Abstract:cochlear implants (cis) have enabled hundreds of thousands of profoundly hearing-impaired people to perceive sounds by electrically stimulating the auditory nerve. However, ci users are often very poor at locating sounds, which leads to impaired sound segregation and threat detection. We provided missing spatial hearing cues through haptic stimulation to augment the electrical ci signal. We found that this "electro-haptic" stimulation dramatically improved sound localisation. furthermore, participants were abl… Show more
“…For the best performing CI users-those that are either bilaterally implanted or are unilaterally implanted with normal hearing in the non-implanted ear-RMS localisation error is ~ 28°4. This is similar to the 30° RMS error measured for sound-localisation using haptic stimulation in unilateral CI users by Fletcher et al 10 . Note that, in these studies, performance was assessed using a single speech or noise stimulus, not a varied stimulus set.…”
supporting
confidence: 89%
“…Those performing worst before training were found to improve most with training. Accuracy after training was substantially better than haptic sound-localisation performance measured after training in Fletcher et al 10 (26° RMS error), in which participants were tested using the same speech sample that was used in training. In fact, the worst performer after training in the current study www.nature.com/scientificreports/ performed with the same accuracy as the average participant in Fletcher et al Strikingly, the accuracy measured after training in the current study was also better than the average sound-localisation performance of bilateral hearing-aid users (~ 25° RMS error using a varied stimulus set) 22 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…After training, we set another ambitious target of achieving haptic sound-localisation accuracy of 25° RMS error. This would exceed the haptic sound-localisation accuracy achieved after training by Fletcher et al for a single stimulus 10 and match the sound-localisation accuracy achieved by bilateral hearing-aid users for a varied stimulus set 22 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 66%
“…For the experimental group, we set a target of achieving less than 28° RMS localisation error before training, as we expected our use of linked multi-band compression and wrist-sensitivity correction to give immediate benefit. This would mean we had substantially exceeded the performance achieved by Fletcher et al before training for haptic sound-localisation with a single stimulus 10 . It would also mean we had exceeded sound-localisation performance in bilateral CI users for a single stimulus 4 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 75%
“…Several studies have shown the importance of training to exploiting auditory information presented through haptic stimulation. Fletcher et al showed that a short training regime can improve sound-localisation accuracy for unilaterally implanted CI users both with and without a hearing-aid in the other ear, either when using audio alone, haptic stimulation alone, or a combination of audio and haptic stimulation 10 . This finding is supported by other work showing that sound localisation improves with training for CI users using a single CI 10,28 and for individuals with a severe-to-profound unilateral hearing loss 29 .…”
Users of hearing-assistive devices often struggle to locate and segregate sounds, which can make listening in schools, cafes, and busy workplaces extremely challenging. A recent study in unilaterally implanted CI users showed that sound-localisation was improved when the audio received by behindthe-ear devices was converted to haptic stimulation on each wrist. We built on this work, using a new signal-processing approach to improve localisation accuracy and increase generalisability to a wide range of stimuli. We aimed to: (1) improve haptic sound-localisation accuracy using a varied stimulus set and (2) assess whether accuracy improved with prolonged training. Thirty-two adults with normal touch perception were randomly assigned to an experimental or control group. The experimental group completed a 5-h training regime and the control group were not trained. Without training, haptic sound-localisation was substantially better than in previous work on haptic sound-localisation. It was also markedly better than sound-localisation by either unilaterally or bilaterally implanted CI users. After training, accuracy improved, becoming better than for sound-localisation by bilateral hearing-aid users. These findings suggest that a wrist-worn haptic device could be effective for improving spatial hearing for a range of hearing-impaired listeners. Users of hearing-assistive devices, such as hearing aids and cochlear implants, often struggle to locate and segregate sounds 1-4. As well as impairing threat detection, this makes listening in complex acoustic environmentssuch as, schools, cafes, and busy workplaces-highly challenging. Cochlear implants (CIs) enable severely-toprofoundly deaf individuals to perceive sound by electrically stimulating the auditory nerve. Recently, it has been shown that this electrical stimulation can be augmented by providing missing sound information through haptic stimulation ("electro-haptic stimulation") 5-11. Historically, a small number of studies in young normal-hearing listeners have explored the possibility of using haptic stimulation on the fingertips to locate sounds 12-15 , but research in this area is extremely sparse. In a recent study by Fletcher et al., it was shown that sound-localisation can be substantially improved in CI users by augmenting the CI signal with haptic stimulation on the wrists 10. This haptic stimulation was derived from audio signals that would be received by behind-the-ear hearing aids or CIs. Localisation accuracy increased after 30 min of training, with the same speech-sample used for both testing and training. In this study, we developed a new signal-processing strategy for haptic sound-localisation, which incorporated linked multi-band compression and wrist sensitivity correction. This was intended to improve haptic sound-localisation accuracy and increase the generalisability of the approach to a wide range of stimuli. The first aim of this study was to assess localisation accuracy with this new signal-processing strategy. To ensure that results were gen...
“…For the best performing CI users-those that are either bilaterally implanted or are unilaterally implanted with normal hearing in the non-implanted ear-RMS localisation error is ~ 28°4. This is similar to the 30° RMS error measured for sound-localisation using haptic stimulation in unilateral CI users by Fletcher et al 10 . Note that, in these studies, performance was assessed using a single speech or noise stimulus, not a varied stimulus set.…”
supporting
confidence: 89%
“…Those performing worst before training were found to improve most with training. Accuracy after training was substantially better than haptic sound-localisation performance measured after training in Fletcher et al 10 (26° RMS error), in which participants were tested using the same speech sample that was used in training. In fact, the worst performer after training in the current study www.nature.com/scientificreports/ performed with the same accuracy as the average participant in Fletcher et al Strikingly, the accuracy measured after training in the current study was also better than the average sound-localisation performance of bilateral hearing-aid users (~ 25° RMS error using a varied stimulus set) 22 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…After training, we set another ambitious target of achieving haptic sound-localisation accuracy of 25° RMS error. This would exceed the haptic sound-localisation accuracy achieved after training by Fletcher et al for a single stimulus 10 and match the sound-localisation accuracy achieved by bilateral hearing-aid users for a varied stimulus set 22 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 66%
“…For the experimental group, we set a target of achieving less than 28° RMS localisation error before training, as we expected our use of linked multi-band compression and wrist-sensitivity correction to give immediate benefit. This would mean we had substantially exceeded the performance achieved by Fletcher et al before training for haptic sound-localisation with a single stimulus 10 . It would also mean we had exceeded sound-localisation performance in bilateral CI users for a single stimulus 4 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 75%
“…Several studies have shown the importance of training to exploiting auditory information presented through haptic stimulation. Fletcher et al showed that a short training regime can improve sound-localisation accuracy for unilaterally implanted CI users both with and without a hearing-aid in the other ear, either when using audio alone, haptic stimulation alone, or a combination of audio and haptic stimulation 10 . This finding is supported by other work showing that sound localisation improves with training for CI users using a single CI 10,28 and for individuals with a severe-to-profound unilateral hearing loss 29 .…”
Users of hearing-assistive devices often struggle to locate and segregate sounds, which can make listening in schools, cafes, and busy workplaces extremely challenging. A recent study in unilaterally implanted CI users showed that sound-localisation was improved when the audio received by behindthe-ear devices was converted to haptic stimulation on each wrist. We built on this work, using a new signal-processing approach to improve localisation accuracy and increase generalisability to a wide range of stimuli. We aimed to: (1) improve haptic sound-localisation accuracy using a varied stimulus set and (2) assess whether accuracy improved with prolonged training. Thirty-two adults with normal touch perception were randomly assigned to an experimental or control group. The experimental group completed a 5-h training regime and the control group were not trained. Without training, haptic sound-localisation was substantially better than in previous work on haptic sound-localisation. It was also markedly better than sound-localisation by either unilaterally or bilaterally implanted CI users. After training, accuracy improved, becoming better than for sound-localisation by bilateral hearing-aid users. These findings suggest that a wrist-worn haptic device could be effective for improving spatial hearing for a range of hearing-impaired listeners. Users of hearing-assistive devices, such as hearing aids and cochlear implants, often struggle to locate and segregate sounds 1-4. As well as impairing threat detection, this makes listening in complex acoustic environmentssuch as, schools, cafes, and busy workplaces-highly challenging. Cochlear implants (CIs) enable severely-toprofoundly deaf individuals to perceive sound by electrically stimulating the auditory nerve. Recently, it has been shown that this electrical stimulation can be augmented by providing missing sound information through haptic stimulation ("electro-haptic stimulation") 5-11. Historically, a small number of studies in young normal-hearing listeners have explored the possibility of using haptic stimulation on the fingertips to locate sounds 12-15 , but research in this area is extremely sparse. In a recent study by Fletcher et al., it was shown that sound-localisation can be substantially improved in CI users by augmenting the CI signal with haptic stimulation on the wrists 10. This haptic stimulation was derived from audio signals that would be received by behind-the-ear hearing aids or CIs. Localisation accuracy increased after 30 min of training, with the same speech-sample used for both testing and training. In this study, we developed a new signal-processing strategy for haptic sound-localisation, which incorporated linked multi-band compression and wrist sensitivity correction. This was intended to improve haptic sound-localisation accuracy and increase the generalisability of the approach to a wide range of stimuli. The first aim of this study was to assess localisation accuracy with this new signal-processing strategy. To ensure that results were gen...
Increased human life expectancy, due in part to improvements in infant and childhood survival, more active lifestyles, in combination with higher patient expectations for better health outcomes, is leading to an extensive change in the number, type and manner in which health conditions are treated. Over the next decades as the global population rapidly progresses toward a super‐aging society, meeting the long‐term quality of care needs is forecast to present a major healthcare challenge. The goal is to ensure longer periods of good health, a sustained sense of well‐being, with extended periods of activity, social engagement, and productivity. To accomplish these goals, multifunctionalized interfaces are an indispensable component of next generation medical technologies. The development of more sophisticated materials and devices as well as an improved understanding of human disease is forecast to revolutionize the diagnosis and treatment of conditions ranging from osteoarthritis to Alzheimer's disease and will impact disease prevention. This review examines emerging cutting‐edge bionic materials, devices and technologies developed to advance disease prevention, and medical care and treatment in our elderly population including developments in smart bandages, cochlear implants, and the increasing role of artificial intelligence and nanorobotics in medicine.
Cochlear implants (CIs) allow hearing impaired individuals to understand speech with remarkable efficiency. On the other hand, they poorly perform in music perception. It may be possible to improve the music experience with the use of other senses such as touch. We present Tickle Tuner, a haptic feedback device suitable for musical training of CI users. The prototype is composed of two high-quality haptic actuators and an external Digital to Analogue Converter (DAC) hosted in a 3D printed enclosure coupled with a smartphone. We describe the design and implementation of the prototype, the analysis of its characteristics and we introduce a test bench for the design of different mappings between sound and vibrations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.