Five bilateral cochlear implant users were tested for their localization abilities and speech understanding in noise, for both monaural and binaural listening conditions. They also participated in lateralization tasks to assess the impact of variations in interaural time delays (ITDs) and interaural level differences (ILDs) for electrical pulse trains under direct computer control. The localization task used pink noise bursts presented from an eight-loudspeaker array spanning an arc of approximately 108 degrees in front of the listeners at ear level (0-degree elevation). Subjects showed large benefits from bilateral device use compared to either side alone. Typical root-mean-square (rms) averaged errors across all eight loudspeakers in the array were about 10 degrees for bilateral device use and ranged from 20 degrees to 60 degrees using either ear alone. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) were measured for sentences presented from directly in front of the listeners (0 degrees) in spectrally matching speech-weighted noise at either 0 degrees, +90 degrees or -90 degrees for four subjects out of five tested who could perform the task. For noise to either side, bilateral device use showed a substantial benefit over unilateral device use when noise was ipsilateral to the unilateral device. This was primarily because of monaural head-shadow effects, which resulted in robust SRT improvements (P<0.001) of about 4 to 5 dB when ipsilateral and contralateral noise positions were compared. The additional benefit of using both ears compared to the shadowed ear (i.e., binaural unmasking) was only 1 or 2 dB and less robust (P = 0.04). Results from the lateralization studies showed consistently good sensitivity to ILDs; better than the smallest level adjustment available in the implants (0.17 dB) for some subjects. Sensitivity to ITDs was moderate on the other hand, typically of the order of 100 micros. ITD sensitivity deteriorated rapidly when stimulation rates for unmodulated pulse-trains increased above a few hundred Hz but at 800 pps showed sensitivity comparable to 50-pps pulse-trains when a 50-Hz modulation was applied. In our opinion, these results clearly demonstrate important benefits are available from bilateral implantation, both for localizing sounds (in quiet) and for listening in noise when signal and noise sources are spatially separated. The data do indicate, however, that effects of interaural timing cues are weaker than those from interaural level cues and according to our psychophysical findings rely on the availability of low-rate information below a few hundred Hz.

Ninety-seven members of a tinnitus self-help group were asked to list the difficulties that they had as a result of their tinnitus. Seventy-two replies were returned from 22 men and 48 women (sex not reported in two cases) whose average age was 61 years. Tinnitus was associated with hearing difficulties in 53%, effects on lifestyle in 93%, effects on general health in 56%, and emotional difficulties in 70% of the sample. Getting to sleep was the most frequently mentioned difficulty, and many respondents indicated that they experienced depression, annoyance, and insecurity. The clinical application of this open-ended questionnaire are discussed.

Guideline S2Otolaryngology- Head and Neck Surgery 151(2S) and (b) recommend sound therapy to patients with persistent, bothersome tinnitus. The development group provided no recommendation regarding the effect of acupuncture in patients with persistent, bothersome tinnitus.

The psychometric properties of a tinnitus handicap questionnaire are reported. There were two phases in this study. In Phase I, 87 questions were administered to 100 tinnitus patients. From their responses, 59 items that were either redundant, insensitive, or had low item-total correlations were eliminated. In Phase II, the resulting 27-item questionnaire was administered to 319 patients. Fiftythree of these patients also completed psychological and psychophysical measures that were used to validate the questionnaire. A factor analysis of patients' responses revealed a three-factor structure. These three factors appeared to reflect the physical, emotional, and social consequences of tinnitus (Factor I), hearing ability of the patient (Factor 2), and the patients' view of tinnitus (Factor 3). Although the 27-item questionnaire had high internal consistency reliability and validity as reflected by correlations with life satisfaction and depression scales, it is recommended that only the items on the Factor 1 and the Factor 2 subscales be scored because of the low internal consistency reliability of the Factor 3 subscale. This questionnaire can be used to compare a patient's tinnitus handicap with the norm, identify specific areas of handicaps, and to monitor a patient's progress with particular treatment programs.

A questionnaire was administered to 528 tinnitus patients to obtain data on their reactions to tinnitus. Results include a discussion of: (a) population characteristics, (b) perceptual characteristics, (c) the impact of tinnitus on daily life, and (d) etiology. Significant gender differences are also discussed. Tinnitus was not an occasional phenomenon, but was present for more than 26 days per month in 74% of the patients. Other important findings about tinnitus include: (a) Hearing levels at 1000 and 4000 Hz were less than or equal to 25 dB HL for 18% of the tinnitus patients, which suggests that some patients had normal hearing or mild hearing losses; (b) the prevalence of tinnitus in patients with noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) was 30% for males and only 3% for females; (c) about 25% of the patients reported tinnitus severity had increased since tinnitus onset; (d) the effects of tinnitus were more severe in patients who reported tinnitus as their primary complaint and in patients diagnosed as having Ménière's syndrome tinnitus; and (e) some patients reported that noise exacerbated their tinnitus, whereas others reported that a quiet background exacerbated their tinnitus.

Hyperacusis can make life difficult for many, forcing sufferers to dramatically alter their work and social habits. We believe this is an opportune time to explore approaches to better understand and treat hyperacusis.

The purpose of this investigation was to document performance of participants wearing a cochlear implant and hearing aid in opposite ears on speech-perception and localization tests. Twelve individuals who wore a cochlear implant and a hearing aid on contralateral ears were tested on their abilities to understand words in quiet and sentences in noise, and to localize everyday sounds. All speech stimuli were presented from the front, with the noise stimuli presented from the front, the right, or the left at a 90 degrees angle. Binaural summation in quiet and in noise, binaural squelch effects, and localization were studied to determine bilateral advantages. The magnitude of the monaural head shadow effect (the difference in unilateral performance when noise was facing the unilateral device vs. when the noise was opposite the unilateral device) also was studied. The test setup for localization was composed of an 8-speaker array spanning an arc of approximately 108 degrees in front of each participant. Group results yielded a statistically significant combined benefit of wearing a hearing aid in conjunction with a cochlear implant on opposite ears in noise conditions. Those participants who received a binaural advantage in 1 condition did not necessarily show a binaural advantage in another. Only 2 participants out of 12 were able to localize when wearing 2 devices. Further efforts are required to improve the integration of information from combined use of cochlear implant and hearing aid devices for enhancement of speech perception in noise and localization.

To predict the audiological outcomes of 2 multichannel cochlear implants, a preoperative battery of historical, audiological, electrophysiologic, and psychologic variables from 48 postlingually deafened adults was tested in a prospective randomized clinical trial. Multivariate analyses were used to select and combine these preoperative variables in a predictive index that was significantly related to audiological outcome at 9 months. The preoperative variables included in the predictive index were duration of profound deafness, speech reading ability, residual hearing, cognitive ability, measures of compliance and engagement with treatment, and use of nonverbal communication strategies. The preoperative predictive index had correlations of .81 with the Iowa Sentences Test, and .78 with the NU-6 word understanding scores, both obtained in a sound-only test. Probability and percentile curves generated from these data offer considerable optimism in forecasting the range of likely audiological outcomes that would be realized by postlingually deafened adult candidates for multichannel cochlear implants.