Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDawson, P. W.en_US
dc.contributor.authorDecker, J. A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPsarros, C. E.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-22T08:48:04Z
dc.date.available2014-05-22T08:48:04Z
dc.date.issued2004en_US
dc.identifier.citationDawson, P. W., Decker, J. A., & Psarros, C. E. (2004). Optimizing dynamic range in children using the nucleus cochlear implant. Ear & Hearing, 25(3), 230-241.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0196-0202en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11343/33353
dc.descriptionThis is a publisher’s version of an article published in Ear and Hearing 2004. This version is reproduced with permission of Lippincott Wilkins & Williams.en_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: The aim of this study was to investigate the benefits of the preprocessing scheme “Adaptive Dynamic Range Optimization” (ADRO) in children using Nucleus cochlear implants. Previous research with adults indicates improved speech perception in quiet and improved sound quality in everyday listening environments with the ADRO scheme. Design: Children were given 4 wk of take-home experience with ADRO, with a minimum of 2 wk in which ADRO was “locked-in.” After 1 wk of ADRO use and again after 4 wk of ADRO use, Bench- Kowal-Bamford (BKB) sentence perception in quiet at a low input level of 50 dB SPL (unweighted root mean square) and sentence perception in noise were compared with the child’s everyday (Standard) program and the ADRO program. Children also rated the loudness of a variety of environmental sounds and indicated which program provided the best hearing in a variety of everyday listening situations. Results: On average, BKB sentence perception in quiet at 50 dB SPL was significantly better with the ADRO program compared with the Standard program. The group mean improvement was 8.60%. Similarly, group mean scores for BKB sentences presented at 65 dB SPL in multitalker babble were significantly higher with the ADRO program (an improvement of 6.87%). The ADRO program was the preferred program in 46% of the listening situations, whereas the Standard program was preferred in 26% of situations. Everyday sounds were not unacceptably loud with ADRO. Conclusions: There was an ADRO benefit for this group of children in quiet and in noise. These findings suggest that young children would benefit from the ADRO programming option being locked in along with other processor settings in the SPrint processor once their MAP levels have stabilized. Some older children and teenagers may choose to use ADRO selectively for specific listening situations.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkinsen_US
dc.relation.ispartofScientific publications, vol.14, 2004-2012en_US
dc.subjectcochlear implantsen_US
dc.subjectotolaryngologyen_US
dc.subjectotologyen_US
dc.subjectAdaptive dynamic range optimization (ADRO)en_US
dc.titleOptimizing dynamic range in children using the nucleus cochlear implanten_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/01.AUD.0000130795.66185.28
melbourne.peerreviewPeer Revieweden_US
melbourne.affiliationThe University of Melbourneen_US
melbourne.publication.statusPublisheden_US
melbourne.source.titleEar & Hearingen_US
melbourne.source.volume25en_US
melbourne.source.issue3en_US
melbourne.source.pages230-241en_US
melbourne.elementsidNA
melbourne.contributor.authoren_US
melbourne.contributor.authoren_US
melbourne.contributor.authoren_US
melbourne.accessrightsOpen Access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record