Sensitivity to interaural time differences and localization accuracy in cochlear implant users with combined electric-acoustic stimulation.

<h4>Objectives</h4>In this study, localization accuracy and sensitivity to acoustic interaural time differences (ITDs) in subjects using cochlear implants with combined electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) were assessed and compared with the results of a normal hearing control group.<h...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Monika Körtje, Uwe Baumann, Timo Stöver, Tobias Weissgerber
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2020-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241015
id doaj-6a2da1619225408a95963ce21829539f
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6a2da1619225408a95963ce21829539f2021-03-04T11:53:21ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032020-01-011510e024101510.1371/journal.pone.0241015Sensitivity to interaural time differences and localization accuracy in cochlear implant users with combined electric-acoustic stimulation.Monika KörtjeUwe BaumannTimo StöverTobias Weissgerber<h4>Objectives</h4>In this study, localization accuracy and sensitivity to acoustic interaural time differences (ITDs) in subjects using cochlear implants with combined electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) were assessed and compared with the results of a normal hearing control group.<h4>Methods</h4>Eight CI users with EAS (2 bilaterally implanted, 6 unilaterally implanted) and symmetric binaural acoustic hearing and 24 normal hearing subjects participated in the study. The first experiment determined mean localization error (MLE) for different angles of sound incidence between ± 60° (frontal and dorsal presentation). The stimuli were either low-pass, high-pass or broadband noise bursts. In a second experiment, just noticeable differences (JND) of ITDs were measured for pure tones of 125 Hz, 250 Hz and 500 Hz (headphone presentation).<h4>Results</h4>Experiment 1: MLE of EAS subjects was 8.5°, 14.3° and 14.7°, (low-, high-pass and broadband stimuli respectively). In the control group, MLE was 1.8° (broadband stimuli). In the differentiation between sound incidence from front and back, EAS subjects performed on chance level. Experiment 2: The JND-ITDs were 88.7 μs for 125 Hz, 48.8 μs for 250 Hz and 52.9 μs for 500 Hz (EAS subjects). Compared to the control group, JND-ITD for 125 Hz was on the same level of performance. No statistically significant correlation was found between MLE and JND-ITD in the EAS cohort.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Near to normal ITD sensitivity in the lower frequency acoustic hearing was demonstrated in a cohort of EAS users. However, in an acoustic localization task, the majority of the subjects did not reached the level of accuracy of normal hearing. Presumably, signal processing time delay differences between devices used on both sides are deteriorating the transfer of precise binaural timing cues.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241015
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Monika Körtje
Uwe Baumann
Timo Stöver
Tobias Weissgerber
spellingShingle Monika Körtje
Uwe Baumann
Timo Stöver
Tobias Weissgerber
Sensitivity to interaural time differences and localization accuracy in cochlear implant users with combined electric-acoustic stimulation.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Monika Körtje
Uwe Baumann
Timo Stöver
Tobias Weissgerber
author_sort Monika Körtje
title Sensitivity to interaural time differences and localization accuracy in cochlear implant users with combined electric-acoustic stimulation.
title_short Sensitivity to interaural time differences and localization accuracy in cochlear implant users with combined electric-acoustic stimulation.
title_full Sensitivity to interaural time differences and localization accuracy in cochlear implant users with combined electric-acoustic stimulation.
title_fullStr Sensitivity to interaural time differences and localization accuracy in cochlear implant users with combined electric-acoustic stimulation.
title_full_unstemmed Sensitivity to interaural time differences and localization accuracy in cochlear implant users with combined electric-acoustic stimulation.
title_sort sensitivity to interaural time differences and localization accuracy in cochlear implant users with combined electric-acoustic stimulation.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2020-01-01
description <h4>Objectives</h4>In this study, localization accuracy and sensitivity to acoustic interaural time differences (ITDs) in subjects using cochlear implants with combined electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) were assessed and compared with the results of a normal hearing control group.<h4>Methods</h4>Eight CI users with EAS (2 bilaterally implanted, 6 unilaterally implanted) and symmetric binaural acoustic hearing and 24 normal hearing subjects participated in the study. The first experiment determined mean localization error (MLE) for different angles of sound incidence between ± 60° (frontal and dorsal presentation). The stimuli were either low-pass, high-pass or broadband noise bursts. In a second experiment, just noticeable differences (JND) of ITDs were measured for pure tones of 125 Hz, 250 Hz and 500 Hz (headphone presentation).<h4>Results</h4>Experiment 1: MLE of EAS subjects was 8.5°, 14.3° and 14.7°, (low-, high-pass and broadband stimuli respectively). In the control group, MLE was 1.8° (broadband stimuli). In the differentiation between sound incidence from front and back, EAS subjects performed on chance level. Experiment 2: The JND-ITDs were 88.7 μs for 125 Hz, 48.8 μs for 250 Hz and 52.9 μs for 500 Hz (EAS subjects). Compared to the control group, JND-ITD for 125 Hz was on the same level of performance. No statistically significant correlation was found between MLE and JND-ITD in the EAS cohort.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Near to normal ITD sensitivity in the lower frequency acoustic hearing was demonstrated in a cohort of EAS users. However, in an acoustic localization task, the majority of the subjects did not reached the level of accuracy of normal hearing. Presumably, signal processing time delay differences between devices used on both sides are deteriorating the transfer of precise binaural timing cues.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241015
work_keys_str_mv AT monikakortje sensitivitytointerauraltimedifferencesandlocalizationaccuracyincochlearimplantuserswithcombinedelectricacousticstimulation
AT uwebaumann sensitivitytointerauraltimedifferencesandlocalizationaccuracyincochlearimplantuserswithcombinedelectricacousticstimulation
AT timostover sensitivitytointerauraltimedifferencesandlocalizationaccuracyincochlearimplantuserswithcombinedelectricacousticstimulation
AT tobiasweissgerber sensitivitytointerauraltimedifferencesandlocalizationaccuracyincochlearimplantuserswithcombinedelectricacousticstimulation
_version_ 1714803320187518976