Graeme Clark Collection
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10
-
ItemIssues in the development of multichannel tactile devices for hearing-impaired children and adults( 1995)Levitt, Pickett and Houde (1980), in their landmark monograph, noted that the history of tactile aid development has been characterized by periodic bursts of enthusiasm and research, often culminating in identification of new avenues to be explored for improving tactile perception of speech. While several research groups have maintained long-term interest in tactile research (Boothroyd, 1985; Oller, Payne, & Gavin, 1980; Saunders, 1985), there was a marked increase in reports of new multichannel tactile devices during the 1980s (reviewed in McGarr, 1989). This upsurge may have been spurred in part by the rapid increase world-wide in the number of hearing-impaired children and adults using cochlear implants as everyday communication devices, and the perceived need for a non-surgical approach to assisting hearing-impaired children. Despite this increase in tactile research, no tactile device has yet achieved widespread commercial use by the hearing-impaired community. It is, therefore, of interest to question why cochlear implants have been more widely accepted than tactile devices.
-
ItemAcute effects of high-rate stimulation on auditory nerve function in guinea pigs( 1995)Cochlear implants have been shown to successfully provide profoundly deaf patients with auditory cues for speech discrimination. Furthermore, a number of safety studies using the Melbourne/Cochlear electrode array indicated that chronic electrical stimulation using charge-balanced biphasic current pulses and stimulus rates between 100 and 500 pulses per second (pps) do not result in additional spiral ganglion loss or general cochlear pathology.1-3 However, safe maximum levels for stimulus parameters (stimulus rate, charge per phase, charge density) have not yet been adequately defined.
-
ItemCochlear implants: future research directions( 1995)The future of cochlear implants for profoundly deaf people now seems assured, and further research should improve its benefits. The present benefits of cochlear implants have now been clearly demonstrated. The results have shown that many postlingually deaf adults get significant open-set speech recognition using electrical stimulation alone, and that profoundly deaf children with a cochlear implant get better speech perception than similar children who use hearing aids or tactile vocoders.
-
ItemPotential and limitations of cochlear implants in children( 1995)Multiple-channel cochlear implants have been in use with children and adolescents for 8 years. The speech perception, speech production, and language of many of these children has been investigated in some detail.l-4 There have been many predictions about factors that may affect the performance of children with implants. For instance, it has been suggested that children with a congenital loss of hearing would not have the same potential to benefit from a cochlear implant as those with an acquired loss. Similarly, it has been suggested that younger children are likely to gain more benefit from a cochlear implant because of the effect of various critical ages for language learning.5 As more results have become available, it has been our observation that the performance of any particular child with a cochlear implant does not appear to follow well-defined rules, and that generalizations about the potential of certain groups of children are likely to encounter many exceptions. We now have a large quantity of results for children using cochlear implants, and it may be possible to determine some of the factors that have a significant effect on performance. This paper will attempt to identify some of these factors by reviewing speech perception results for 100 children implanted with the Nucleus 22-channel cochlear prosthesis in Australia and speech perception results for adult patients. This analysis will use an "information processing" model of a child using a cochlear implant. That is, we will assume that a child will benefit from a cochlear implant in terms of speech perception, production, and language development, if he or she receives a maximal amount of auditory information from the environment, and is able to process this information successfully. This model divides potential limiting or predictive factors into those that affect the information presented to the auditory system (eg, implant technology, surviving auditory neurons) and those that affect the processing of this information (eg, development of central auditory pathways, amount and consistency of auditory input).
-
ItemControl strategies for nerves modeled by self-exciting point processes( 1995)Cochlear implants electrically stimulate the auditory nerve with the aim of generating a perception of sound via an evoked neural response pattern. An electrically stimulated auditory nerve responds differently to an acoustically stimulated auditory nerve, and the surviving nerves of patients with a hearing loss may exhibit characteristics different from those of normal-hearing people. Thus, the cochlear implant evoked response pattern differs greatly from that of the normal hearing situation. One method of understanding such response patterns is to employ a mathematic model. If possible, the model should permit the determination of neural response differences between closely related sounds, and facilitate the design of stimuli that evoke desired neural response patterns. How should such a model be chosen?
-
ItemCochlear implants for congenitally deaf adolescents: is open-set speech perception a realistic expectation?( 1994)The prognosis for benefit from use of cochlear implants in congenitally deaf adolescents, who have a long duration of profound deafness prior to implantation, has typically been low. Speech perception results for two congenitally deaf patients implanted as adolescents at the University of Melbourne/Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital Clinic show that, after 12 months of experience, both patients had significant open-set speech discrimination scores without lipreading. These results suggest that although benefits may in general be low for congenitally deaf adolescents, individuals may attain significant benefits to speech perception after a short period of experience. Prospective patients from this group should therefore be considered on an individual basis with regard to prognosis for benefit from cochlear implantation.
-
ItemPartial hearing loss in the macaque following the co-administration of kanamycin and ethacrynic acid( 1994)Co-administration of kanamycin (KA) with the loop diuretic ethacrynic acid (EA) rapidly produces a profound hearing loss in the cat while maintaining normal renal function [Xu et al., Hear. Res. 70, 205-215 (1993)]. In the present paper we have applied this deafening procedure to the old world monkey Macaca fascicularis (macaque). Following the co-administration of KA and EA, the hearing loss in the macaque developed far slower than we observed in the cat. Moreover, unlike the cat, there was evidence of a partial recovery in the animal’s hearing, resulting in a bilaterally symmetrical high frequency hearing loss. The extent of this hearing loss was dependent on the dose of the EA administered. Finally, the most unexpected result of the present study was the degree of acute nephrotoxicity experienced by these animals following the drug administration. The sensitivity of this species to renal failure restricted the dose of EA that could be safely administered. In conclusion, the co-administration of KA and EA cannot reliably produce a profound hearing loss in the macaque. While it can produce a dose dependent high frequency hearing loss the animal will also experience acute renal failure that requires careful management.
-
ItemThe University of Melbourne/Nucleus cochlear prosthesis( 1988)This is a review of research to develop the University of Melbourne/Nucleus cochlear prosthesis for patients with a profound-total hearing loss. A more complete review can be obtained in Clark et al. A prototype receiver-stimulator and multiple-electrode array developed at the University of Melbourne was first implanted in a postlingually deaf adult patient with a profound-total hearing loss on 1 August 1978. A speech processing strategy which could help this patient understand running speech, especially when combined with lipreading was developed in 1978 following initial psychophysical studies. A prototype wearable speech processor was fabricated in 1979, that could provide significant help for the first two patients in understanding running speech when used in combination with lipreading compared with lipreading alone, and it also enabled them to understand some running speech when using electrical stimulation alone. An implantable receiver-stimulator and wearable speech processor embodying the principles of the prototype devices were then produced for clinical trial by the Australian biomedical firm, Nucleus Ltd, and its subsidiaries, Cochlear Pty Ltd and Cochlear Corporation. This cochlear implant was initially clinically trialled on six patients at The Royal Victorian Eye & Ear Hospital in 1982, and shown to give similar results to those obtained with the prototype device. In view of these findings a clinical trial was carried out for a Premarket Approval Application to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and extended to a number of centres in the US, Canada, and West Germany. This clinical trial confirmed that patients could understand running speech when electrical stimulation was combined with lipreading, and that some patients could also understand running speech when using electrical stimulation alone. Today, more than 600 patients world-wide are using cochlear implants developed from the research described in this paper.
-
ItemAn acoustic model of a multiple-channel cochlear implant( 1984)Abstract not available due to copyright.
-
ItemSpeech processing studies using an acoustic model of a multiple-channel cochlear implant( 1984)Abstract not available due to copyright.