Spatial hearing with a single cochlear implant in late-implanted adults

Nava, Elena; Bottari, Davide; Bonfioli, Francesca; Beltrame, Millo Achille; Pavani, Francesco

doi:10.1016/j.heares.2009.06.007

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The portable and somewhat convenient nature of these headsets make implementing home-based training paradigms more feasible and thus, beneficial to patients who cannot access in-person laboratory-based training due to old age, limited mobility and/or long commute times. In addition, audiovisual training paradigms have been shown to improve localization performance under monaural conditions (Strelnikov et al 2011;Zonooz and Van Opstal 2019), where spatial localization abilities are severely hampered (Colletti et al 1988;Luntz et al 2005;Nava et al 2009;Slattery and Middlebrooks 1994). Taken together, these studies provide evidence that highlights the crucial role of vision in auditory spatial learning and plasticity and further indicate that audiovisual perceptual learning paradigms can be effective tools in improving auditory perceptual outcomes especially for spatial localization in cochlear implant individuals and in individuals with hearing loss.…”

Section: Visual Facilitation Of Auditory Spatial Learningmentioning

confidence: 69%

Visual Influences on Auditory Behavioral, Neural, and Perceptual Processes: A Review

Opoku-Baah

Schoenhaut

Vassall

et al. 2021

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a naturalistic environment, auditory cues are often accompanied by information from other senses, which can be redundant with or complementary to the auditory information. Although the multisensory interactions derived from this combination of information and that shape auditory function are seen across all sensory modalities, our greatest body of knowledge to date centers on how vision influences audition. In this review, we attempt to capture the state of our understanding at this point in time regarding this topic. Following a general introduction, the review is divided into 5 sections. In the first section, we review the psychophysical evidence in humans regarding vision’s influence in audition, making the distinction between vision’s ability to enhance versus alter auditory performance and perception. Three examples are then described that serve to highlight vision’s ability to modulate auditory processes: spatial ventriloquism, cross-modal dynamic capture, and the McGurk effect. The final part of this section discusses models that have been built based on available psychophysical data and that seek to provide greater mechanistic insights into how vision can impact audition. The second section reviews the extant neuroimaging and far-field imaging work on this topic, with a strong emphasis on the roles of feedforward and feedback processes, on imaging insights into the causal nature of audiovisual interactions, and on the limitations of current imaging-based approaches. These limitations point to a greater need for machine-learning-based decoding approaches toward understanding how auditory representations are shaped by vision. The third section reviews the wealth of neuroanatomical and neurophysiological data from animal models that highlights audiovisual interactions at the neuronal and circuit level in both subcortical and cortical structures. It also speaks to the functional significance of audiovisual interactions for two critically important facets of auditory perception—scene analysis and communication. The fourth section presents current evidence for alterations in audiovisual processes in three clinical conditions: autism, schizophrenia, and sensorineural hearing loss. These changes in audiovisual interactions are postulated to have cascading effects on higher-order domains of dysfunction in these conditions. The final section highlights ongoing work seeking to leverage our knowledge of audiovisual interactions to develop better remediation approaches to these sensory-based disorders, founded in concepts of perceptual plasticity in which vision has been shown to have the capacity to facilitate auditory learning.

show abstract

Section: Visual Facilitation Of Auditory Spatial Learningmentioning

confidence: 69%

Visual Influences on Auditory Behavioral, Neural, and Perceptual Processes: A Review

Opoku-Baah

Schoenhaut

Vassall

et al. 2021

JARO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Participants 4-6 had between 23 and 25.5 years of deprivation in the implanted ear; P7 and P9 also had extended periods of deprivation (40 and 34 years, respectively) in the poorer ear; however, their onset of SPHL was postlingual. It is common that longer periods of time are required to maximize potential benefits of implantation for traditional CI recipients with pre/perilinguistic onset of SPHL compared to those with postlinguistic onset (Litovsky et al 2004; Nava et al 2009). These three participants had meaningful residual hearing in the non-implanted ear, which distinguishes them from traditional CI recipients with bilateral pre/perilinguistic onset of SPHL.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cochlear Implantation in Adults With Asymmetric Hearing Loss

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Bilateral severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss is a standard criterion for cochlear implantation. Increasingly, patients are implanted in one ear and continue to use a hearing aid in the non-implanted ear to improve abilities such as sound localization and speech understanding in noise. Patients with severe-to-profound hearing loss in one ear and a more moderate hearing loss in the other ear (i.e., asymmetric hearing) are not typically considered candidates for cochlear implantation. Amplification in the poorer ear is often unsuccessful due to limited benefit, restricting the patient to unilateral listening from the better ear alone. The purpose of this study was to determine if patients with asymmetric hearing loss could benefit from cochlear implantation in the poorer ear with continued use of a hearing aid in the better ear. Design Ten adults with asymmetric hearing between ears participated. In the poorer ear, all participants met cochlear implant candidacy guidelines; seven had postlingual onset and three had pre/perilingual onset of severe-to-profound hearing loss. All had open-set speech recognition in the better hearing ear. Assessment measures included word and sentence recognition in quiet, sentence recognition in fixed noise (four-talker babble) and in diffuse restaurant noise using an adaptive procedure, localization of word stimuli and a hearing handicap scale. Participants were evaluated pre-implant with hearing aids and post-implant with the implant alone, the hearing aid alone in the better ear and bimodally (the implant and hearing aid in combination). Postlingual participants were evaluated at six months post-implant and pre/perilingual participants were evaluated at six and 12 months post-implant. Data analysis compared results 1) of the poorer hearing ear pre-implant (with hearing aid) and post-implant (with cochlear implant), 2) with the device(s) used for everyday listening pre- and post-implant and, 3) between the hearing aid-alone and bimodal listening conditions post-implant. Results The postlingual participants showed significant improvements in speech recognition after six months cochlear implant use in the poorer ear. Five postlingual participants had a bimodal advantage over the hearing aid-alone condition on at least one test measure. On average, the postlingual participants had significantly improved localization with bimodal input compared to the hearing aid-alone. Only one pre/perilingual participant had open-set speech recognition with the cochlear implant. This participant had better hearing than the other two pre/perilingual participants in both the poorer and better ear. Localization abilities were not significantly different between the bimodal and hearing aid-alone conditions for the pre/perilingual participants. Mean hearing handicap ratings improved post-implant for all participants indicating perceived benefit in everyday life with the addition of the cochlear implant. Conclusions Patients with asymmetric hearing loss who are not typical cochlea...

show abstract

“…However, while these cues can account for some performances in monaural sound localization, not all unilateral deaf patients present satisfactory performances [3]. Such impairment is especially accentuated in unilaterally cochlear implanted deaf patients [6], [7]. In this case, patients probably use the information provided by the other sensory modalities (cross-modal compensation), especially the visual channel because visuo-auditory interactions can improve sound localization [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Audiovisual Training on Monaural Spatial Hearing in Horizontal Plane

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article aims to test the hypothesis that audiovisual integration can improve spatial hearing in monaural conditions when interaural difference cues are not available. We trained one group of subjects with an audiovisual task, where a flash was presented in parallel with the sound and another group in an auditory task, where only sound from different spatial locations was presented. To check whether the observed audiovisual effect was similar to feedback, the third group was trained using the visual feedback paradigm. Training sessions were administered once per day, for 5 days. The performance level in each group was compared for auditory only stimulation on the first and the last day of practice. Improvement after audiovisual training was several times higher than after auditory practice. The group trained with visual feedback demonstrated a different effect of training with the improvement smaller than the group with audiovisual training. We conclude that cross-modal facilitation is highly important to improve spatial hearing in monaural conditions and may be applied to the rehabilitation of patients with unilateral deafness and after unilateral cochlear implantation.

show abstract

Spatial hearing with a single cochlear implant in late-implanted adults

Cited by 12 publications

References 22 publications

Visual Influences on Auditory Behavioral, Neural, and Perceptual Processes: A Review

Visual Influences on Auditory Behavioral, Neural, and Perceptual Processes: A Review

Cochlear Implantation in Adults With Asymmetric Hearing Loss

Effect of Audiovisual Training on Monaural Spatial Hearing in Horizontal Plane

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About