Cargando…

Auditory Speech Perception Tests in Relation to the Coding Strategy in Cochlear Implant

INTRODUCTION:  The objective of the evaluation of auditory perception of cochlear implant users is to determine how the acoustic signal is processed, leading to the recognition and understanding of sound. OBJECTIVE:  To investigate the differences in the process of auditory speech perception in indi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bazon, Aline Cristine, Mantello, Erika Barioni, Gonçales, Alina Sanches, Isaac, Myriam de Lima, Hyppolito, Miguel Angelo, Reis, Ana Cláudia Mirândola Barbosa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Publicações Ltda 2015
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4942301/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27413409
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1559595
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION:  The objective of the evaluation of auditory perception of cochlear implant users is to determine how the acoustic signal is processed, leading to the recognition and understanding of sound. OBJECTIVE:  To investigate the differences in the process of auditory speech perception in individuals with postlingual hearing loss wearing a cochlear implant, using two different speech coding strategies, and to analyze speech perception and handicap perception in relation to the strategy used. METHODS:  This study is prospective cross-sectional cohort study of a descriptive character. We selected ten cochlear implant users that were characterized by hearing threshold by the application of speech perception tests and of the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults. RESULTS:  There was no significant difference when comparing the variables subject age, age at acquisition of hearing loss, etiology, time of hearing deprivation, time of cochlear implant use and mean hearing threshold with the cochlear implant with the shift in speech coding strategy. There was no relationship between lack of handicap perception and improvement in speech perception in both speech coding strategies used. CONCLUSION:  There was no significant difference between the strategies evaluated and no relation was observed between them and the variables studied.