Potential Benefits of an Integrated Electric-Acoustic Sound Processor with Children: A Preliminary Report (Record no. 2734)
[ view plain ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | nam a22 7a 4500 |
| 003 - CONTROL NUMBER IDENTIFIER | |
| control field | OSt |
| 005 - DATE AND TIME OF LATEST TRANSACTION | |
| control field | 20170512144300.0 |
| 008 - FIXED-LENGTH DATA ELEMENTS--GENERAL INFORMATION | |
| fixed length control field | 170512b xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d |
| 040 ## - CATALOGING SOURCE | |
| Transcribing agency | National Acoustics Laboratories |
| 245 ## - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | Potential Benefits of an Integrated Electric-Acoustic Sound Processor with Children: A Preliminary Report |
| 520 3# - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc | Background: A number of published studies have demonstrated the benefits of electric-acoustic stimulation<br/>(EAS) over conventional electric stimulation for adults with functional low-frequency acoustic<br/>hearing and severe-to-profound high-frequency hearing loss. These benefits potentially include better<br/>speech recognition in quiet and in noise, better localization, improvements in sound quality, better music<br/>appreciation and aptitude, and better pitch recognition. There is, however, a paucity of published reports<br/>describing the potential benefits and limitations of EAS for children with functional low-frequency acoustic<br/>hearing and severe-to-profound high-frequency hearing loss.<br/>Purpose: The objective of this study was to explore the potential benefits of EAS for children.<br/>Research Design: A repeated measures design was used to evaluate performance differences obtained<br/>with EAS stimulation versus acoustic- and electric-only stimulation.<br/>Study Sample: Seven users of Cochlear Nucleus Hybrid, Nucleus 24 Freedom, CI512, and CI422 implants<br/>were included in the study.<br/>Data Collection and Analysis: Sentence recognition (assayed using the pediatric version of the AzBio<br/>sentence recognition test) was evaluated in quiet and at three fixed signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) (0, 15,<br/>and 110 dB). Functional hearing performance was also evaluated with the use of questionnaires, including<br/>the comparative version of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities, the Listening Inventory for Education<br/>Revised, and the Children’s Home Inventory for Listening Difficulties.<br/>Results: Speech recognition in noise was typically better with EAS compared to participants’ performance<br/>with acoustic- and electric-only stimulation, particularly when evaluated at the less favorable<br/>SNR. Additionally, in real-world situations, children generally preferred to use EAS compared to electric-only<br/>stimulation. Also, the participants’ classroom teachers observed better hearing performance in the classroom<br/>with the use of EAS.<br/>Conclusions: Use of EAS provided better speech recognition in quiet and in noise when compared to<br/>performance obtained with use of acoustic- and electric-only stimulation, and children responded favorably<br/>to the use of EAS implemented in an integrated sound processor for real-world use. |
| 700 ## - ADDED ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME | |
| Personal name | Jace Wolfe |
| 773 0# - HOST ITEM ENTRY | |
| Relationship information | /Volume 28, Number 2, 2017 |
| Title | Journal of the American Academy of Audiology |
| 942 ## - ADDED ENTRY ELEMENTS (KOHA) | |
| Source of classification or shelving scheme | Universal Decimal Classification |
| Koha item type | Journal article |
No items available.