• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Otology and neurotology: official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology >Comparison of continuous interleaved sampling and simultaneous analog stimulation speech processing strategies in newly implanted adults with a Clarion 1.2 cochlear implant.
【24h】

Comparison of continuous interleaved sampling and simultaneous analog stimulation speech processing strategies in newly implanted adults with a Clarion 1.2 cochlear implant.

机译：在使用Clarion 1.2人工耳蜗的新植入成人中，连续交错采样和同时模拟刺激语音处理策略的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

OBJECTIVE: This study consisted of a within-subjects comparison of speech recognition and patient preference when subjects used two different cochlear implant speech processing strategies with a Clarion 1.2 (enhanced bipolar) device: Simultaneous Analog Stimulation (SAS), and Continuous Interleaved Sampling (CIS). These two strategies used two different electrode configurations: the SAS strategy used bipolar stimulation, whereas the CIS strategy used monopolar stimulation. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter study that used a within-subjects balanced crossover design. Experience with the two strategies was replicated in each subject using an ABAB design. Order of strategy use was balanced across all subjects. SETTING: The study was carried out at several cochlear implant centers affiliated with tertiary medical centers. PATIENTS: Subjects consisted of 25 postlingually deafened adults who received a Clarion cochlear implant. INTERVENTIONS: Total involvement by each subject was 14 weeks. Speech perception testing and sound quality assessments were performed after use with each strategy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures include speech perception data and patient responses to questionnaires regarding speech and sound quality. RESULTS: Analyses revealed that performance did not differ significantly by the strategy encountered first as relative to the strategy encountered second and that the order in which a strategy was used did not appear to affect subjects' eventual preference for a particular strategy. Although speech recognition scores tended to be higher for CIS for most of the test measures at most of the test intervals, the analysis of variance to evaluate differences in strategy did not reveal a significant effect of strategy. Further analysis of scores obtained at the replication interval, however, revealed that scores obtained with CIS were significantly higher than scores obtained with SAS on the Hearing in Noise Test sentences in quiet and noise. In addition, significantly more patients indicated a final preference for the CIS strategy than for the SAS strategy. Importantly, both the analysis evaluating order and the analysis evaluating strategy revealed significant effects of evaluation period, indicating that time/experience with the implant had a significant effect on scores for each strategy, regardless of the order in which it was used (first or second). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that important learning occurs during the first several weeks of cochlear implant use, making it difficult to adequately compare performance with different speech processing strategies. However, the finding that patients often prefer the strategy they understand speech the best with supports the clinical practice of letting adult patients select their preferred strategy without formally evaluating speech perception with each available strategy.
机译：目的：这项研究由受试者内部比较，当受试者使用两种不同的人工耳蜗语音处理策略和Clarion 1.2（增强型双极）设备时，语音识别和患者偏好比较：同时模拟刺激（SAS）和连续交错采样（CIS） ）。这两种策略使用两种不同的电极配置：SAS策略使用双极刺激，而CIS策略使用单极刺激。研究设计：这是一项多中心研究，使用了受试者内部平衡交叉设计。使用ABAB设计在每个受试者中复制了这两种策略的经验。在所有主题之间，策略使用的顺序是平衡的。地点：该研究是在附属于三级医疗中心的几个人工耳蜗中心进行的。患者：受试者由25位接受Clarion人工耳蜗的耳聋后成年人组成。干预：每个受试者的总干预时间为14周。每种策略使用后都进行了语音感知测试和声音质量评估。主要观察指标：主要观察指标包括语音感知数据和患者对有关语音和声音质量的问卷的反应。结果：分析显示，首先遇到的策略与第二次遇到的策略相比，绩效没有显着差异，并且使用策略的顺序似乎不会影响受试者最终对特定策略的偏好。尽管在大多数测试时间间隔内，大多数测试指标的CIS语音识别得分均较高，但是对方差分析以评估策略差异并未显示策略的显着效果。但是，对在复制间隔获得的分数进行的进一步分析显示，在安静和噪音环境中，CIS所获得的分数明显高于SAS所获得的分数。此外，有更多的患者表示对CIS策略的最终偏爱比对SAS策略的喜好。重要的是，分析评估顺序和分析评估策略均显示评估期的显着影响，表明植入物的时间/经验对每种策略的评分均具有显着影响，而与使用顺序无关（第一或第二次使用）。结论：这项研究表明重要的学习发生在使用人工耳蜗的最初几周内，因此很难充分比较不同语音处理策略的性能。但是，发现患者经常更喜欢他们最能理解语音的策略，这一发现支持了临床实践，即让成年患者选择他们偏爱的策略，而不用每种可用策略来正式评估语音感知。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号