Hearing Performance Benefits of a Programmable Power Baha® Sound Processor with a Directional Microphone for Patients with a Mixed Hearing Loss

Abstract

ObjectivesNew signal processing technologies have recently become available for Baha® sound processors. These technologies have led to an increase in power and to the implementation of directional microphones. For any new technology, it is important to evaluate the degree of benefit under different listening situations.MethodsTwenty wearers of the Baha osseointegrated hearing system participated in the investigation. The control sound processor was the Baha Intenso and the test sound processor was the Cochlear™ Baha® BP110power. Performance was evaluated in terms of free-field audibility with narrow band noise stimuli. Speech recognition of monosyllabic phonetically balanced (PB) words in quiet was performed at three intensity settings (50, 65, and 80 dB sound pressure level [SPL]) with materials presented at 0 degrees azimuth. Speech recognition of sentences in noise using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) in an adaptive framework was performed with speech from 0 degrees and noise held constant at 65 dB SPL from 180 degrees. Testing was performed in both the omni and directional microphone settings. Loudness growth was assessed in randomly presented 10 dB steps between 30 and 90 dB SPL to narrow band noise stimuli at 500 Hz and 3,000 Hz.ResultsThe test sound processor had significantly improved high frequency audibility (3,000-8,000 Hz). Speech recognition of PB words in quiet at three different intensity levels (50, 65, and 80 dB SPL) indicated a significant difference in terms of level (P<0.0001) but not for sound processor type (P>0.05). Speech recognition of sentences in noise demonstrated a 2.5 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) improvement in performance for the test sound processor. The directional microphone provided an additional 2.3 dB SNR improvement in speech recognition (P<0.0001). Loudness growth functions demonstrated similar performance, indicating that both sound processors had sufficient headroom and amplification for the required hearing loss.ConclusionThe test sound processor demonstrated significant improvements in the most challenging listening situation (speech recognition in noise). The implementation of a directional microphone demonstrated a further potential improvement in hearing performance. Both the control and test sound processors demonstrated good performance in terms of audibility, word recognition in quiet and loudness growth.

Hearing Rehabilitation through Bone-Conducted Sound Stimulation: Preliminary Results

“…The patients subjected to speech perception tests in the present study showed gains. However, these gains were not as significant as those reported by Flynn (2012), 20 who recorded lower, but non-significant (F [1,19] = 1.83, p > 0.05) speech recognition under silence condition (4–5%). Therefore, they found 50 dB and 65 dB improvement in the test-sound processor.…”

Efficacy of Auditory Implants for Patients With Conductive and Mixed Hearing Loss Depends on Implant Center

“…The ratio (mean “effective gain” divided by the mean cochlear hearing threshold) as a function of frequency. The full lines refer to the averaged data of respectively the Codacs (2,23,24), Baha (14,15,22) and VSB devices (16–21; see labels) obtained from studies in patients with a mean cochlear hearing loss exceeding 35 dB HL. The dashed lines present similar data for studies in patients with a cochlear hearing loss between 25 and 35 dB HL.…”

“…The “effective gain” at 1, 2, and 4 kHz averaged as a function of the cochlear hearing loss averaged across the same frequencies. The triangles refer to the Codacs studies (2,23,24), the squares to Bonebridge studies (34–38), the dots to VSB studies (16–21,27–33) and the diamonds to Baha/Ponto studies (5,6,14,15, 22,25,26, 36,39–41). …”

Clinical Performance of a New Magnetic Bone Conduction Hearing Implant System

“…First, energy loss in the intervening skin layer results in less effective sound transmission compared with direct bone conduction (8Y10). However, recent advances in digital sound processing and fitting tools (11) make it possible to evaluate and partly compensate for sound attenuation by increasing the amplification in the affected frequencies (12). Second, the magnetic coupling must ensure good retention to enable effective sound transmission while not causing discomfort and/or pressure-related soft tissue complications.…”