Cargando…

Impact of a Moving Noise Masker on Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users

OBJECTIVES: Previous studies investigating speech perception in noise have typically been conducted with static masker positions. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of spatial separation of source and masker (spatial release from masking, SRM) in a moving masker setup and to evaluat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weissgerber, Tobias, Rader, Tobias, Baumann, Uwe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4430230/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25970594
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0126133
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: Previous studies investigating speech perception in noise have typically been conducted with static masker positions. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of spatial separation of source and masker (spatial release from masking, SRM) in a moving masker setup and to evaluate the impact of adaptive beamforming in comparison with fixed directional microphones in cochlear implant (CI) users. DESIGN: Speech reception thresholds (SRT) were measured in S(0)N(0) and in a moving masker setup (S(0)N(move)) in 12 normal hearing participants and 14 CI users (7 subjects bilateral, 7 bimodal with a hearing aid in the contralateral ear). Speech processor settings were a moderately directional microphone, a fixed beamformer, or an adaptive beamformer. The moving noise source was generated by means of wave field synthesis and was smoothly moved in a shape of a half-circle from one ear to the contralateral ear. Noise was presented in either of two conditions: continuous or modulated. RESULTS: SRTs in the S(0)N(move) setup were significantly improved compared to the S(0)N(0) setup for both the normal hearing control group and the bilateral group in continuous noise, and for the control group in modulated noise. There was no effect of subject group. A significant effect of directional sensitivity was found in the S(0)N(move) setup. In the bilateral group, the adaptive beamformer achieved lower SRTs than the fixed beamformer setting. Adaptive beamforming improved SRT in both CI user groups substantially by about 3 dB (bimodal group) and 8 dB (bilateral group) depending on masker type. CONCLUSIONS: CI users showed SRM that was comparable to normal hearing subjects. In listening situations of everyday life with spatial separation of source and masker, directional microphones significantly improved speech perception with individual improvements of up to 15 dB SNR. Users of bilateral speech processors with both directional microphones obtained the highest benefit.