Wolfe Jace, Neumann Sara, Schafer Erin, Marsh Megan, Wood Mark, Baker R Stanley
Hearts for Hearing Foundation, Oklahoma City, OK.
Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of North Texas, Denton, TX.
J Am Acad Audiol. 2017 Feb;28(2):127-140. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.15133.
A number of published studies have demonstrated the benefits of electric-acoustic stimulation (EAS) over conventional electric stimulation for adults with functional low-frequency acoustic hearing and severe-to-profound high-frequency hearing loss. These benefits potentially include better speech recognition in quiet and in noise, better localization, improvements in sound quality, better music appreciation and aptitude, and better pitch recognition. There is, however, a paucity of published reports describing the potential benefits and limitations of EAS for children with functional low-frequency acoustic hearing and severe-to-profound high-frequency hearing loss.
The objective of this study was to explore the potential benefits of EAS for children.
A repeated measures design was used to evaluate performance differences obtained with EAS stimulation versus acoustic- and electric-only stimulation.
Seven users of Cochlear Nucleus Hybrid, Nucleus 24 Freedom, CI512, and CI422 implants were included in the study.
Sentence recognition (assayed using the pediatric version of the AzBio sentence recognition test) was evaluated in quiet and at three fixed signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) (0, +5, and +10 dB). Functional hearing performance was also evaluated with the use of questionnaires, including the comparative version of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities, the Listening Inventory for Education Revised, and the Children's Home Inventory for Listening Difficulties.
Speech recognition in noise was typically better with EAS compared to participants' performance with acoustic- and electric-only stimulation, particularly when evaluated at the less favorable SNR. Additionally, in real-world situations, children generally preferred to use EAS compared to electric-only stimulation. Also, the participants' classroom teachers observed better hearing performance in the classroom with the use of EAS.
Use of EAS provided better speech recognition in quiet and in noise when compared to performance obtained with use of acoustic- and electric-only stimulation, and children responded favorably to the use of EAS implemented in an integrated sound processor for real-world use.
多项已发表的研究表明，对于具有功能性低频听觉且高频听力重度至极重度损失的成年人，电声刺激（EAS）比传统电刺激更具优势。这些优势可能包括在安静和噪声环境中更好的言语识别、更好的声源定位、声音质量的改善、更好的音乐欣赏能力和音乐天赋，以及更好的音高识别。然而，关于EAS对具有功能性低频听觉且高频听力重度至极重度损失儿童的潜在益处和局限性的已发表报告却很少。
本研究的目的是探索EAS对儿童的潜在益处。
采用重复测量设计来评估EAS刺激与仅声学刺激和仅电刺激相比所获得的性能差异。
本研究纳入了7名使用科利耳核混合型、核24自由型、CI512和CI422植入体的用户。
在安静环境以及三个固定信噪比（SNR）（0、+5和+10 dB）下评估句子识别（使用AzBio句子识别测试的儿童版进行测定）。还通过问卷评估功能性听力表现，包括言语、空间和质量比较版、修订后的教育听力量表以及儿童家庭听力困难量表。
与仅声学刺激和仅电刺激时参与者的表现相比，EAS在噪声环境中的言语识别通常更好，尤其是在较不利的SNR下进行评估时。此外，在实际情况中，与仅电刺激相比，儿童通常更喜欢使用EAS。而且，参与者的课堂教师观察到在课堂上使用EAS时听力表现更好。
与仅使用声学刺激和仅电刺激时的表现相比，使用EAS在安静和噪声环境中提供了更好的言语识别，并且儿童对在集成式声音处理器中实施的用于实际应用的EAS反应良好。
