Sahoo Lokanath, Patnaik Uma, Singh Nitu, Dwivedi Gunjan, Nagre Gauri D, Sahoo Krushnendu Sundar
Department of ENT, Command Hospital Southern Command, Pune, India.
Department of ENT, CHSC, AFMC, Pune, India.
Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2024 Oct;76(5):4356-4364. doi: 10.1007/s12070-024-04860-z. Epub 2024 Jul 8.
In current age of technology, artificial intelligence is used in the medical field to improve the quality and accuracy in patient care and achieve better clientele satisfaction. The use of artificial intelligence in the field of hearing rehabilitation and cochlear implantation has an immense scope and it enhances the accuracy in placement of electrode array, forecasting site of surgical location and optimization of speech processing. This study aims to compare the audiological outcomes of conventional versus artificial intelligence technology enabled cochlear implant speech processors. Additionally, it compares the individual performance and satisfaction level with use of both types of speech processors. All children who underwent upgradation of their cochlear implant speech processors at a tertiary care cochlear implant centre with artificial intelligence enabled speech processors were included in the study. The comparison of audiological outcomes of conventional versus artificial intelligence integrated speech processors were assessed by using Aided Audiometry, Categories of Auditory Perception Score and Speech Intelligibility Rating scale. Children using the basic model cochlear implant speech processor which was provided at the time of implantation are referred as conventional cochlear implant speech processor user. Their speech processors were subsequently upgraded with current generation artificial intelligence integrated speech processors which is referred here as artificial intelligence upgraded cochlear implant speech processor. During the study, a total of thirty-four (34) patients underwent upgradation of cochlear implant speech processors. The mean categories of auditory perception score were 11.58 and 11.94 using conventional and artificial intelligence upgraded speech processor respectively. The mean speech intelligibility rating score was 4.5 and 4.6 respectively. The audiological outcomes of conventional speech processors are comparable with those using artificial intelligence enabled speech processors. However, the clientele satisfaction in respect to quality of sound, ease of listening in difficult listening environment, smart connectivity options for both phone and television is available and better with the artificial intelligence enabled cochlear implant speech processor. This also has the advantages of auto switching of programming with change in ambient noise, better signal to noise ratio and better 360* hearing.
在当今科技时代，人工智能被应用于医疗领域，以提高患者护理的质量和准确性，并实现更高的客户满意度。人工智能在听力康复和人工耳蜗植入领域的应用具有广阔的前景，它提高了电极阵列放置的准确性、预测手术位置以及优化语音处理。本研究旨在比较传统人工耳蜗语音处理器与人工智能技术支持的人工耳蜗语音处理器的听力学结果。此外，还比较了使用这两种语音处理器的个人表现和满意度水平。所有在三级护理人工耳蜗植入中心将其人工耳蜗语音处理器升级为人工智能支持的语音处理器的儿童都纳入了本研究。通过使用助听测听、听觉感知类别评分和语音可懂度评级量表来评估传统语音处理器与集成人工智能的语音处理器的听力学结果。使用植入时提供的基本型号人工耳蜗语音处理器的儿童被称为传统人工耳蜗语音处理器用户。他们的语音处理器随后升级为当前一代集成人工智能的语音处理器，在此称为人工智能升级人工耳蜗语音处理器。在研究期间，共有34名患者对人工耳蜗语音处理器进行了升级。使用传统语音处理器和人工智能升级语音处理器时，听觉感知类别评分的平均值分别为11.58和11.94。语音可懂度评级分数的平均值分别为4.5和4.6。传统语音处理器的听力学结果与使用人工智能支持的语音处理器的结果相当。然而，在声音质量、在困难聆听环境中的聆听便利性、手机和电视的智能连接选项方面，客户对人工智能支持的人工耳蜗语音处理器的满意度更高。它还具有随着环境噪声变化自动切换程序、更好的信噪比和更好的360度听力的优点。
