对侧助听器对人工耳蜗使用者言语感知贡献研究

目的探讨讲汉语普通话的人工耳蜗(Cochlear Implantation,以下简称CI)使用者对侧佩戴助听器(Hearing Aid,以下简称HA)的获益。方法:选取对侧使用HA的14名母语为汉语普通话的CI使用者,分别测试其在使用CI和CI+HA(即双模式)两种助听模式下的声调、双音节词、及句子的识别表现,并分析助听器耳残余听力对双模式言语表现的影响。结果:安静环境下使用CI和CI+HA模式下的声调识别率分别为67.6%±10.5%、71.6%±12.5%,双音节词识别率分别为72.3%±21.8%、74.2%±23.3%,句子识别率分别为62.3%±28.3%、61.8%±31.3%,噪声环境句子识别率分别为37.6%±36.5%、42.4%±35.9%。统计分析发现声调识别表现在CI+HA模式下显著优于CI模式(t=-2.285,P=0.04),其余言语识别表现在两种聆听模式下均无显著差异;且1000Hz及以下频率的助听器耳残余听力与CI+HA模式下言语识别表现显著相关。结论::对于"大龄"语前聋患者,一侧人工耳蜗植入联合对侧助听器的双模式应用,需考虑助听器耳的残余听力情况,极重度感音神经性聋助听器辅助效果有限,必要时需考虑双侧人工耳蜗植入。     

语前聋患儿一侧人工耳蜗对侧助听器效果分析

目的:通过对人工耳蜗植入对侧耳不同听力损失的患儿联合使用助听器与人工耳蜗语前聋患儿的听觉、语言及学习能力进行评估和比较,探索对患儿更为有效的助听方法,帮助患儿获得最大限度的言语交流。方法:将30例3～6岁语前聋患儿按照植入人工耳蜗对侧耳听力损失程度及是否佩戴助听器,分为一侧人工耳蜗+对侧重度听力损失助听器组(CI+SHA组)、一侧人工耳蜗+对侧极重度听力损失助听器组(CI+PHA组)、单耳人工耳蜗组(CI组)。评估各组在康复3、6、9、12、15、18个月时听觉、语言及学习能力,并记录结果。结果:随着术后康复时间的延长,聋儿听觉、语言及学习能力逐渐提高(P<0.05),CI+SHA组听觉能力优于CI+PHA组及CI组(均P<0.05),语言能力及学习能力无明显差异(P>0.05)。结论:语前聋患儿单耳人工耳蜗植入后,若对侧耳尚有残余听力,佩戴助听器后听觉能力效果显著,长期佩戴有助于患儿的康复。     

一例神经纤维瘤患者植入人工耳蜗的效果观察

目的：探讨神经纤维瘤听力下降患者人工耳蜗植入手术可行性及疗效。方法对一例多发性神经纤维瘤伽马刀术后患者带瘤行CS-10A人工耳蜗植入,术前和术后3个月分别进行裸耳/助听听阈评估、单音节和双音节言语识别测试。结果患者术前右侧重度、左侧极重度感音神经性聋,术前言语识别率左耳最大声输出患者无反应,右耳最大单音节词言语识别率为12%,双耳双音节词言语识别率均为0%。听觉行为分级量表为2级。患者右侧成功植入人工耳蜗。术后3个月助听后声场评估右耳（人工耳蜗植入耳）平均听力42.5 dB HL,单音节词最大言语识别率为64%,双音节词最大言语识别率为47%,听觉行为分级量表为7级。结论在影像学证明听神经完整的情况下,神经纤维瘤伽马刀术后重度聋患者可植入人工耳蜗,以提升听力水平。     

双侧人工耳蜗植入术后言语识别效果的评估

目的评估双侧人工耳蜗植入者汉语普通话短句、双音节词单音节词及汉语声调的识别效果,探索双侧人工耳蜗植入者双耳听觉产生的机制及对言语识别率的影响。方法选取双侧人工耳蜗植入患者6人,自制问卷收集受试者的基本信息并评估他们的主观听觉状况。首先测试受试者在使用双侧人工耳蜗（BCI）、单独使用一侧人工耳蜗（RCI/LCI）的听阈,随后测试他们在BCI和RCI/LCI两种听觉模式下的七音节短句、双音节词、声调、韵母、声母识别率,测试背景环境包括安静环境和嘈杂语噪声环境,言语信号强度为65dB SPL,固定信噪比为+10 dB SPL。随后将BCI和RCI/LCI两种听觉模式下的识别效果进行比较。结果除噪声状态下韵母识别测试中其余测试结果均为BCI言语识别率得分高于RCI/LCI。结论对于符合双侧人工耳蜗植入术适应证标准的患者而言,双侧植入人工耳蜗可以在不同程度上提高安静和噪声环境下的短句、双字词、声母、韵母及声调的识别率,降低其声场听阈。     

42例语前聋儿童人工耳蜗植入术后效果分析

目的初步分析语前聋儿童人工耳蜗植入后听觉言语的康复进程。方法通过对42例行人工耳蜗植入的语前聋儿童进行重建听阈测试、双音节词封闭项识别，主题对话测试及智力评估，以了解他们术后的听力水平、听觉言语能力及智力情况。结果受试者术后平均听阈在35 dB HL左右，在术后6个月以上的聋儿中扬扬格双音节词识别率≥80％的占95．45％；主题对话达到3～4级水平的占70．83％。双音节词识别率≥80％的聋儿言语能力为3～4级水平的占70．97％。结论对于智力发育正常，术后及时在康复机构接受科学、系统的康复训练的语前聋人工耳蜗植入的患儿，术后半年以上大多数患儿的听觉和言语能力的提高是较为明显的。     

低年龄段语前聋儿童人工耳蜗植入后汉语声调识别变化的分析

目的:探讨低年龄段经人工耳蜗植入的语前聋儿童经过开机一段时间后声调识别的变化特点。方法:选择29例已经接受人工耳蜗植入的低年龄语前聋儿童,按植入时年龄分为2组,即A组:3.0~4.5岁,B组:5.0~6.5岁,植入后平均开机时间为1.5~2.0年。采用聋康系统的《聋儿听觉言语康复评估词表》中主要反映声调识别的相应评估内容进行封闭项测试。结果:A组:同音单音节声调识别率为(63.00±16.75)%,双音节声调识别率为(75.60±11.18)%,单音节词识别率为(72.38±11.39)%。B组:同音单音节声调识别率为(49.46±13.91)%,双音节声调识别为(64.71±9.64)%,单音节词识别率为(55.71±8.59)%。所有正确识别率结果均大于机会水平。人工耳蜗植入后不同年龄组患儿有关声调识别的三项测试内容,低年龄组患儿均好于高年龄组,结果均差异有统计学意义。结论:对于语前聋行人工耳蜗植入的低年龄儿童,植入时年龄仍是影响植入后声调识别的重要因素之一,而在更能反映汉语声、韵、调特点的单音节词中差异更为明显,因此植入年龄是术后汉语学习的重要影响因素之一。     

普通话词汇相邻性词表在人工耳蜗植入儿童中的等价性验证

目的 在人工耳蜗植入(cochlear implant,CI)儿童中进一步验证四类普通话词汇相邻性测试词表(Standard-Chinese lexical neighborhood test,M-LNT)的表间等价性,同时比较词汇学特征对词汇识别的影响.方法 应用四类普通话词汇相邻性词表,在隔声室内对30名语前聋人工耳蜗植入儿童进行声场下的言语测试,按循环播放顺序获得各个测试词表的言语识别率,通过球形检验及方差分析,验证四类词表各表内的表间等价性,同时分析词汇学效应对各类词表识别率的影响.结果 3张双音节易词表识别率均值分别为80.00%±14.80%、83.00%±14.54%和80.50%±12.69%,3张双音节难词表识别率均值分别为65.33%±13.13%、68.83%±14.24%、66.33%±13.83%;3张单音节易词表识别率均值分别为72.33%±13.24%、74.50%±12.75%、72.33%±14.72%;3张单音节难词表识别率均值分别为53.33%±14.58%、58.17%±14.71%和57.83%±12.98%.各表间言语识别得分差异均无统计学意义(P>0.5,α=0.05).词汇学因素对CI儿童言语识别有显著影响,易词表识别率高于难词表(P<0.01),双音节词表识别率高于单音节词表(P<0.01).结论四类普通话词汇相邻性测试词表各表间具有等价性,其言语识别率可提供CI儿童语言辨识的基本过程,难易词表及单双音节词表间的识别率差异可反映CI儿童言语识别能力的词汇学发展是从易词到难词,从简单到复杂.     

使用人工耳蜗和助听器的语前聋儿童言语识别能力的研究

目的 通过对使用人工耳蜗和助听器的语前聋儿童的言语识别能力的比较研究,为人工耳蜗植入适应证提供参考.方法实验对象包括18例人工耳蜗植入和40例配戴助听器的先天性语前聋儿童,先在自由声场测试双耳裸耳听阈,根据装置使用时间和平均裸耳听阈值分组,测试并比较使用人工耳蜗和助听器的语前聋儿童封闭项的声母、韵母、单音节词识别率.结果人工耳蜗植入时间≥2年组儿童的韵母、声母和单音节词识别率明显高于＜2年组患者.助听器使用时间≥2年组的各测试项识别率与＜2年组差异无统计学意义.装置使用时间＜2年的语前聋儿童,人工耳蜗植入者的各测试项识别率均明显高于平均裸耳听阈＞100 dB HL的助听器使用者,与平均裸耳听阈≤100 dB HL的助听器使用者的各测试项识别率差异均无统计学意义.装置使用时间≥2年的语前聋儿童,人工耳蜗植入者的各测试项识别率均明显高于平均裸耳听阈＞90 dB HL的助听器使用者,但与平均裸耳听阈＞70 dB HL但≤90 dB HL的助听器使用者差异无统计学意义.结论极重度语前聋儿童人工耳蜗植入后能获得比助听器使用者更好的言语识别能力.     

低龄语前聋患儿双侧人工耳蜗植入与双模式干预早期效果分析

目的 探讨语前聋患儿双模式(一侧人工耳蜗植入,对侧配戴助听器)干预与双侧人工耳蜗植入(co-chlear implantation,CI)后早期听觉言语康复效果以及生活质量,为语前聋患儿双侧干预模式的选择提供参考.方法 回顾性分析2016～2019年行双侧CI 28例(双侧CI组)和双模式干预28例(双模式组)语前聋患...     

普通话单音节测听表在人工耳蜗植入者中的初步应用

目的采用新编普通话单音节测听表,评估人工耳蜗植入者的言语识别能力。方法选取8名语前聋儿童（甲组）及13名语后聋（乙组）人工耳蜗植入者作为研究对象,男12名,女9名。甲组植入年龄为1．6～11．9岁（中位数2．7岁）,使用年限〉3．4年。乙组植入年龄为3．2～30．9岁（中位数12．0岁）,使用年限〉0．7年以上。在声场中测试人工耳蜗日常使用状态下的啭音听阈,并55dB SPL言语强度下的单音节识别率。部分受试者还接受了65、80dB SPL言语强度下单音节识别率的测试。结果甲乙2组受试者的0．5、1、2、4kHz四频率平均（4 Frequency Average,4FA）声场啭音听阈分别为32．5±3．4dB HL、35．9±4．9dB HL,t检验显示P=0．1046。甲乙2组受试者55dB SPL下的单音节识别率分别为56．8±9．0％、31．41±7．1％,t检验显示P=0．001。结论新编普通话单音节测听表,可有效地用来评价人工耳蜗植入者的言语识别能力。使用年限较短的语后聋患者的单音节识别率尚不及使用年限较长的语前聋儿童。人工耳蜗植入者的单音节识别率一言语声强（Performance—Intensity,P—I）函数曲线较正常成人平均右移30dB以上,提示人工耳蜗使用者的言语听力补偿水平较正常人仍有差距。     

Advantages of binaural hearing provided through bimodal stimulation via a cochlear implant and a conventional hearing aid: a 6-month comparative study

CONCLUSIONS: Our study data demonstrate the additional benefit derived from continued use of a contralateral hearing aid (HA) post-cochlear implantation for speech recognition ability in quiet and in noise. Postoperative bimodal stimulation is recommended for all subjects who show some speech recognition ability in the contralateral ear as it may offer binaural listening advantages in various listening situations encountered in everyday life. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits derived from bimodal stimulation for experienced HA users implanted with a cochlear implant (CI) (score=20% in disyllabic test). The correlation between pre- and postoperative performance on speech perception measures was examined to determine additional criteria for recommending bimodal stimulation postoperatively. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A within-subject repeated-measures design was used, with each subject acting as their own control. Assessments were carried out preoperatively in aided monaural and best-aided conditions and at 6 months postoperatively in CI-alone, contralateral HA-alone and bimodal listening conditions. Speech recognition using Spanish words and sentences materials was assessed at conversational level and for soft speech in quiet. Speech comprehension in noise was assessed using word materials at a signal:noise ratio of +10, for coincident speech in noise and for spatially separated speech in noise. Twelve adult native Spanish subjects with a severe-to-profound hearing impairment who were experienced with optimally fitted conventional amplification and who displayed suboptimal speech understanding preoperatively were enrolled in the study. Preoperatively, conventional amplification was worn by five subjects binaurally and by seven monaurally. RESULTS: Postoperatively, superior speech recognition ability in quiet and in noise for disyllabic words was achieved using bimodal stimulation in comparison to performance for either monaural aided condition. Mean improvement in speech recognition in the bimodal condition was significant over performance in the CI-alone condition for disyllabic words in quiet at 70 (p=0.006) and 55 dB SPL (p=0.028), for disyllabic words in noise at +10 dB with speech and noise spatially separated with the noise source closest to the contralateral HA (S0NHA) (p=0.0005) and when the noise source was closest to the CI ear (S0NCI) (p=0.002). When testing word recognition in noise with speech and noise sources coincident in space, word scores were superior in the bimodal condition relative to the CI-alone condition but this improvement was not significant (p=0.07). The advantages of bimodal stimulation included significant effects of binaural summation in quiet and significant binaural squelch effects in both the S0NHA and S0NCI test conditions. All subjects showed superior performance in the binaural situation postoperatively relative to the best-aided condition preoperatively for one or more test situations.     

Advantages of binaural hearing provided through bimodal stimulation via a cochlear implant and a conventional hearing aid: A 6-month comparative study

Conclusions

Our study data demonstrate the additional benefit derived from continued use of a contralateral hearing aid (HA) post-cochlear implantation for speech recognition ability in quiet and in noise. Postoperative bimodal stimulation is recommended for all subjects who show some speech recognition ability in the contralateral ear as it may offer binaural listening advantages in various listening situations encountered in everyday life.

Objectives

To assess the benefits derived from bimodal stimulation for experienced HA users implanted with a cochlear implant (CI) (score?≥?20% in disyllabic test). The correlation between pre- and postoperative performance on speech perception measures was examined to determine additional criteria for recommending bimodal stimulation postoperatively.

Material and methods

A within-subject repeated-measures design was used, with each subject acting as their own control. Assessments were carried out preoperatively in aided monaural and best-aided conditions and at 6 months postoperatively in CI-alone, contralateral HA-alone and bimodal listening conditions. Speech recognition using Spanish words and sentences materials was assessed at conversational level and for soft speech in quiet. Speech comprehension in noise was assessed using word materials at a signal:noise ratio of +10, for coincident speech in noise and for spatially separated speech in noise. Twelve adult native Spanish subjects with a severe-to-profound hearing impairment who were experienced with optimally fitted conventional amplification and who displayed suboptimal speech understanding preoperatively were enrolled in the study. Preoperatively, conventional amplification was worn by five subjects binaurally and by seven monaurally.

Results

Postoperatively, superior speech recognition ability in quiet and in noise for disyllabic words was achieved using bimodal stimulation in comparison to performance for either monaural aided condition. Mean improvement in speech recognition in the bimodal condition was significant over performance in the CI-alone condition for disyllabic words in quiet at 70 (p=0.006) and 55 dB SPL (p=0.028), for disyllabic words in noise at +10 dB with speech and noise spatially separated with the noise source closest to the contralateral HA (S0NHA) (p=0.0005) and when the noise source was closest to the CI ear (S0NCI) (p=0.002). When testing word recognition in noise with speech and noise sources coincident in space, word scores were superior in the bimodal condition relative to the CI-alone condition but this improvement was not significant (p=0.07). The advantages of bimodal stimulation included significant effects of binaural summation in quiet and significant binaural squelch effects in both the S0NHA and S0NCI test conditions. All subjects showed superior performance in the binaural situation postoperatively relative to the best-aided condition preoperatively for one or more test situations.     

Should a hearing aid in the contralateral ear be recommended for children with a unilateral cochlear implant?

OBJECTIVES: To predict bimodal benefit before cochlear implantation, we compared the performances of participants with bimodal fitting and with a cochlear implant alone on speech perception tests. METHODS: Twenty-two children with a cochlear implant in one ear and a hearing aid in the other (bimodal fitting) were included. Several aided and unaided average hearing thresholds and the aided word recognition score of the hearing aid ear were related to the bimodal benefit on a phoneme recognition test in quiet and in noise. Results with bimodal fitting were compared to results with the cochlear implant alone on a phoneme recognition test in quiet and in noise. RESULTS: No relationship was found between any of the hearing thresholds or the aided phoneme recognition score of the hearing aid ear and the bimodal benefit on the phoneme recognition tests. At the group level, the bimodal scores on the phoneme recognition tests in quiet and in noise were significantly better than the scores with the cochlear implant alone. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperatively available audiometric parameters are not reliable predictors of bimodal benefit in candidates for cochlear implantation. Children with unilateral implants benefit from bimodal fitting on speech tests. This improvement in performance warrants the recommendation of bimodal fitting even when bimodal benefit cannot be predicted.     

Speech perception for adults who use hearing aids in conjunction with cochlear implants in opposite ears.

This study aimed to (a) investigate the effect of using a hearing aid in conjunction with a cochlear implant in opposite ears on speech perception in quiet and in noise, (b) identify the speech information obtained from a hearing aid that is additive to the information obtained from a cochlear implant, and (c) explore the relationship between aided thresholds in the nonimplanted ear and speech perception benefit from wearing a hearing aid in conjunction with a cochlear implant in opposite ears.Fourteen adults who used the Nucleus 24 cochlear implant system in 1 ear participated in the study. All participants had either used a hearing aid in the nonimplanted ear for at least 75% of waking hours after cochlear implantation, and/or, hearing loss less than 90 dB HL in the low frequencies in the nonimplanted ear. Speech perception was evaluated in 3 conditions: cochlear implant alone (CI), hearing aid alone (HA), and cochlear implant in conjunction with hearing aid in opposite ears (CIHA). Three speech perception tests were used: consonant-vowel nucleus-consonant (CNC) words in quiet, City University of New York style (CUNY) sentences in coincident signal and noise, and spondees in coincidental and spatially separated signal and noise. Information transmission analyses were performed on the CNC responses.Of the 14 participants tested, 6 showed significant bimodal benefit on open-set speech perception measures and 5 showed benefit on close-set spondees. However, 2 participants showed poorer speech perception with CIHA than CI in at least 1 of the speech perception tests. Results of information transmission analyses showed that bimodal benefit (performance with CIHA minus that with CI) in quiet arises from improved perception of the low frequency components in speech. Results showed that participants with poorer aided thresholds in the mid-to-high frequencies demonstrated greater bimodal benefit. It is possible that the mid-to-high frequency information provided by the hearing aids may be conflicting with the cochlear implants.     

Assessing binaural/bimodal advantages using auditory event-related potentials in subjects with cochlear implants

Objective

To assess the advantage of binaural and bimodal hearing for subjects with cochlear implant (CI) using auditory event-related potentials as well as speech perception tests.

Subjects and methods

The subjects comprised four binaural CI users (CI/CI group) and eleven bimodal CI users, who wore a hearing aid (HA) contralaterally (CI/HA group). All subjects had used binaural or bimodal fitting for over 6 months. Their speech perception was examined in a quiet environment using monosyllabic words. Late cortical waves were measured while subjects were engaged in an oddball task of 1 kHz frequent and 2 kHz rare tone stimuli. The latencies of event-related potential (N1, N2, P3) were compared for monaural, binaural, and bimodal hearing conditions.

Results

Significantly (p < 0.01, paired t-test) better speech perception for monosyllabic words was found for both binaural and bimodal hearing than monaural hearing. The latency of N1 did not significantly change for either binaural or bimodal hearing. On the other hand, the latency of N2 was significantly (p < 0.01, paired t-test) shorter for binaural and bimodal hearing than for monaural hearing. The latency of P3 was shorter for binaural and bimodal hearing than monaural hearing in all subjects, and the difference was statistically significant in both CI/CI and CI/HA groups (p < 0.01, paired t-test).

Conclusions

Better speech perception was obtained for binaural and bimodal hearing than for monaural hearing in CI subjects. The results obtained in the comparison of P3 latency agreed with that of speech perception. Thus, using bilateral hearing devices is recommended for CI subjects. We also found that event-related potentials were useful as an objective tool to assess the advantage of binaural and bimodal hearing for CI subjects.     

多人谈话噪声及年龄对儿童言语识别中词汇学效应的影响

目的 探讨引入多人谈话噪声(babble noise,BN)后,词汇学效应在竞争性噪声环境下对正常听力儿童言语识别能力的影响及其随年龄增长的发展特性.方法 以212例3~6岁的正常听力儿童为研究对象,使用普通话词汇相邻性测试(Mandarin lexical neighborhood test,MLNT)材料(含双音节易词、双音节难词、单音节易词、单音节难词四类词表),在安静条件下给声强度70 dB SPL,多人谈话噪声下信噪比(signal to noise ratio,SNR)为4 dB,对所有对象进行开放式言语测试,分别获取四类词表在安静和噪声条件下的言语识别率,并比较3、4、5、6岁组儿童的结果.结果 在安静条件下正常听力儿童双音节易、难词及单音节易、难词的识别率分别为96.45%±5.17%、88.87%±7.73%、91.90%±7.31%、82.38%±7.95%,噪声下四类词表言语识别率分别为85.34%±11.23%、66.42%±11.08%、68.81%±15.99%、48.58%±12.81%,在噪声下的各词表言语识别率显著低于安静条件下(P<0.05).在安静和噪声条件下对词汇学效应的影响显示易词的识别率高于难词(P<0.05),双音节词言语识别率高于单音节词(P<0.05),且在噪声下比安静环境下影响更明显.噪声下不同年龄组中3岁组四类词表言语识别率分别为80.83%±12.65%、60.63%±9.13%、58.54%±12.98%、41.88%±11.69%,6岁组分别为92.38%±6.64%、71.90%±10.66%、76.90%±14.53%、57.14%±12.61%,3~6岁听力正常儿童噪声下言语识别能力随年龄增长显著提高(P<0.05).结论 在噪声下词汇学效应对听力正常儿童词汇提取的影响较安静环境下更明显,双音节词和易词更易获取,单音节词和难词更难获取;3~6岁听力正常儿童噪声下的言语识别能力随年龄增长而提高,且在6岁时仍未达到平台期.     

有低频残余听力感音神经聋的人工耳蜗植入术

目的介绍一种有低频残余听力感音神经聋的人工耳蜗植入技术,探讨人工耳蜗植入手术对有残余听力患者的治疗效果和价值。方法15例有残余听力的患者接受了保护残余听力的人工耳蜗植入手术。术中电极植入深度在19mm～24mm左右。术后分别检测单纯使用助听器、单纯使用人工耳蜗、人工耳蜗结合助听器三种不同状态下的听力。结果15例患者中,有13例术后残余听力保存良好,仅分别丢失5～20dB听力,但另2例术后残余听力全部丧失。术后在安静、信噪比15dB和10dB三种不同状态下的言语测试结果显示,人工耳蜗结合助听器使用者测试得分始终保持在很高水平;单纯使用人工耳蜗者也有较好的成绩,但在信噪比达10dB的条件下,测试成绩下降;而单纯使用助听器者,不仅在安静状态下听力成绩不甚理想,一旦加入竞争性噪声,听力测试成绩急剧下降。结论保护和利用残余听力的人工耳蜗植入技术,使人工耳蜗植入手术对象从重度或极重度聋扩大到高频为重度或极重度聋,低频（≤500Hz）为中、轻度聋的患者。接受这项技术患者的听力和言语识别能力均明显优于其单纯配戴助听器和单纯使用人工耳蜗时的听力和言语识别能力。     

Contralateral hearing aid use in cochlear implanted patients: Multicenter study of bimodal benefit

Abstract Conclusion: The use of a hearing aid (HA) in combination with a cochlear implant (CI) significantly improved performance for speech perception in quiet, in noise, and for localization compared with monaural conditions. No significant differences in functional performance were observed following optimization of HA fitting. Objectives: To evaluate the binaural benefits derived from using a contralateral HA in conjunction with a CI in subjects with significant functional hearing in the nonimplanted ear and the effects of HA fitting optimization. Methods: Fifteen adult CI users, intra-subject controls, were enrolled in a prospective repeated-measure multicenter study. Evaluation of performance for speech understanding, localization, and subjective impressions was conducted before and following HA fitting optimization for CI alone, HA alone, and CI + HA. Results: For speech testing in quiet, bimodal scores were significantly better than for HA alone and CI alone conditions (p < 0.01). For speech and noise (S0N0) at 0° azimuth the scores were significantly better in the bimodal condition than for CI alone (p = 0.01), indicating binaural summation. When noise was presented to the HA side (S0NHA) bimodal scores were significantly better than for CI alone (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05, respectively), suggesting a significant binaural squelch effect. Sound localization ability was significantly improved in the bimodal condition compared with the CI alone condition (p = 0.002).     

外中耳畸形患者骨桥植入效果分析

目的分析6例外中耳畸形患者植入骨桥后的听觉及言语识别能力,探讨骨桥植入的适应症及效果。方法对6例外中耳畸形患者骨桥植入术前及术后开机时进行纯音测听和言语测听,比较植入前后听阈及安静时声强65 dB SPL下的单音节、双音节、语句的言语识别率。结果 6例患者术后助听听阈及言语识别阈较术前裸耳均明显改善,助听听阈平均改善43.2±11.1 dB;言语识别阈平均改善38.8±7.7 dB,中高频相对低频补偿的更多;言语识别率亦较术前明显提升,单音节言语识别率平均提高63.33%±22.51%,双音节言语识别率平均提高77.83%±28.92%,语句言语识别率平均提高78.33%±17.08%。结论骨桥植入可以改善传导性和混合性听力损失患者的听觉言语能力,为外中耳畸形及听骨链畸形伴传导性或混合性听力损失患者的有效听觉补偿方法。