Cargando…

A Binaural Cochlear Implant Sound Coding Strategy Inspired by the Contralateral Medial Olivocochlear Reflex

OBJECTIVES: In natural hearing, cochlear mechanical compression is dynamically adjusted via the efferent medial olivocochlear reflex (MOCR). These adjustments probably help understanding speech in noisy environments and are not available to the users of current cochlear implants (CIs). The aims of t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lopez-Poveda, Enrique A., Eustaquio-Martín, Almudena, Stohl, Joshua S., Wolford, Robert D., Schatzer, Reinhold, Wilson, Blake S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Williams And Wilkins 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4894785/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26862711
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000273
_version_ 1782435722398007296
author Lopez-Poveda, Enrique A.
Eustaquio-Martín, Almudena
Stohl, Joshua S.
Wolford, Robert D.
Schatzer, Reinhold
Wilson, Blake S.
author_facet Lopez-Poveda, Enrique A.
Eustaquio-Martín, Almudena
Stohl, Joshua S.
Wolford, Robert D.
Schatzer, Reinhold
Wilson, Blake S.
author_sort Lopez-Poveda, Enrique A.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: In natural hearing, cochlear mechanical compression is dynamically adjusted via the efferent medial olivocochlear reflex (MOCR). These adjustments probably help understanding speech in noisy environments and are not available to the users of current cochlear implants (CIs). The aims of the present study are to: (1) present a binaural CI sound processing strategy inspired by the control of cochlear compression provided by the contralateral MOCR in natural hearing; and (2) assess the benefits of the new strategy for understanding speech presented in competition with steady noise with a speech-like spectrum in various spatial configurations of the speech and noise sources. DESIGN: Pairs of CI sound processors (one per ear) were constructed to mimic or not mimic the effects of the contralateral MOCR on compression. For the nonmimicking condition (standard strategy or STD), the two processors in a pair functioned similarly to standard clinical processors (i.e., with fixed back-end compression and independently of each other). When configured to mimic the effects of the MOCR (MOC strategy), the two processors communicated with each other and the amount of back-end compression in a given frequency channel of each processor in the pair decreased/increased dynamically (so that output levels dropped/increased) with increases/decreases in the output energy from the corresponding frequency channel in the contralateral processor. Speech reception thresholds in speech-shaped noise were measured for 3 bilateral CI users and 2 single-sided deaf unilateral CI users. Thresholds were compared for the STD and MOC strategies in unilateral and bilateral listening conditions and for three spatial configurations of the speech and noise sources in simulated free-field conditions: speech and noise sources colocated in front of the listener, speech on the left ear with noise in front of the listener, and speech on the left ear with noise on the right ear. In both bilateral and unilateral listening, the electrical stimulus delivered to the test ear(s) was always calculated as if the listeners were wearing bilateral processors. RESULTS: In both unilateral and bilateral listening conditions, mean speech reception thresholds were comparable with the two strategies for colocated speech and noise sources, but were at least 2 dB lower (better) with the MOC than with the STD strategy for spatially separated speech and noise sources. In unilateral listening conditions, mean thresholds improved with increasing the spatial separation between the speech and noise sources regardless of the strategy but the improvement was significantly greater with the MOC strategy. In bilateral listening conditions, thresholds improved significantly with increasing the speech-noise spatial separation only with the MOC strategy. CONCLUSIONS: The MOC strategy (1) significantly improved the intelligibility of speech presented in competition with a spatially separated noise source, both in unilateral and bilateral listening conditions; (2) produced significant spatial release from masking in bilateral listening conditions, something that did not occur with fixed compression; and (3) enhanced spatial release from masking in unilateral listening conditions. The MOC strategy as implemented here, or a modified version of it, may be usefully applied in CIs and in hearing aids.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4894785
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Williams And Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48947852016-06-21 A Binaural Cochlear Implant Sound Coding Strategy Inspired by the Contralateral Medial Olivocochlear Reflex Lopez-Poveda, Enrique A. Eustaquio-Martín, Almudena Stohl, Joshua S. Wolford, Robert D. Schatzer, Reinhold Wilson, Blake S. Ear Hear e-Research Articles OBJECTIVES: In natural hearing, cochlear mechanical compression is dynamically adjusted via the efferent medial olivocochlear reflex (MOCR). These adjustments probably help understanding speech in noisy environments and are not available to the users of current cochlear implants (CIs). The aims of the present study are to: (1) present a binaural CI sound processing strategy inspired by the control of cochlear compression provided by the contralateral MOCR in natural hearing; and (2) assess the benefits of the new strategy for understanding speech presented in competition with steady noise with a speech-like spectrum in various spatial configurations of the speech and noise sources. DESIGN: Pairs of CI sound processors (one per ear) were constructed to mimic or not mimic the effects of the contralateral MOCR on compression. For the nonmimicking condition (standard strategy or STD), the two processors in a pair functioned similarly to standard clinical processors (i.e., with fixed back-end compression and independently of each other). When configured to mimic the effects of the MOCR (MOC strategy), the two processors communicated with each other and the amount of back-end compression in a given frequency channel of each processor in the pair decreased/increased dynamically (so that output levels dropped/increased) with increases/decreases in the output energy from the corresponding frequency channel in the contralateral processor. Speech reception thresholds in speech-shaped noise were measured for 3 bilateral CI users and 2 single-sided deaf unilateral CI users. Thresholds were compared for the STD and MOC strategies in unilateral and bilateral listening conditions and for three spatial configurations of the speech and noise sources in simulated free-field conditions: speech and noise sources colocated in front of the listener, speech on the left ear with noise in front of the listener, and speech on the left ear with noise on the right ear. In both bilateral and unilateral listening, the electrical stimulus delivered to the test ear(s) was always calculated as if the listeners were wearing bilateral processors. RESULTS: In both unilateral and bilateral listening conditions, mean speech reception thresholds were comparable with the two strategies for colocated speech and noise sources, but were at least 2 dB lower (better) with the MOC than with the STD strategy for spatially separated speech and noise sources. In unilateral listening conditions, mean thresholds improved with increasing the spatial separation between the speech and noise sources regardless of the strategy but the improvement was significantly greater with the MOC strategy. In bilateral listening conditions, thresholds improved significantly with increasing the speech-noise spatial separation only with the MOC strategy. CONCLUSIONS: The MOC strategy (1) significantly improved the intelligibility of speech presented in competition with a spatially separated noise source, both in unilateral and bilateral listening conditions; (2) produced significant spatial release from masking in bilateral listening conditions, something that did not occur with fixed compression; and (3) enhanced spatial release from masking in unilateral listening conditions. The MOC strategy as implemented here, or a modified version of it, may be usefully applied in CIs and in hearing aids. Williams And Wilkins 2016-05 2015-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4894785/ /pubmed/26862711 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000273 Text en Copyright © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.
spellingShingle e-Research Articles
Lopez-Poveda, Enrique A.
Eustaquio-Martín, Almudena
Stohl, Joshua S.
Wolford, Robert D.
Schatzer, Reinhold
Wilson, Blake S.
A Binaural Cochlear Implant Sound Coding Strategy Inspired by the Contralateral Medial Olivocochlear Reflex
title A Binaural Cochlear Implant Sound Coding Strategy Inspired by the Contralateral Medial Olivocochlear Reflex
title_full A Binaural Cochlear Implant Sound Coding Strategy Inspired by the Contralateral Medial Olivocochlear Reflex
title_fullStr A Binaural Cochlear Implant Sound Coding Strategy Inspired by the Contralateral Medial Olivocochlear Reflex
title_full_unstemmed A Binaural Cochlear Implant Sound Coding Strategy Inspired by the Contralateral Medial Olivocochlear Reflex
title_short A Binaural Cochlear Implant Sound Coding Strategy Inspired by the Contralateral Medial Olivocochlear Reflex
title_sort binaural cochlear implant sound coding strategy inspired by the contralateral medial olivocochlear reflex
topic e-Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4894785/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26862711
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000273
work_keys_str_mv AT lopezpovedaenriquea abinauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT eustaquiomartinalmudena abinauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT stohljoshuas abinauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT wolfordrobertd abinauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT schatzerreinhold abinauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT wilsonblakes abinauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT lopezpovedaenriquea binauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT eustaquiomartinalmudena binauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT stohljoshuas binauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT wolfordrobertd binauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT schatzerreinhold binauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex
AT wilsonblakes binauralcochlearimplantsoundcodingstrategyinspiredbythecontralateralmedialolivocochlearreflex