Hybrid 10 clinical trial: Preliminary results

Bruce J. Gantz, Marlan R. Hansen, Christopher W. Turner, Jacob J. Oleson, Lina Reiss, Aaron J. Parkinson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

142 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Acoustic plus electric (electric-acoustic) speech processing has been successful in highlighting the important role of articulation information in consonant recognition in those adults that have profound high-frequency hearing loss at frequencies greater than 1500 Hz and less than 60% discrimination scores. Eighty-seven subjects were enrolled in an adult Hybrid multicenter Food and Drug Administration clinical trial. Immediate hearing preservation was accomplished in 85/87 subjects. Over time (3 months to 5 years), some hearing preservation was maintained in 91% of the group. Combined electric-acoustic processing enabled most of this group of volunteers to gain improved speech understanding, compared to their preoperative hearing, with bilateral hearing aids. Most have preservation of low-frequency acoustic hearing within 15 dB of their preoperative pure tone levels. Those with greater losses (>30 dB) also benefited from the combination of electric-acoustic speech processing. Postoperatively, in the electric-acoustic processing condition, loss of low-frequency hearing did not correlate with improvements in speech perception scores in quiet. Sixteen subjects were identified as poor performers in that they did not achieve a significant improvement through electric-acoustic processing. A multiple regression analysis determined that 91% of the variance in the poorly performing group can be explained by the preoperative speech recognition score and duration of deafness. Signal-to-noise ratios for speech understanding in noise improved more than 9 dB in some individuals in the electric-acoustic processing condition. The relation between speech understanding in noise thresholds and residual low-frequency acoustic hearing is significant (r = 0.62; p <0.05). The data suggest that, in general, the advantages gained for speech recognition in noise by preserving residual hearing exist, unless the hearing loss approaches profound levels. Preservation of residual low-frequency hearing should be considered when expanding candidate selection criteria for standard cochlear implants. Duration of profound high-frequency hearing loss appears to be an important variable when determining selection criteria for the Hybrid implant.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)32-38
Number of pages7
JournalAudiology and Neurotology
Volume14
Issue numberSUPPL. 1
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Hearing
Acoustics
Clinical Trials
Speech Acoustics
High-Frequency Hearing Loss
Noise
Patient Selection
Speech Perception
Hearing Aids
Cochlear Implants
Signal-To-Noise Ratio
Deafness
United States Food and Drug Administration
Hearing Loss
Volunteers
Regression Analysis
Recognition (Psychology)

Keywords

  • Electric-acoustic stimulation
  • Hearing loss
  • Hearing preservation
  • Sensorineural
  • Short electrode

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Sensory Systems
  • Speech and Hearing

Cite this

Gantz, B. J., Hansen, M. R., Turner, C. W., Oleson, J. J., Reiss, L., & Parkinson, A. J. (2009). Hybrid 10 clinical trial: Preliminary results. Audiology and Neurotology, 14(SUPPL. 1), 32-38. https://doi.org/10.1159/000206493

Hybrid 10 clinical trial : Preliminary results. / Gantz, Bruce J.; Hansen, Marlan R.; Turner, Christopher W.; Oleson, Jacob J.; Reiss, Lina; Parkinson, Aaron J.

In: Audiology and Neurotology, Vol. 14, No. SUPPL. 1, 04.2009, p. 32-38.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gantz, BJ, Hansen, MR, Turner, CW, Oleson, JJ, Reiss, L & Parkinson, AJ 2009, 'Hybrid 10 clinical trial: Preliminary results', Audiology and Neurotology, vol. 14, no. SUPPL. 1, pp. 32-38. https://doi.org/10.1159/000206493
Gantz BJ, Hansen MR, Turner CW, Oleson JJ, Reiss L, Parkinson AJ. Hybrid 10 clinical trial: Preliminary results. Audiology and Neurotology. 2009 Apr;14(SUPPL. 1):32-38. https://doi.org/10.1159/000206493
Gantz, Bruce J. ; Hansen, Marlan R. ; Turner, Christopher W. ; Oleson, Jacob J. ; Reiss, Lina ; Parkinson, Aaron J. / Hybrid 10 clinical trial : Preliminary results. In: Audiology and Neurotology. 2009 ; Vol. 14, No. SUPPL. 1. pp. 32-38.
@article{f4967c44f7154cc999008ecac5bc6a42,
title = "Hybrid 10 clinical trial: Preliminary results",
abstract = "Acoustic plus electric (electric-acoustic) speech processing has been successful in highlighting the important role of articulation information in consonant recognition in those adults that have profound high-frequency hearing loss at frequencies greater than 1500 Hz and less than 60{\%} discrimination scores. Eighty-seven subjects were enrolled in an adult Hybrid multicenter Food and Drug Administration clinical trial. Immediate hearing preservation was accomplished in 85/87 subjects. Over time (3 months to 5 years), some hearing preservation was maintained in 91{\%} of the group. Combined electric-acoustic processing enabled most of this group of volunteers to gain improved speech understanding, compared to their preoperative hearing, with bilateral hearing aids. Most have preservation of low-frequency acoustic hearing within 15 dB of their preoperative pure tone levels. Those with greater losses (>30 dB) also benefited from the combination of electric-acoustic speech processing. Postoperatively, in the electric-acoustic processing condition, loss of low-frequency hearing did not correlate with improvements in speech perception scores in quiet. Sixteen subjects were identified as poor performers in that they did not achieve a significant improvement through electric-acoustic processing. A multiple regression analysis determined that 91{\%} of the variance in the poorly performing group can be explained by the preoperative speech recognition score and duration of deafness. Signal-to-noise ratios for speech understanding in noise improved more than 9 dB in some individuals in the electric-acoustic processing condition. The relation between speech understanding in noise thresholds and residual low-frequency acoustic hearing is significant (r = 0.62; p <0.05). The data suggest that, in general, the advantages gained for speech recognition in noise by preserving residual hearing exist, unless the hearing loss approaches profound levels. Preservation of residual low-frequency hearing should be considered when expanding candidate selection criteria for standard cochlear implants. Duration of profound high-frequency hearing loss appears to be an important variable when determining selection criteria for the Hybrid implant.",
keywords = "Electric-acoustic stimulation, Hearing loss, Hearing preservation, Sensorineural, Short electrode",
author = "Gantz, {Bruce J.} and Hansen, {Marlan R.} and Turner, {Christopher W.} and Oleson, {Jacob J.} and Lina Reiss and Parkinson, {Aaron J.}",
year = "2009",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1159/000206493",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "32--38",
journal = "Audiology and Neurotology",
issn = "1420-3030",
publisher = "S. Karger AG",
number = "SUPPL. 1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Hybrid 10 clinical trial

T2 - Preliminary results

AU - Gantz, Bruce J.

AU - Hansen, Marlan R.

AU - Turner, Christopher W.

AU - Oleson, Jacob J.

AU - Reiss, Lina

AU - Parkinson, Aaron J.

PY - 2009/4

Y1 - 2009/4

N2 - Acoustic plus electric (electric-acoustic) speech processing has been successful in highlighting the important role of articulation information in consonant recognition in those adults that have profound high-frequency hearing loss at frequencies greater than 1500 Hz and less than 60% discrimination scores. Eighty-seven subjects were enrolled in an adult Hybrid multicenter Food and Drug Administration clinical trial. Immediate hearing preservation was accomplished in 85/87 subjects. Over time (3 months to 5 years), some hearing preservation was maintained in 91% of the group. Combined electric-acoustic processing enabled most of this group of volunteers to gain improved speech understanding, compared to their preoperative hearing, with bilateral hearing aids. Most have preservation of low-frequency acoustic hearing within 15 dB of their preoperative pure tone levels. Those with greater losses (>30 dB) also benefited from the combination of electric-acoustic speech processing. Postoperatively, in the electric-acoustic processing condition, loss of low-frequency hearing did not correlate with improvements in speech perception scores in quiet. Sixteen subjects were identified as poor performers in that they did not achieve a significant improvement through electric-acoustic processing. A multiple regression analysis determined that 91% of the variance in the poorly performing group can be explained by the preoperative speech recognition score and duration of deafness. Signal-to-noise ratios for speech understanding in noise improved more than 9 dB in some individuals in the electric-acoustic processing condition. The relation between speech understanding in noise thresholds and residual low-frequency acoustic hearing is significant (r = 0.62; p <0.05). The data suggest that, in general, the advantages gained for speech recognition in noise by preserving residual hearing exist, unless the hearing loss approaches profound levels. Preservation of residual low-frequency hearing should be considered when expanding candidate selection criteria for standard cochlear implants. Duration of profound high-frequency hearing loss appears to be an important variable when determining selection criteria for the Hybrid implant.

AB - Acoustic plus electric (electric-acoustic) speech processing has been successful in highlighting the important role of articulation information in consonant recognition in those adults that have profound high-frequency hearing loss at frequencies greater than 1500 Hz and less than 60% discrimination scores. Eighty-seven subjects were enrolled in an adult Hybrid multicenter Food and Drug Administration clinical trial. Immediate hearing preservation was accomplished in 85/87 subjects. Over time (3 months to 5 years), some hearing preservation was maintained in 91% of the group. Combined electric-acoustic processing enabled most of this group of volunteers to gain improved speech understanding, compared to their preoperative hearing, with bilateral hearing aids. Most have preservation of low-frequency acoustic hearing within 15 dB of their preoperative pure tone levels. Those with greater losses (>30 dB) also benefited from the combination of electric-acoustic speech processing. Postoperatively, in the electric-acoustic processing condition, loss of low-frequency hearing did not correlate with improvements in speech perception scores in quiet. Sixteen subjects were identified as poor performers in that they did not achieve a significant improvement through electric-acoustic processing. A multiple regression analysis determined that 91% of the variance in the poorly performing group can be explained by the preoperative speech recognition score and duration of deafness. Signal-to-noise ratios for speech understanding in noise improved more than 9 dB in some individuals in the electric-acoustic processing condition. The relation between speech understanding in noise thresholds and residual low-frequency acoustic hearing is significant (r = 0.62; p <0.05). The data suggest that, in general, the advantages gained for speech recognition in noise by preserving residual hearing exist, unless the hearing loss approaches profound levels. Preservation of residual low-frequency hearing should be considered when expanding candidate selection criteria for standard cochlear implants. Duration of profound high-frequency hearing loss appears to be an important variable when determining selection criteria for the Hybrid implant.

KW - Electric-acoustic stimulation

KW - Hearing loss

KW - Hearing preservation

KW - Sensorineural

KW - Short electrode

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=66249084506&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=66249084506&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1159/000206493

DO - 10.1159/000206493

M3 - Article

C2 - 19390173

AN - SCOPUS:66249084506

VL - 14

SP - 32

EP - 38

JO - Audiology and Neurotology

JF - Audiology and Neurotology

SN - 1420-3030

IS - SUPPL. 1

ER -