Reconhecimento de fala em crianças usuárias de implante coclear utilizando dois diferentes processadores de fala

Abstract

Purpose: To study comparatively the speech recognition skills in quiet and noise background situation in children with cochlear implants using two different speech processors. Methods: It was evaluated 26 children with cochlear implant device Nucleus 24M or 24K, Cochlear Corporation, divided in two groups according to the speech processor used. The Group 1 consisted of 16 children who used the Sprint processor and the Group 2 consisted of 10 children who used the Freedom processor. The Hearing in Noise Test -Portuguese version of Brazil was applied in the sound field in silence and in the presence of noise background situation. Results: The speech recognition performance of Group 2 (Freedom) was higher than Group 1 (Sprint) in all evaluation situations, with significant difference between groups only on quiet situation. Conclusion: The speech processor showed significant influence on speech perception in children users of Nucleus 24K and 24M cochlear implants. The components of the signal processing available on the Nucleus Freedom processor may have contributed to the better speech recognition performance of Group 2. Further research is needed to complement these findings.RESUMO Objetivo: Estudar comparativamente a habilidade de reconhecimento de fala no silêncio e na presença de ruído competitivo em crianças usuárias de implante coclear utilizando dois diferentes processadores de fala. Métodos: Foram avaliadas 26 crianças usuárias do implante coclear Nucleus 24M/24K, da Cochlear Corporation®, divididas em dois grupos de acordo com o processador de fala utilizado. O Grupo 1 foi composto por 16 crianças que faziam uso do processador de fala Sprint e o Grupo 2 foi composto por 10 crianças que faziam uso do processador de fala Freedom. Foi aplicado o Hearing in Noise Test -versão em Português/ Brasil, em campo livre, na condição de silêncio e na presença de ruído competitivo. Resultados: O desempenho do Grupo 2 (Freedom) foi superior ao desempenho do Grupo 1 (Sprint) em todas as condições de avaliação, sendo evidenciada diferença entre eles na condição de silêncio.Conclusão: O processador de fala apresentou influência significativa na percepção de fala de crianças usuárias dos implantes cocleares Nucleus 24K e 24M. As características de pré-processamento do som presentes no processador de fala Freedom podem ter contribuído para o melhor desempenho do Grupo 2 nos testes de percepção de fala realizados.Novos estudos são necessários para complementação destes achados.

Percepção de fala no ruído em músicos

“…The present study results are also close to the reference values, indicating the normality of the participants. The HINT test was created to assess auditory performance in hearing aid users (12) , but it has also been used to study auditory performance differences in specific populations, such as children (18) , cochlear implant users (19,20) , workers exposed to noise (14) and chemicals (21) , airmen (22) , bilingual individuals (23) , and musicians.…”

As implicações do implante coclear para desenvolvimento das habilidades de linguagem: uma revisão da literatura

“…This finding may indicate, in part, an engagement of the scientific community to study the processes of development of auditory skills via cochlear implant 5,20 . Yet, this emphasis can be endorsed by the rapid improvement of technology of this device (especially the speech processor) 20 , which promotes researches (recommended or not by companies) on the effects of these technological refinements in certain auditory skills.…”

“…Although Brazil has established important steps in the direction of these policies (such as of this was the investment in the production of processors with increasingly sophisticated technologies that enable a high level of refinement of the captured sound stimuli 20 which demanded research on the possible effects of these on the auditory detection/discrimination and cost-effectiveness among the models 20 .…”

“…In the scientific field, we can infer that the foundation and consolidation of research groups in the cochlear implant services (of multi-professional character rand linked to universities and centers of reference) have provided a favorable condition for research, monitoring and intervention in cochlear implant users 16,[20][21][22] .…”

“…The advancement and technological enhancement in cochlear implant devices can be another important factor in the growth of researches 6,19,20 . From 2003 to 2013, companies have produced models of cochlear implants with important differences in the components (such as waterproof devices, for example), the programming and mapping software and the coding strategies (such as CIS, SPEAK and ACE); these changes, in turn, may imply distinct effects on perception of speech sounds and, therefore, the development of auditory skills and oral production 5,20 .An example …”