-in-noise changes in children as young as 4–5 years. The MAPID-A offers a clinical tool to behaviorally track young children’s development in speech-recognition-in-noise and SRM, and to potentially review the development of the auditory neural pathway and the cerebral dominance for speech-recognition-in-noise in young children.

Efficient Representation of Head-Related Transfer Functions With Combination of Spherical Harmonics and Spherical Wavelets

Recently, a modeling method for head-related transfer functions (HRTFs) in the spatial domain is proposed based on spherical wavelets. Because spherical wavelets are local functions on the sphere, HRTF local features can be efficiently represented by using a small number of analysis functions. This sparse representation method enables to control the spatial resolutions of a desired local region on the sphere with the expansion coefficients. Meanwhile, the conventional HRTF spatial variations models based on spherical harmonic decomposition, which is able to represent the HRTF coarse structure well with lower order models. In this paper, a modeling method of the HRTF spatial features is proposed by combining the spherical harmonics and spherical wavelets, which represents the coarse structure and spatial detail of the HRTFs, respectively. The numerical experiment results show that the proposed joint modeling method has smaller approximation errors within the frequency range of 7 kHz compared with 15 orders spherical harmonics modeling when the same number of parameters is used for representing the HRTF magnitude in all directions. In the comparisons with higher orders spherical harmonics modeling, the proposed joint modeling method yields smaller approximation errors within the frequency range of 20 kHz. Furthermore, the proposed joint modeling method is expected to help interpret the spatial cues in which the low orders spherical harmonic coefficients corresponds to head shadow effects while the spherical wavelet coefficients corresponding to the residual finer details may be interpreted as pinna effects. A tool for the HRTF spatial feature extraction is provided in this paper.

A functionally relevant measure of spatial release from masking in children with bilateral cochlear implants

The ability to segregate speech from noise is an important skill for children as they navigate everyday noisy environments. Spatial release from masking (SRM) is a measure of benefit observed when target speech is co-located versus spatially separated from maskers. SRM is typically studied with target-maskers in front versus maskers displaced to fixed angles towards the side. Children fitted with bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) typically show smaller SRM than children with normal hearing (NH), even for target-masker angular separation of 90°, and when monaural head shadow cues exist. Here, we used an open-set corpus that has high informational masking and better mimics realistic listening situations for children. First, SRM was measured by adapting target-masker separation, and quantified as the minimal angular separation needed to achieve 20% improvement in target intelligibility. Second, SRM was measured for target-masker separation of 180°. Preliminary results suggested that, in the BiCI group, all children achieved 20% SRM with a target-masker angular separation smaller than 180°. With the full 180° target-masker separation, children in the BiCI group achieved a much larger SRM (6–8 dB) than previously reported while NH children’s SRM was larger. Acoustic cues available through CI processors will be discussed. [Work funded by NIH-NIDCD.]