Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28664331›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2017

Benefit of the UltraZoom beamforming technology in noise in cochlear implant users.

Isabelle Mosnier, Nathalie Mathias, Jonathan Flament, Dorith Amar, Amelie Liagre-Callies, Stephanie Borel, Emmanuèle Ambert-Dahan, Olivier Sterkers, Daniele Bernardeschi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The COVID-19 pandemic and upgrades of CI speech processors for children: part II-hearing outcomes.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Contribution of noise reduction pre-processing and microphone directionality strategies in the speech recognition in noise in adult cochlear implant users.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Benefits in noise from sound processor upgrade in thirty-three cochlear implant users for more than 20 years.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. [Research progress of microphone array based front-end speech enhancement technology for cochlear implant].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2019
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Isabelle MosnierSorbonne Universités, Université Pierre et Marie Curie Paris 6, Inserm, Unité Réhabilitation chirurgicale mini-invasive et robotisée de l'audition, Paris, France. isabelle.mosnier@aphp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0458-4827
Nathalie MathiasAdvanced Bionics, Bron, France.
Jonathan FlamentAP-HP, Groupe Hospitalier Universitaire Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service ORL, Otologie, implants auditifs et chirurgie de la base du crâne, 47-83 Boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75651, Paris Cedex 13, France.
Dorith AmarAP-HP, Groupe Hospitalier Universitaire Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service ORL, Otologie, implants auditifs et chirurgie de la base du crâne, 47-83 Boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75651, Paris Cedex 13, France.
Amelie Liagre-CalliesAP-HP, Groupe Hospitalier Universitaire Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service ORL, Otologie, implants auditifs et chirurgie de la base du crâne, 47-83 Boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75651, Paris Cedex 13, France.
Stephanie BorelAP-HP, Groupe Hospitalier Universitaire Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service ORL, Otologie, implants auditifs et chirurgie de la base du crâne, 47-83 Boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75651, Paris Cedex 13, France.
Emmanuèle Ambert-DahanAP-HP, Groupe Hospitalier Universitaire Pitié-Salpêtrière, Service ORL, Otologie, implants auditifs et chirurgie de la base du crâne, 47-83 Boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75651, Paris Cedex 13, France.
Olivier SterkersSorbonne Universités, Université Pierre et Marie Curie Paris 6, Inserm, Unité Réhabilitation chirurgicale mini-invasive et robotisée de l'audition, Paris, France.
Daniele BernardeschiSorbonne Universités, Université Pierre et Marie Curie Paris 6, Inserm, Unité Réhabilitation chirurgicale mini-invasive et robotisée de l'audition, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objectives of the study were to demonstrate the audiological and subjective benefits of the adaptive UltraZoom beamforming technology available in the Naída CI Q70 sound processor, in cochlear-implanted adults upgraded from a previous generation sound processor. Thirty-four adults aged between 21 and 89 years (mean 53 ± 19) were prospectively included. Nine subjects were unilaterally implanted, 11 bilaterally and 14 were bimodal users. The mean duration of cochlear implant use was 7 years (range 5-15 years). Subjects were tested in quiet with monosyllabic words and in noise with the adaptive French Matrix test in the best-aided conditions. The test setup contained a signal source in front of the subject and three noise sources at +/-90° and 180°. The noise was presented at a fixed level of 65 dB SPL and the level of speech signal was varied to obtain the speech reception threshold (SRT). During the upgrade visit, subjects were tested with the Harmony and with the Naída CI sound processors in omnidirectional microphone configuration. After a take-home phase of 2 months, tests were repeated with the Naída CI processor with and without UltraZoom. Subjective assessment of the sound quality in daily environments was recorded using the APHAB questionnaire. No difference in performance was observed in quiet between the two processors. The Matrix test in noise was possible in the 21 subjects with the better performance. No difference was observed between the two processors for performance in noise when using the omnidirectional microphone. At the follow-up session, the median SRT with the Naída CI processor with UltraZoom was -4 dB compared to -0.45 dB without UltraZoom. The use of UltraZoom improved the median SRT by 3.6 dB (p < 0.0001, Wilcoxon paired test). When looking at the APHAB outcome, improvement was observed for speech understanding in noisy environments (p < 0.01) and in aversive situations (p < 0.05) in the group of 21 subjects who were able to perform the Matrix test in noise and for speech understanding in noise (p < 0.05) in the group of 13 subjects with the poorest performance, who were not able to perform the Matrix test in noise. The use of UltraZoom beamforming technology, available on the new sound processor Naída CI, improves speech performance in difficult and realistic noisy conditions when the cochlear implant user needs to focus on the person speaking at the front. Using the APHAB questionnaire, a subjective benefit for listening in background noise was also observed in subjects with good performance as well as in those with poor performance. This study highlighted the importance of upgrading CI recipients to new technology and to include assessment in noise and subjective feedback evaluation as part of the process.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsNoiseSpeech PerceptionAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesFemaleHearing Loss, SensorineuralHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionSpeech Reception Threshold TestSurveys and QuestionnairesSpeech intelligibility in noiseSpeech processorSubjective benefitUpgrading

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.