Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 8/2016

01-08-2016 | Otology

Bilateral use of active middle ear implants: speech discrimination results in noise

Authors: Astrid Wolf-Magele, Viktor Koci, Johannes Schnabl, Patrick Zorowka, Herbert Riechelmann, Georg Mathias Sprinzl

Published in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology | Issue 8/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Binaural sound reception has advantages over unilateral perception, including better localization and sound quality as well as speech and tone reception in both quiet and noisy environments. Up to now, most active middle ear implant (AMEI) users have been unilaterally implanted, but patient demand for an implant on the other side is increasing. Ten bilaterally-AMEI implanted native German-speaking adults were included in the study. The Oldenburg sentence test was used to measure speech reception thresholds in noise. The subject’s signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) at a speech reception score of 50 % was calculated for different noise conditions. SRT was measured as a function of noise condition (nc) and listening condition (lc)—for example, SRT (lc, nc), with nc from S0N0, S0N-90, or S0N90 and lc from left, right or both. For each noise condition, the squelch effect and the binaural summation effect were calculated. Patients in this study demonstrated improvement with bilateral AMEIs compared to right or left AMEI only in all three tested listening conditions. Statistical significance was found in the S0N0 condition to favor usage of bilateral AMI versus either the right or left side only. The benefits of binaural hearing are well known, also in normal-hearing individuals. In the future every bilateral implantation should be a part of the clinical routine. Bilateral implantation can help to reduce problems in background noise and restore directional hearing.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ricketts T, Lindley G, Henry P (2001) Impact of compression and hearing aid style on directional hearing aid benefit and performance. Ear Hear 22:348–361CrossRefPubMed Ricketts T, Lindley G, Henry P (2001) Impact of compression and hearing aid style on directional hearing aid benefit and performance. Ear Hear 22:348–361CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Saliba I, Calmels MN, Wanna G et al (2005) Binaurality in middle ear implant recipients using contralateral digital hearing AIDS. Otol Neurotol 26:680–685CrossRefPubMed Saliba I, Calmels MN, Wanna G et al (2005) Binaurality in middle ear implant recipients using contralateral digital hearing AIDS. Otol Neurotol 26:680–685CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Garin P, Schmerber S, Magnan J et al (2010) Bilateral vibrant soundbridge implantation: audiologic and subjective benefits in quiet and noisy environments. Acta Otolaryngol 130:1370–1378CrossRefPubMed Garin P, Schmerber S, Magnan J et al (2010) Bilateral vibrant soundbridge implantation: audiologic and subjective benefits in quiet and noisy environments. Acta Otolaryngol 130:1370–1378CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Stern RM Jr, Colburn HS (1978) Theory of binaural interaction based in auditory-nerve data. IV. A model for subjective lateral position. J Acoust Soc Am 64:127–140CrossRefPubMed Stern RM Jr, Colburn HS (1978) Theory of binaural interaction based in auditory-nerve data. IV. A model for subjective lateral position. J Acoust Soc Am 64:127–140CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Boheim K, Mlynski R, Lenarz T et al (2012) Round window vibroplasty: long-term results. Acta Otolaryngol 132:1042–1048CrossRefPubMed Boheim K, Mlynski R, Lenarz T et al (2012) Round window vibroplasty: long-term results. Acta Otolaryngol 132:1042–1048CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Beleites T, Neudert M, Beutner D et al (2011) Experience with vibroplasty couplers at the stapes head and footplate. Otol Neurotol 32:1468–1472CrossRefPubMed Beleites T, Neudert M, Beutner D et al (2011) Experience with vibroplasty couplers at the stapes head and footplate. Otol Neurotol 32:1468–1472CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Wagener K, Brand T, Kollmeier B (1999) Enwicklung und evaluation eines Satztests für die deutsche Sprache 38(2):44–56 Wagener K, Brand T, Kollmeier B (1999) Enwicklung und evaluation eines Satztests für die deutsche Sprache 38(2):44–56
8.
go back to reference Wagener K, Brand T, Kollmeier B (1999) Enwicklung und evaluation eines Satztests für die deutsche Sprache 38(3):86–95 Wagener K, Brand T, Kollmeier B (1999) Enwicklung und evaluation eines Satztests für die deutsche Sprache 38(3):86–95
9.
go back to reference Bronkhorst AW, Plomp R (1988) The effect of head-induced interaural time and level differences on speech intelligibility in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 83:1508–1516CrossRefPubMed Bronkhorst AW, Plomp R (1988) The effect of head-induced interaural time and level differences on speech intelligibility in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 83:1508–1516CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Noble W, Gatehouse S (2006) Effects of bilateral versus unilateral hearing aid fitting on abilities measured by the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol 45(2):172–181CrossRefPubMed Noble W, Gatehouse S (2006) Effects of bilateral versus unilateral hearing aid fitting on abilities measured by the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol 45(2):172–181CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Noble W (2006) Bilateral hearing aids: a review of self-reports of benefit in comparison with unilateral fitting. Int J Audiol 45(1):S63–S71CrossRefPubMed Noble W (2006) Bilateral hearing aids: a review of self-reports of benefit in comparison with unilateral fitting. Int J Audiol 45(1):S63–S71CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Wolframm MD, Giarbini N, Streitberger C (2012) Speech-in-noise and subjective benefit with active middle ear implant omnidirectional and directional microphones: a within-subjects comparison. Otol Neurotol 33:618–622CrossRefPubMed Wolframm MD, Giarbini N, Streitberger C (2012) Speech-in-noise and subjective benefit with active middle ear implant omnidirectional and directional microphones: a within-subjects comparison. Otol Neurotol 33:618–622CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Holmes AE (2003) Bilateral amplification for the elderly: two aids better than one? Int J Audiol 42:2S63–2S67CrossRefPubMed Holmes AE (2003) Bilateral amplification for the elderly: two aids better than one? Int J Audiol 42:2S63–2S67CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Bilateral use of active middle ear implants: speech discrimination results in noise
Authors
Astrid Wolf-Magele
Viktor Koci
Johannes Schnabl
Patrick Zorowka
Herbert Riechelmann
Georg Mathias Sprinzl
Publication date
01-08-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology / Issue 8/2016
Print ISSN: 0937-4477
Electronic ISSN: 1434-4726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-015-3783-6

Other articles of this Issue 8/2016

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 8/2016 Go to the issue