Paper  |   December 2006
Speech Recognition in Noise in Children With Cochlear Implants While Listening in Bilateral, Bimodal, and FM-System Arrangements
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Erin C. Schafer
    University of Texas at Dallas
  • Linda M. Thibodeau
    University of Texas at Dallas
  • Contact author: Erin C. Schafer, UNT Speech and Hearing Center, 907 W. Sycamore, Room 266, Denton, TX 76201. E-mail: eschafer@unt.edu.
Hearing & Speech Perception / Acoustics / Hearing Disorders / Hearing Aids, Cochlear Implants & Assistive Technology / Research Issues, Methods & Evidence-Based Practice
Paper   |   December 2006
Speech Recognition in Noise in Children With Cochlear Implants While Listening in Bilateral, Bimodal, and FM-System Arrangements
American Journal of Audiology December 2006, Vol.15, 114-126. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2006/015)
History: Accepted 30 Aug 2006 , Received 10 Mar 2006
American Journal of Audiology December 2006, Vol.15, 114-126. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2006/015)
History: Accepted 30 Aug 2006 , Received 10 Mar 2006

Purpose: Speech recognition performance in noise was examined in children with cochlear implants (CIs) when using (a) a second CI (bilateral group), (b) a hearing aid (HA) on the nonimplant ear (bimodal group), and (c) a frequency modulation (FM) system on 1 or both sides.

Method: While always maintaining use of the first CI, 2 groups participated in 6 conditions each using various listening arrangements with the second CI, HA, or FM system. Speech-in-noise thresholds were determined using simple phrases, classroom noise, and a method-of-limits approach.

Results: No group differences were detected across any conditions. In the no-FM-system conditions, no significant benefit of bilateral or bimodal input was found relative to a single CI. In the FM-system conditions, thresholds were significantly lower (up to 20 dB) relative to all other conditions when FM-system input was provided to the first-implanted side or to both sides simultaneously.

Conclusions: Children’s speech-in-noise thresholds did not improve when providing input to the second side with a CI or an HA relative to a single CI. However, children with CIs had better speech recognition in noise with the use of an FM system on one or both sides relative to the conditions with no FM system. Binaural conditions with a single FM receiver on the second CI or HA yielded significantly poorer performance than any other FM condition.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Audiology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access

Related Articles

Speech Recognition and Subjective Perceptions of Neck-Loop FM Receivers With Cochlear Implants
American Journal of Audiology June 2013, Vol.22, 53-64. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2012/11-0032)
Directional Benefit in Simulated Classroom Environments
American Journal of Audiology December 2007, Vol.16, 130-144. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2007/017)
Children’s Speech Recognition and Loudness Perception With the Desired Sensation Level v5 Quiet and Noise Prescriptions
American Journal of Audiology December 2012, Vol.21, 149-162. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2012/12-0002)
Benefits of Adaptive FM Systems on Speech Recognition in Noise for Listeners Who Use Hearing Aids
American Journal of Audiology June 2010, Vol.19, 36-45. doi:10.1044/1059-0889(2010/09-0014)
Coordinator’s Corner
SIG 9 Perspectives on Hearing and Hearing Disorders in Childhood March 2008, Vol.18, 2-3. doi:10.1044/hhdc18.1.2