PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 2356735

What should be implemented in future cochlear implants?

Abstract

Cochlear-implant performance can be improved by focusing on: 1) psychophysical studies to determine hearing limitations; 2) speech perception to suggest the most effective speech-processing strategies; 3) aural rehabilitation to effectively train patients to use the new electrical stimuli. Basic psychophysical studies have shown only weak correlations with speech perception. Perhaps more speech-like stimuli should be explored in psychophysical tasks. Studies on vowel and consonant recognition suggest enhancing all speech features, but particularly frication and place of articulation should help most patients. Probably the feature that would be the most beneficial to enhance is place of articulation, which is poorly coded even in the best patients. Empirical studies are needed to determine the ways in which these cues can be enhanced. Certain types of auditory training are likely to be beneficial, particularly when the signal is new, incomplete or distorted. However, much more research in aural rehabilitation is needed.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R S Tyler. 1990. What should be implemented in future cochlear implants?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2356735/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Cochlear implantation].

Since the Israeli cochlear implant program was started in June 1989, 74 candidates have been evaluated for implantation. The main causes for hearing loss were meningitis (16 patients), aminoglycoside toxicity (9), congenital (6), viral (e.g. mumps) (6), and middle ear infection. Candidates were rejected mainly due to psychosocial factors (40%) and audiological parameters (30%). 16 postlingual deaf were implanted. In 7 of them (43.7%) the results were excellent, in 4 (25.0%) good, in 3 (18.7%) fair; 1 case is currently in a training program and 1 is a failure. There were 2 major complications: facial nerve palsy which necessitated surgical decompression, and insertion of the electrodes into the hypotympanic air cells, corrected by reoperation.

Cochlear Implants

Performance over time with a nucleus or Ineraid cochlear implant.

This investigation determined whether the audiological performance of cochlear implant users varied with experience. Thirteen Nucleus and 14 Ineraid subjects were evaluated at 1, 9, and 18 mo after cochlear implant connection. Ten Nucleus and five Ineraid subjects were tested at 30 mo. On average, the ability of the subjects to recognize words and phonemes in an audition-only condition improved during the first 9 mo, as did their ability to recognize spondees in noise. The phoneme scores continued to improve during the next 9 mo. Environmental sound recognition improved gradually; significant improvement from the 1 mo scores was not noted until 18 mo. About half of the subjects who demonstrated poor word recognition at 1 mo showed significantly improved percent word correct scores by 18 mo. The Nucleus and Ineraid subjects did not differ in their patterns of change over time. An information transmission analysis performed on the subjects' consonant confusion matrices showed relatively little change for the nasality and place features during the first 18 mo, and relatively large change for the voice, duration, and frication features. Most improvement in the feature scores occurred during the first 9 mo.

Cochlear Implants