语前聋患儿一侧人工耳蜗植入对侧佩戴助听器聆听效果分析

目的：分析语前聋患儿一侧人工耳蜗植入（cochlear implant ,CI）对侧佩戴助听器模式下的聆听效果,以及非植入耳残余听力对聆听效果的影响。方法选取一侧人工耳蜗植入对侧佩戴助听器的语前聋患儿18例,分别测试其在单侧人工耳蜗植入、一侧人工耳蜗植入对侧佩戴助听器的双耳聆听模式（ bimodal fitting ,BIM ）安静环境及稳态噪声环境下标准中文短句、双音节词、单音节词的识别率。结果安静状态下本组患儿CI、BIM 模式单音节词言语识别率分别为82．67％±12．23％、83．61％±12．22％,双音节词分别为76．00％±16．13％、78．11％±14．84％,标准中文短句分别为60．11％±17．18％、65．43％±16．76％;信噪比10 dB环境下CI、BIM 助听模式患儿单音节词识别率分别为75．50％±14．12％、76．83％±14．15％,双音节词分别为68．22％±17．15％、77．18％±16．83％,标准中文短句分别为49．39％±19．26％、56．33％±19．55％,除两种模式下单音节词外其余言语识别率差异均有统计学意义（P＜0．05）,且非植入耳250、500 Hz助听听阈与BIM 模式言语识别率呈负相关。结论语前聋患儿双耳双模式聆听时有一定优势,这种优势可能主要来自低频残余听力。     

人工耳蜗使用者汉语声调感知与音乐感知相关性研究

目的评估讲汉语普通话的人工耳蜗使用者的汉语普通话声调识别及音乐识别表现,并探究二者的相关性。方法选取对侧使用助听器(Hearing Aid,以下简称HA)的12名母语为汉语普通话的人工耳蜗(Cochlear Implantation,以下简称CI)使用者,分别测试其在使用HA、CI、CI+HA(即双模式)三种助听模式下的声调和音乐识别表现,并对二者的相关性进行分析。其中声调识别应用自然时长声调和相同时长声调两种,应用音乐音符轮廓识别(Melodic contour identification,以下简称MCI)进行音乐感知能力评估。结果自然时长声调在HA、CI、CI+HA模式下的平均正确识别率分别为62.2%、70.9%、73.1%,且显著优于对应模式下的时长相同声调识别表现。MCI在HA、CI、CI+HA模式下平均正确识别率分别为29.5%、37.5%、34.0%。MCI表现与自然时长声调在CI和CI+HA模式下均显著相关,与相同时程声调在三种助听模式下均显著相关。结论讲汉语的CI使用者的声调感知及音乐感知均不理想。时长线索对声调音高感知起重要作用。声调与音乐感知可能具有相似感知机制。     

听障儿童电声双模式助听的应用效果

目的 研究调查听障儿童一侧耳植入人工耳蜗后对侧耳配戴助听器,这种电声双模式同时刺激的应用效果.方法 随机测试78名儿童人工耳蜗植入者在使用人工耳蜗和助听器(CI+HA)及单独使用人工耳蜗(CI)时听觉事件相关电位MMN和P300潜伏期及波幅的变化,比较同一患者在三种环境下(安静、S/N-0dB,S/N-15dB)的听觉言语识别率,并进行家长问卷调查.结果 患者使用CI+HA与CI的MMN 引出率分别是 80%和75%,P300引出率分别是93.1%和89%;CI+HA组与CI组MMN和P300潜伏期以及CI+HA组与正常组P300波幅的比较有显著差异(P<0,05);在S/N-0dB时CI+HA组单音节、双音节和声调的识别率均高于CI组(P<0.05),而安静环境下和S/N-15dB时组内比较无统计学意义;开放式问卷调查结果 显示60.26%的患者认为使用CI+HA模式能获得更多不同的听觉帮助.闭合式问卷结果 显示使用CI+HA和单用CI的聆听效果有差别.结论 本文大多数听障儿童使用电声同时刺激的助听模式.大脑中枢处理系统并不拮抗,能发挥协同作用,尤其在改善噪声环境下的言语识别和声调感知.以及声源定位和声信息的利用等方面具有优势.     

对侧使用助听器对人工耳蜗植入儿童句子识别能力的影响

目的：探讨安静环境和噪声环境下，人工耳蜗植入儿童在电声双模式(对侧使用助听器)和电模式(对侧不使用助听器)助听下的句子识别率差异。方法在安静环境和噪声环境中，分别对12例人工耳蜗植入儿童进行句子识别率测试，比较两种助听模式之间的识别率差异。结果在安静环境中，电声双模式助听的人工耳蜗植入儿童句子识别率为77.7%±15.0%，电模式助听下的句子识别率为73.0%±17.2%，两者之间差异显著(P<0.05)；在噪声环境中，电声双模式助听下的句子识别率为60.8%±24.5%，电模式助听下的句子识别率为54.8%±19.7%，两者之间差异显著(P<0.05)。结论在安静环境和噪声环境中，电声双模式助听的句子识别率均高于电模式助听的句子识别率。     

双耳双模式助听患者汉语普通话声调识别特征

目的 比较双耳双模式助听患者在安静环境和不同背景噪声下的声调识别率,探讨不同信噪比和不同基频噪声下的双模式优势.方法 12例一侧植入人工耳蜗、对侧佩戴助听器[双模式(CIHA)]的汉语普通话患者参加本研究,所有患者双模式使用时间均为半年以上.使用天使语训i-CAST测试软件的人工耳蜗科研项目模块,采用闭合式测试方法,分别测试受试者在安静环境和不同背景噪声环璋下单独使用人工耳蜗(CI)、单独使用助听器(HA)和双模式下(CIHA)的声调识别率,测试环境包括安静环境、男信号男背景、男信号女背景三种,每种背景噪声包含10、5和0 dB三种信噪比(以下将6种背景噪声简称为男男10、男男5、男男0、男女10、男女5和男女0),即每位患者进行21组测试;每组分别测试/Ba/、/Bi/、/Bo/、/Bu/4个音的一、二、三、四4个声调;测试声通过扬声器发出,强度为65 dB SPL;记录患者上述三种模式下的助听听阈及助听侧裸耳听阈.结果 患者在CIHA与CI模式下的助听听阈差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但均与HA模式和非植入侧的裸耳听阈差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).声调识别率受背景环境的显著影响(F=24.77,P<0.001),安静环境、男男5和男男0背景噪声环境下双模式无明显优势(P>0.05),在男男10、男女10、男女5和男女0背景噪声环境下双模式均有显著优势(P值分别为0.010,0.012,0.015和0.001).结论 本组患者在安静环境下的声调识别双模式无显著优势,信号声与背景噪声基频不同时,双模式优势显著.     

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.     

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。     

术前助听器佩戴史对婴幼儿人工耳蜗植入者术后开放式言语识别的影响

目的初步探讨术前助听器佩戴史对婴幼儿人工耳蜗植入(cochlear implant,CI)者早期开放式言语识别的影响。方法植入年龄0.9~3.0岁的CI儿童306例,按照术前是否佩带助听器分为助听器(hearing aid,HA)组94例,非助听器(non-hearing aid,NHA)组212例,用普通话词汇相邻性测试(Mandarin lexical neighborhood test,M-LNT)分别对两组受试儿童进行开放式言语识别能力评估,比较两组儿童M-LNT正确识别率。结果年龄相同或人工耳蜗使用时长相同的助听器组与非助听器组间M-LNT正确识别率的差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);术前佩戴助听器不同时长者与非助听器组之间M-LNT识别率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论对于0.9~3.0岁行人工耳蜗植入术的重度和极重度听力损失儿童,术前有无助听器佩戴史对其术后开放式言语识别能力无显著影响。     

低频残余听力保留患者声电联合刺激短期效果观察

目的分析低频残余听力(low-frequency residual hearing, LFRH)保留的人工耳蜗(cochlear implant, CI)植入患者使用声电联合刺激(electrical acoustic stimulation, EAS)后, 其言语、声调识别以及音乐感知的改善情况。方法选取2017年1月至2020年10月行单侧CI手术且有LFRH保留的汉语普通话患者共12例, 男8例、女4例, 语后聋5例、语前聋7例, 植入时中位年龄12岁(3～62岁);患者术前均有残余听力, 及时佩戴助听器且康复效果良好, CI电刺激使用时间(37.0±16.2)个月。患者植入侧术后125 Hz和250 Hz纯音听阈均≤80 dB HL, 使用EAS设备后, 进行为期2个月的临床跟踪性研究。分别于EAS使用前、使用即刻、使用后2个月进行效果评估, 包括言语识别率、声调识别和音乐测试。使用SPSS 23.0软件进行统计学分析。结果共10例患者完成2个月临床随访和效果评估, EAS使用即刻相比使用前, 扬扬格词识别率明显下降[(71.7±4.3)%比(79.6±3.1)%, P=0.0...     

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...     

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.     

Bimodal benefits in Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users with contralateral residual acoustic hearing

Abstract

Objective: The present study aimed to measure bimodal benefits and probe their underlying mechanisms in Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant (CI) subjects who had contralateral residual acoustic hearing. Design: The subjects recognised words or phonemes from the Mandarin Lexical Neighborhood Test in noise at a 10-dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) with acoustic stimulation, electric stimulation or the combined bimodal stimulation. Study sample: Thirteen Mandarin-speaking subjects wore a CI in one ear and had residual acoustic hearing in the contralateral ear. Six of the subjects (5.2–13.0 years) had pre-lingual onset of severe hearing loss, and seven of them (8.6–45.8 years) had post-lingual onset of severe hearing loss. Results: Both groups of subjects produced a significant bimodal benefit in word recognition in noise. Consonants and tones accounted for the bimodal benefit. The bimodal integration efficiency was negatively correlated with the duration of deafness in the implanted ear for vowel recognition but positively correlated with CI or bimodal experience for consonant recognition. Conclusions: The present results support preservation of residual acoustic hearing, early cochlear implantation and continuous use of bimodal hearing for subjects who have significant residual hearing in the non-implanted ear.     

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).     

Bimodal benefit depends on the performance difference between a cochlear implant and a hearing aid

Abstract

Objectives

The present study characterizes the relationship between bimodal benefit and hearing aid (HA) performance, cochlear implant (CI) performance, and the difference in the performances of the two devices.

Methods

Fourteen adult bimodal listeners participated in the study. Consonant, vowel, and sentence recognition were measured in quiet and noise (at a +5 and +10 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR)) with an HA alone, a CI alone, and with the combined use of an HA and CI in each listener. Speech and noise were presented directly in front of the listener.

Results

The correlation analyses showed that bimodal benefit was significantly associated with the difference in performances of a CI and an HA in all testing materials, with HA-alone performance in vowel recognition, and with CI-alone performance in sentence recognition. However, regression analyses showed that the independent contribution of the difference in performance across ears to bimodal benefit was significant, irrespective of the testing material or the SNR: the smaller the difference, the greater the benefit. Further, the independent contributions of HA-only performance and CI-alone performance were not significant factors in predicting the existence of bimodal benefit across testing materials and SNRs when the effect of the difference between CI and HA performance was removed from the model.

Conclusion

The results suggest that bimodal benefit is limited by how effectively the modalities integrate, rather than HA-only or CI-alone performance, and that this integration is facilitated when the performances of the modalities are similar.     

Speech recognition materials and ceiling effects: considerations for cochlear implant programs

Cochlear implant recipients have demonstrated remarkable increases in speech perception since US FDA approval was granted in 1984. Improved performance is due to a number of factors including improved cochlear implant technology, evolving speech coding strategies, and individuals with increasingly more residual hearing receiving implants. Despite this evolution, the same recommendations for pre- and postimplant speech recognition testing have been in place for over 10 years in the United States. To determine whether new recommendations are warranted, speech perception performance was assessed for 156 adult, postlingually deafened implant recipients as well as 50 hearing aid users on monosyllabic word recognition (CNC) and sentence recognition in quiet (HINT and AzBio sentences) and in noise (BKB-SIN). Results demonstrated that for HINT sentences in quiet, 28% of the subjects tested achieved maximum performance of 100% correct and that scores did not agree well with monosyllables (CNC) or sentence recognition in noise (BKB-SIN). For a more difficult sentence recognition material (AzBio), only 0.7% of the subjects achieved 100% performance and scores were in much better agreement with monosyllables and sentence recognition in noise. These results suggest that more difficult materials are needed to assess speech perception performance of postimplant patients - and perhaps also for determining implant candidacy.     

Contribution of hearing aids to music perception by cochlear implant users

Abstract

Objectives

Modern cochlear implant (CI) encoding strategies represent the temporal envelope of sounds well but provide limited spectral information. This deficit in spectral information has been implicated as a contributing factor to difficulty with speech perception in noisy conditions, discriminating between talkers and melody recognition. One way to supplement spectral information for CI users is by fitting a hearing aid (HA) to the non-implanted ear.

Methods

In this study 14 postlingually deaf adults (half with a unilateral CI and the other half with a CI and an HA (CI + HA)) were tested on measures of music perception and familiar melody recognition.

Results

CI + HA listeners performed significantly better than CI-only listeners on all pitch-based music perception tasks. The CI + HA group did not perform significantly better than the CI-only group in the two tasks that relied on duration cues. Recognition of familiar melodies was significantly enhanced for the group wearing an HA in addition to their CI. This advantage in melody recognition was increased when melodic sequences were presented with the addition of harmony.

Conclusion

These results show that, for CI recipients with aidable hearing in the non-implanted ear, using a HA in addition to their implant improves perception of musical pitch and recognition of real-world melodies.     

A directional remote-microphone for bimodal cochlear implant recipients

Abstract

To evaluate whether speech recognition in noise differs according to whether a wireless remote microphone is connected to just the cochlear implant (CI) or to both the CI and to the hearing aid (HA) in bimodal CI users. The second aim was to evaluate the additional benefit of the directional microphone mode compared with the omnidirectional microphone mode of the wireless microphone. This prospective study measured Speech Recognition Thresholds (SRT) in babble noise in a ‘within-subjects repeated measures design’ for different listening conditions. Eighteen postlingually deafened adult bimodal CI users. No difference in speech recognition in noise in the bimodal listening condition was found between the wireless microphone connected to the CI only and to both the CI and the HA. An improvement of 4.1?dB was found for switching from the omnidirectional microphone mode to the directional mode in the CI only condition. The use of a wireless microphone improved speech recognition in noise for bimodal CI users. The use of the directional microphone mode led to a substantial additional improvement of speech perception in noise for situations with one target signal.     

A comparison of the speech recognition and pitch ranking abilities of children using a unilateral cochlear implant, bimodal stimulation or bilateral hearing aids

Objective

The present study compared the speech recognition and pitch ranking abilities of normally hearing children (n = 15) to children using a cochlear implant (CI) alone (n = 8), bilateral hearing aids (HAs) (n = 6), or bimodal stimulation (BMS) (n = 9). It was hypothesised that users of BMS would score higher on tasks of speech and pitch perception than children using a CI alone, but not children using HAs.

Methods

Participants were assessed on tasks of monosyllabic word recognition in quiet, sentence recognition in quiet and noise (10 dB signal-to-noise ratio), and a pitch ranking task using pairs of sung vowels one, half, and a quarter of an octave apart.

Results

There were no significant differences between the mean percentage-correct scores of the four participant groups for either words in quiet or sentences in quiet and noise. However, the proportion of bimodal users who scored >80% correct (80%) was significantly greater than the proportion of high-scoring unilateral CI (25%) or bilateral HA users (17%). Contrary to expectations, there was also no significant difference between the pitch ranking scores of users of BMS and users of a CI alone for all three interval sizes (p < 0.05, RM-ANOVA). However participants using only acoustic hearing (i.e. the NH and HA groups) scored significantly higher than participants using electrical stimulation (i.e. the CI and BMS groups) on the pitch ranking task (p < 0.05; RM-ANOVA).

Conclusions

Contrary to findings in postlingually deafened adults, we found no significant bimodal advantage for pitch perception in prelingually deafened children. However, the performance of children using electrical stimulation was significantly poorer than children using only acoustic stimulation. Further research is required to investigate the contribution of the non-implanted ears of users of BMS to pitch perception, and the effect of hearing loss on the development of pitch perception in children.