A Systematic Review of Electric-Acoustic Stimulation: Device Fitting Ranges, Outcomes, and Clinical Fitting Practices

被引:71
作者
Incerti, Paola V. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Ching, Teresa Y. C. [1 ,2 ]
Cowan, Robert [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Natl Acoust Labs, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] HEARing Cooperat Res Ctr, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[3] Univ Melbourne, Dept Audiol Hearing & Speech Sci, Melbourne, Vic 3010, Australia
来源
TRENDS IN AMPLIFICATION | 2013年 / 17卷 / 01期
关键词
electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS); cochlear implants (CI); hearing aids (HA); LOW-FREQUENCY HEARING; COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION; RESIDUAL HEARING; PARTIAL DEAFNESS; SPEECH-PERCEPTION; AUDITORY-SYSTEM; ELECTROACOUSTIC STIMULATION; PRESERVATION; RECOGNITION; BENEFIT;
D O I
10.1177/1084713813480857
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Cochlear implant systems that combine electric and acoustic stimulation in the same ear are now commercially available and the number of patients using these devices is steadily increasing. In particular, electric-acoustic stimulation is an option for patients with severe, high frequency sensorineural hearing impairment. There have been a range of approaches to combining electric stimulation and acoustic hearing in the same ear. To develop a better understanding of fitting practices for devices that combine electric and acoustic stimulation, we conducted a systematic review addressing three clinical questions: what is the range of acoustic hearing in the implanted ear that can be effectively preserved for an electric-acoustic fitting?; what benefits are provided by combining acoustic stimulation with electric stimulation?; and what clinical fitting practices have been developed for devices that combine electric and acoustic stimulation? A search of the literature was conducted and 27 articles that met the strict evaluation criteria adopted for the review were identified for detailed analysis. The range of auditory thresholds in the implanted ear that can be successfully used for an electric-acoustic application is quite broad. The effectiveness of combined electric and acoustic stimulation as compared with electric stimulation alone was consistently demonstrated, highlighting the potential value of preservation and utilization of low frequency hearing in the implanted ear. However, clinical procedures for best fitting of electric-acoustic devices were varied. This clearly identified a need for further investigation of fitting procedures aimed at maximizing outcomes for recipients of electric-acoustic devices.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 26
页数:24
相关论文
共 55 条
[1]   Is Electric Acoustic Stimulation Better Than Conventional Cochlear Implantation for Speech Perception in Quiet? [J].
Adunka, Oliver F. ;
Pillsbury, Harold C. ;
Adunka, Marcia C. ;
Buchman, Craig A. .
OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2010, 31 (07) :1049-1054
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2010, COCHLEAR IMPLANTS IN, DOI [10.1179/146701010X12726366068256, DOI 10.1179/146701010X12726366068256]
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2009, ADV OTO RHINO LARYNG
[4]  
[Anonymous], AUDIOLOGY TODAY
[5]  
[Anonymous], EAR HEARING
[6]  
Arnoldner C, 2010, ADV OTO-RHINO-LARYNG, V67, P116, DOI 10.1159/000262603
[7]   Pitch Matching Psychometrics in Electric Acoustic Stimulation [J].
Baumann, Uwe ;
Rader, Tobias ;
Helbig, Silke ;
Bahmer, Andreas .
EAR AND HEARING, 2011, 32 (05) :656-662
[8]  
Brockmeier SJ, 2010, ADV OTO-RHINO-LARYNG, V67, P70, DOI [10.1159/000262598, 10.1179/146701010X12671177440343]
[9]   Achieving Electric-Acoustic Benefit with a Modulated Tone [J].
Brown, Christopher A. ;
Bacon, Sid P. .
EAR AND HEARING, 2009, 30 (05) :489-493
[10]   Impact of Low-Frequency Hearing [J].
Buechner, A. ;
Schuessler, M. ;
Battmer, R. D. ;
Stoever, T. ;
Lesinski-Schiedat, A. ;
Lenarz, T. .
AUDIOLOGY AND NEURO-OTOLOGY, 2009, 14 :8-13