Graeme Clark Collection
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13
-
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).
-
ItemSignal processing for multichannel cochlear implants: past, present and future [Abstract]( 1994)Since the late 1970's, many groups have worked on developing effective signal processing for multichannel cochlear implants. The main aim of such schemes has been to provide the best possible speech perception for those using the device. Secondary aims of providing awareness and discrimination of environmental sounds and appreciation of music have also been considered. Early designs included some that attempted to simulate the normal cochlea. The application of such complex processing schemes was limited by the technology of the times. In some cases, researchers reverted to the use of single channel systems which could be controlled reliably with the existing technology. In other cases, as with the Australian implant, a simple multichannel processing scheme was devised that allowed a reliable implementation with available electronics. Over the next 15 years, largely due to the improvements in integrated circuit technology, the signal processors have slowly become more complex. Further psychophysical research has shown how additional information can be transferred effectively to implant users via electrical stimulation of the cochlea. This has lead to rapid improvement in the speech perception abilities of adults using cochlear implants. Some of the main developments in signal processing over the last 15 years will be discussed along with the latest speech perception results obtained with the new SPEAK processing scheme for the Australian 22-channel cochlear implant. Initial results for SPEAK show mean scores of 70% (equivalent to 85-90% phoneme scores) for open set monosyllabic word testing for experienced adult users. Although there remains a large range of performance for all users of cochlear implants, average speech perception scores for all implanted adults have also improved significantly with the developments in signal processing. It appears likely that multichannel cochlear implants will be a viable alternative for the treatment of severe hearing loss in the future.
-
ItemIssues in long-term management of children with cochlear implants and tactile devices [Abstract]( 1994)For many children with severe and profound hearing losses, conventional hearing aids are unable to provide sufficient amplification to ensure good oral communication and/or in the case of very young children, development of speech and language. Traditionally a number of these children have opted for the use of sign language alone or in Total Communication approaches as a primary means of communication. The advent of multiple channel cochlear implants for children and the continuing development of multiple channel speech processing tactile devices provide auditory approaches to resolving communication difficulties for these children. The successful use of such devices depends on a number of factors including the information provided through the aid; the ease of use, convenience and reliability of the aid; the individual communication needs of the child; and the habilitation and management program used with the device. Long-term data has shown that children continue to show increased speech perception benefits from improvements in speech processing and from further experience with these devices. Habilitation and management programs must therefore be geared to meet the changing needs of children as they progress and of families as children mature and face new challenges. Habilitation must address specific individual needs in speech perception and in speech production. For very young children, benefits of improved speech perception should have an impact on the development of speech and language, and habilitation and management must emphasise the need for language growth.
-
ItemHabilitation issues in the management of children using the cochlear multiple-channel cochlear prosthesis(Wien, 1994)Since 1985, a significant proportion of patients seen in the Melbourne cochlear implant clinic have been children. The children represent a diverse population, with both congenital and acquired hearing-impairments, a wide-range of hearing levels pre-implant, and an age range from 2 years to 18 years. The habilitation programme developed for the overall group must be flexible enough to be tailored to the individual needs of each child, and to adapt to the changing needs of children as they progress. Long-term data shows that children are continuing to show improvements after 5-7 years of device use, particularly in their perception of open-set words and sentences. Habilitation programs must therefore be geared to the long-term needs of children and their families. Both speech perception and speech production need to be addressed in the specific content of the habilitation program for any individual child. In addition, for young children, the benefits of improved speech perception should have an impact on development of speech and language, and the focus of the programme for this age child will reflect this difference in emphasis. Specific materials and approaches will vary for very young children, school-age and teenage children. In addition, educational setting will have a bearing on the integration of listening and device use into the classroom environment.
-
ItemThe effects of auditory feedback from the nucleus cochlear implant on the vowel formant frequencies produced by children and adults( 1993)Cochlear implants provide an auditory signal with which profoundly deaf users may monitor their own speech production. The vowel production of two adults and three children who used the Nucleus multiple-electrode cochlear implant was examined to assess the effect of altered auditory feedback. Productions of words were recorded under conditions where the talkers received auditory feedback (speech processor turned on) and where no auditory feedback was provided (speech processor turned off). Data were collected over 3 days at weekly intervals. First and second formant frequencies were measured and the data were analysed to assess significant differences between auditory feedback conditions, vowel context, and data collection points. Overall, the results varied across talkers, across the data collection days, and depended on the consonant environment of the vowel. However, two effects of auditory feedback were noted. First, there was a generalized shift in first formant frequencies between the processor on and processor off conditions across three of the five subjects, but the shift differed in direction for each subject. Second, for three of the five talkers, the two front vowels /ε/ and /I/ were more neutralised in the absence of auditory feedback. However, this effect was less pronounced than that noted by previous studies.
-
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.
-
ItemSpeech perception with cochlear implants and tactile aids [Abstract]( 1988)Abstract not available due to copyright.
-
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.
-
ItemRehabilitation strategies for adult cochlear implant users(Monduzzi Editore, 1997)This paper summarizes open-set speech perception results using audition alone for a large group of adult Nucleus cochlear implant users in Melbourne. The results show wide variation in performance but significant improvement over the years from 1982 to 1995. Analysis of these results shows that speech processor developments have made the major contribution to this improvement over this time. Recent results for patients using the SPECTRA-SPEAK processor show !hat most subjects obtain good speech perception within six months of implantation and the need for intensive auditory training is minimal for many of these patients. Postoperative care should encourage consistent device use by providing opportunities for success and providing long term technical support for implant users. In some cases, including elderly patients, those with long term profound deafness, and those with special needs, there will still be a need for additional rehabilitation and auditory training support.