Nicole Hope Capach, Noam Zigdon, Taylor A Payne, Jonathan D Neukam, Yeonjoo Choi, Hong Ju Park, William H Shapiro, Mario A Svirsky
{"title":"人工耳蜗和辅助听力图:一项回顾性研究比较设备制造商的性能。","authors":"Nicole Hope Capach, Noam Zigdon, Taylor A Payne, Jonathan D Neukam, Yeonjoo Choi, Hong Ju Park, William H Shapiro, Mario A Svirsky","doi":"10.3390/audiolres15040079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: We investigated: (1) differences in CI-aided thresholds and speech perception scores among cochlear implant manufacturers and (2) the relationship between CI-aided thresholds and speech perception. <b>Methods</b>: We analyzed exploratory data from NYU and a confirmatory data set of 120 CI-aided audiograms from the ASAN clinic. CI-aided soundfield evaluations were compared between manufacturers (Cochlear, Advanced Bionics, MED-EL) using 5- and 6-pure-tone average thresholds; percentage of patients with average thresholds above 35 dB HL; speech perception scores; and correlations between thresholds and speech perception. <b>Results</b>: Compared to Cochlear users, MED-EL and Advanced Bionics users had significantly higher (poorer) pure-tone averages (26.7 dB HL for Cochlear vs. 30.0 dB HL for AB and 34.6 dB HL for MED-EL at NYU; 29.0 dB HL for Cochlear vs. 36.5 dB HL for MED-EL at ASAN), and higher incidence of 5- or 6-PTAs above 35 dB HL (1.6% vs. 23.4%/47.1% at NYU; 11.2% vs. 60.0% at ASAN). Word and sentence scores were significantly higher for the Cochlear group when compared to the MED-EL group. Speech scores were higher for manufacturers that recommend the use of behaviorally-measured T-levels (Cochlear) rather than estimated T-levels (AB and MED-EL). Significant negative correlations existed between CI-aided thresholds and speech scores. <b>Conclusions</b>: Significant differences in CI-aided thresholds and speech perception were observed between manufacturers, potentially related to brand-specific T-level programming approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":44133,"journal":{"name":"Audiology Research","volume":"15 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12286021/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cochlear Implants and the Aided Audiogram: A Retrospective Study Comparing Performance Across Device Manufacturers.\",\"authors\":\"Nicole Hope Capach, Noam Zigdon, Taylor A Payne, Jonathan D Neukam, Yeonjoo Choi, Hong Ju Park, William H Shapiro, Mario A Svirsky\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/audiolres15040079\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: We investigated: (1) differences in CI-aided thresholds and speech perception scores among cochlear implant manufacturers and (2) the relationship between CI-aided thresholds and speech perception. <b>Methods</b>: We analyzed exploratory data from NYU and a confirmatory data set of 120 CI-aided audiograms from the ASAN clinic. CI-aided soundfield evaluations were compared between manufacturers (Cochlear, Advanced Bionics, MED-EL) using 5- and 6-pure-tone average thresholds; percentage of patients with average thresholds above 35 dB HL; speech perception scores; and correlations between thresholds and speech perception. <b>Results</b>: Compared to Cochlear users, MED-EL and Advanced Bionics users had significantly higher (poorer) pure-tone averages (26.7 dB HL for Cochlear vs. 30.0 dB HL for AB and 34.6 dB HL for MED-EL at NYU; 29.0 dB HL for Cochlear vs. 36.5 dB HL for MED-EL at ASAN), and higher incidence of 5- or 6-PTAs above 35 dB HL (1.6% vs. 23.4%/47.1% at NYU; 11.2% vs. 60.0% at ASAN). Word and sentence scores were significantly higher for the Cochlear group when compared to the MED-EL group. Speech scores were higher for manufacturers that recommend the use of behaviorally-measured T-levels (Cochlear) rather than estimated T-levels (AB and MED-EL). Significant negative correlations existed between CI-aided thresholds and speech scores. <b>Conclusions</b>: Significant differences in CI-aided thresholds and speech perception were observed between manufacturers, potentially related to brand-specific T-level programming approaches.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44133,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Audiology Research\",\"volume\":\"15 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12286021/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Audiology Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/audiolres15040079\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Audiology Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/audiolres15040079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景/目的:我们研究了:(1)不同人工耳蜗制造商在人工智能辅助阈值和语音感知评分上的差异;(2)人工耳蜗辅助阈值与语音感知的关系。方法:我们分析了来自纽约大学的探索性数据和来自ASAN诊所的120个ci辅助听力图的验证性数据集。使用5和6纯音平均阈值对制造商(Cochlear, Advanced Bionics, MED-EL)的ci辅助声场评估进行比较;平均阈值高于35 dB HL的患者百分比;语音感知评分;以及阈值和语音感知之间的关系。结果:与Cochlear使用者相比,MED-EL和Advanced Bionics使用者的纯音平均值明显更高(更差)(纽约大学的Cochlear为26.7 dB HL, AB为30.0 dB HL, MED-EL为34.6 dB HL;耳蜗为29.0 dB HL, ASAN为36.5 dB HL), 5-或6-PTAs高于35 dB HL的发生率更高(纽约大学为1.6%,而纽约大学为23.4%/47.1%;11.2%, ASAN为60.0%)。与MED-EL组相比,耳蜗组的单词和句子得分明显更高。推荐使用行为测量t水平(Cochlear)而不是估计t水平(AB和MED-EL)的制造商的语音分数更高。ci辅助阈值与语音得分呈显著负相关。结论:不同制造商在ci辅助阈值和语音感知方面存在显著差异,这可能与品牌特定的t级编程方法有关。
Cochlear Implants and the Aided Audiogram: A Retrospective Study Comparing Performance Across Device Manufacturers.
Background/Objectives: We investigated: (1) differences in CI-aided thresholds and speech perception scores among cochlear implant manufacturers and (2) the relationship between CI-aided thresholds and speech perception. Methods: We analyzed exploratory data from NYU and a confirmatory data set of 120 CI-aided audiograms from the ASAN clinic. CI-aided soundfield evaluations were compared between manufacturers (Cochlear, Advanced Bionics, MED-EL) using 5- and 6-pure-tone average thresholds; percentage of patients with average thresholds above 35 dB HL; speech perception scores; and correlations between thresholds and speech perception. Results: Compared to Cochlear users, MED-EL and Advanced Bionics users had significantly higher (poorer) pure-tone averages (26.7 dB HL for Cochlear vs. 30.0 dB HL for AB and 34.6 dB HL for MED-EL at NYU; 29.0 dB HL for Cochlear vs. 36.5 dB HL for MED-EL at ASAN), and higher incidence of 5- or 6-PTAs above 35 dB HL (1.6% vs. 23.4%/47.1% at NYU; 11.2% vs. 60.0% at ASAN). Word and sentence scores were significantly higher for the Cochlear group when compared to the MED-EL group. Speech scores were higher for manufacturers that recommend the use of behaviorally-measured T-levels (Cochlear) rather than estimated T-levels (AB and MED-EL). Significant negative correlations existed between CI-aided thresholds and speech scores. Conclusions: Significant differences in CI-aided thresholds and speech perception were observed between manufacturers, potentially related to brand-specific T-level programming approaches.
期刊介绍:
The mission of Audiology Research is to publish contemporary, ethical, clinically relevant scientific researches related to the basic science and clinical aspects of the auditory and vestibular system and diseases of the ear that can be used by clinicians, scientists and specialists to improve understanding and treatment of patients with audiological and neurotological disorders.