Objectives: To compare Anatomy-Based Fitting (ABF) vs. Default Fitting (DF) in terms of music perception and music enjoyment in CI users.
Methods: CI users ≥ 18 years implanted with a Synchrony ST Flex28 (MEDEL) with at least 12 months of experience with either ABF or DF, with good speech tests outcomes (≥ 65% disyllables) were enrolled. Music tasks were assessed with "Discovery" level of Meludia online interactive music tool, which includes Rhythm (beat count), Spatialization (differentiating between lower and higher notes), Stable/unstable (perception of stability or instability), Melody (ascendant or descendant), and Density (presence of one or multiple simultaneous sounds). Each task consists of five levels of difficulty. Participants were allowed a maximum of 4 attempts to complete a level. The Music-Related Quality of Life (MuRQoL) and the Munich Music (MUMU) questionnaires evaluated music background.
Results: Twenty CI users took part: 10 using ABF and 10 DF. There were no significant differences in age at implantation (53.2 ± 15.0 vs. 53.8 ± 14.5y), time since surgery (1.8 ± 0.5 vs. 2.4 ± 1.5y), or the percentage of disyllables in silence (68.0 ± 8.0 vs. 77.3 ± 11.5%) between groups. Regarding Meludia scores, differences were observed between both groups in Density: ABF had better mean scores when completing the level in only one attempt (8.7 ± 2.5 vs. 4.6 ± 3.1, p = 0.016) and required fewer restarts to complete the five levels (6.6 ± 1.6 vs. 9.3 ± 2.3; p = 0.009). Furthermore, the fifth level of Density was successfully completed by 60% of patients with ABF, while none of the patients with DF achieved this (p = 0.003). The scores obtained in MuRQoL were similar between ABF and DF groups. In a similar way, the MUMU showed no differences in terms of frequency and music importance.
Conclusions: ABF demonstrates specific advantages in certain musical tasks, specifically in processing multiple sounds simultaneously. Further studies are necessary to explore additional benefits of ABF in musical skills in CI users. NCT05319678.
Level Of Evidence: Level 3.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11617376 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2024.101533 | DOI Listing |
Braz J Otorhinolaryngol
November 2024
Hospital Universitario La Paz, IdiPAZ Research Institute, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Madrid, Spain; Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain.
Objectives: To compare Anatomy-Based Fitting (ABF) vs. Default Fitting (DF) in terms of music perception and music enjoyment in CI users.
Methods: CI users ≥ 18 years implanted with a Synchrony ST Flex28 (MEDEL) with at least 12 months of experience with either ABF or DF, with good speech tests outcomes (≥ 65% disyllables) were enrolled.
PLoS One
November 2024
King Abdullah Ear Specialist Center (KAESC), King Saud Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Background: Anatomy-based fitting (ABF) for cochlear implant users is a new era that seeks improved outcomes. Recently, different imaging modalities, such as plain X-rays, have been proposed to build the ABF as an alternative to the computed tomography (CT) scan. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and validity of OTOPLAN® software in building ABF using plain X-ray imaging.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAudiol Neurootol
November 2024
Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Introduction: Anatomy-based fitting (ABF), a relatively new technique for cochlear implant (CI) programming, attempts to lessen the impact of the electrode insertion location-related frequency-to-place mismatch (FPM). This study aimed to compare vowels and consonant perception in quiet and in noise among experienced adult CI users using the ABF and the regular, conventional-based fitting (CBF) map (pre-ABF) over 6 months.
Methods: Nine ears from eight experienced adult CI users were included in the experimental and longitudinal research.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol
September 2024
Department of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Comprehensive Hearing Center, University Hospital Würzburg, Josef-Schneider-Str. 11, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Objective: To evaluate objective and subjective hearing outcomes in experienced cochlear implant users with single sided deafness (SSD CI) who used fitting maps created via anatomy-based fitting (ABF) and clinically-based fitting (CBF).
Participants: Twelve SSD CI users with postlingual hearing loss.
Intervention: OTOPLAN (Version 3.
Otol Neurotol
August 2024
Department of Experimental Audiology, University Clinic for Otorhinolaryngology Münster of the Westfälische Wilhelms University, Münster, Germany.
Objectives: The aim is to investigate the influence of the anatomy-based fitting (ABF) in cochlear implants (CI) on the perception of specific musical features.
Design: The Montreal Battery of Evaluation of Amusia (MBEA) test battery was performed with a collective of 16 CI users with and without an anatomy-based fitting and 9 normal hearing subjects. The insertion angles of the intracochlear electrode arrays were calculated using Otoplan® (MED-EL, Innsbruck, Austria) software.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!