Guidelines for Best Practice in the Audiological Management of Adults Using Bimodal Hearing Configurations

Jourdan T Holder, Meredith A Holcomb, Hillary Snapp, Robert F Labadie, Jantien Vroegop, Christine Rocca, Mohamed Salah Elgandy, Camille Dunn, René H Gifford, Jourdan T Holder, Meredith A Holcomb, Hillary Snapp, Robert F Labadie, Jantien Vroegop, Christine Rocca, Mohamed Salah Elgandy, Camille Dunn, René H Gifford

Abstract

Clinics are treating a growing number of patients with greater amounts of residual hearing. These patients often benefit from a bimodal hearing configuration in which acoustic input from a hearing aid on 1 ear is combined with electrical stimulation from a cochlear implant on the other ear. The current guidelines aim to review the literature and provide best practice recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of individuals with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who may benefit from bimodal hearing configurations. Specifically, the guidelines review: benefits of bimodal listening, preoperative and postoperative cochlear implant evaluation and programming, bimodal hearing aid fitting, contralateral routing of signal considerations, bimodal treatment for tinnitus, and aural rehabilitation recommendations.

Keywords: Bimodal; Cochlear implant; Hearing aid.

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICT OF INTEREST M.A.H. holds the position of Associate Editor for Otology & Neurotology Open and has been recused from reviewing or making decisions for the article. J.T.H., H.S., and R.H.G. are on the Editorial Board for Otology & Neurotology Open and have been recused from reviewing or making decisions for the article. The remaining authors disclose no conflicts of interest.

References

    1. Gifford RH, Dorman MF. Bimodal hearing or bilateral cochlear implants? Ask the patient. Ear Hear. 2019;40:501–516.
    1. Neuman AC, Waltzman SB, Shapiro WH, Neukam JD, Zeman AM, Svirsky MA. Self-reported usage, functional benefit, and audiologic characteristics of cochlear implant patients who use a contralateral hearing aid. Trends Hear. 2017;21:1014.
    1. Kessler DM, Wolfe J, Blanchard M, Gifford RH. Clinical application of spectral modulation detection: speech recognition benefit for combining a cochlear implant and contralateral hearing aid. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2020;63:1561–1571.
    1. Blamey PJ, Maat B, Başkent D, et al. A retrospective multicenter study comparing speech perception outcomes for bilateral implantation and bimodal rehabilitation. Ear Hear. 2015;36:408–416.
    1. Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Sheffield SW, Teece K, Olund AP. Availability of binaural cues for bilateral implant recipients and bimodal listeners with and without preserved hearing in the implanted ear. Audiol Neurootol. 2014;19:57–71.
    1. Illg A, Bojanowicz M, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz T, Büchner A. Evaluation of the bimodal benefit in a large cohort of cochlear implant subjects using a contralateral hearing aid. Otol Neurotol. 2014;35:e240–e244.
    1. Kessler DM, Ananthakrishnan S, Smith SB, D’Onofrio K, Gifford RH. Frequency following response and speech recognition benefit for combining a cochlear implant and contralateral hearing aid. Trends Hear. 2020;24:2331216520902001.
    1. Crew JD, Galvin JJ III, Fu QJ. Perception of sung speech in bimodal cochlear implant users. Trends Hear. 2016;20:2331216516669329.
    1. Gifford RH, Sunderhaus L, Sheffield S. Bimodal hearing with pediatric cochlear implant recipients: effect of acoustic bandwidth. Otol Neurotol. 2021;42:S19–S25.
    1. Cheng X, Liu Y, Wang B, et al. The benefits of residual hair cell function for speech and music perception in pediatric bimodal cochlear implant listeners. Neural Plast. 2018;2018:4610592.
    1. Choi JE, Moon IJ, Kim EY, et al. Sound localization and speech perception in noise of pediatric cochlear implant recipients: bimodal fitting versus bilateral cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2017;38:426–440.
    1. Davidson LS, Firszt JB, Brenner C, Cadieux JH. Evaluation of hearing aid frequency response fittings in pediatric and young adult bimodal recipients. J Am Acad Audiol. 2015;26:393–407.
    1. Davidson LS, Geers AE, Uchanski RM, Firszt JB. Effects of early acoustic hearing on speech perception and language for pediatric cochlear implant recipients. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019;62:3620–3637.
    1. Dunn CC, Tyler RS, Witt SA. Benefit of wearing a hearing aid on the unimplanted ear in adult users of a cochlear implant. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005;48:668–680.
    1. Sheffield SW, Gifford RH. The benefits of bimodal hearing: effect of frequency region and acoustic bandwidth. Audiol Neurootol. 2014;19:151–163.
    1. Devocht EMJ, Janssen AML, Chalupper J, Stokroos RJ, George ELJ. The benefits of bimodal aiding on extended dimensions of speech perception: intelligibility, listening effort, and sound quality. Trends Hear. 2017;21:2331216517727900.
    1. Firszt JB, Reeder RM, Holden LK, Dwyer NY; Asymmetric Hearing Study Team. Results in adult cochlear implant recipients with varied asymmetric hearing: a prospective longitudinal study of speech recognition, localization, and participant report. Ear Hear. 2018;39:845–862.
    1. Berrettini S, Passetti S, Giannarelli M, Forli F. Benefit from bimodal hearing in a group of prelingually deafened adult cochlear implant users. Am J Otolaryngol. 2010;31:332–338.
    1. D’Onofrio KL, Gifford RH. Bimodal benefit for music perception: effect of acoustic bandwidth. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021;64:1341–1353.
    1. D’Onofrio KL, Caldwell M, Limb C, Smith S, Kessler DM, Gifford RH. Musical emotion perception in bimodal patients: relative weighting of musical mode and tempo cues. Front Neurosci. 2020;14:114.
    1. Duret S, Bigand E, Guigou C, Marty N, Lalitte P, Bozorg Grayeli A. Participation of acoustic and electric hearing in perceiving musical sounds. Front Neurosci. 2021;15:558421.
    1. Gifford RH, Davis TJ, Sunderhaus LW, et al. Combined electric and acoustic stimulation with hearing preservation: effect of cochlear implant low-frequency cutoff on speech understanding and perceived listening difficulty. Ear Hear. 2017;38:539–553.
    1. Minimum Speech Test Battery. Minimum Speech Test Battery For Adult Cochlear Implant Users. 2011. Available at: . Accessed January 5, 2018.
    1. Zwolan TA, Schvartz-Leyzac KC, Pleasant T. Development of a 60/60 guideline for referring adults for a traditional cochlear implant candidacy evaluation. Otol Neurotol. 2020;41:895–900.
    1. Gifford RH. Cochlear Implant Patient Assessment: Evaluation of Candidacy, Performance, and Outcomes. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing; 2020.
    1. Lenarz M, Sönmez H, Joseph G, Büchner A, Lenarz T. Long-term performance of cochlear implants in postlingually deafened adults. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012;147:112–118.
    1. Busby PA, Arora K. Effects of threshold adjustment on speech perception in nucleus cochlear implant recipients. Ear Hear. 2016;37:303–311.
    1. Allum JH, Greisiger R, Probst R. Relationship of intraoperative electrically evoked stapedius reflex thresholds to maximum comfortable loudness levels of children with cochlear implants. Int J Audiol. 2002;41:93–99.
    1. Brickley G, Boyd P, Wyllie F, O’Driscoll M, Webster D, Nopp P. Investigations into electrically evoked stapedius reflex measures and subjective loudness percepts in the MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implant. Cochlear Implants Int. 2005;6:31–42.
    1. Gordon K, Papsin BC, Harrison RV. Programming cochlear implant stimulation levels in infants and children with a combination of objective measures. Int J Audiol. 2004;43(suppl 1):S28–S32.
    1. Hodges AV, Balkany TJ, Ruth RA, Lambert PR, Dolan-Ash S, Schloffman JJ. Electrical middle ear muscle reflex: use in cochlear implant programming. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;117:255–261.
    1. Lorens A, Walkowiak A, Piotrowska A, Skarzynski H, Anderson I. ESRT and MCL correlations in experienced paediatric cochlear implant users. Cochlear Implants Int. 2004;5:28–37.
    1. Shallop JK, Ash KR. Relationships among comfort levels determined by cochlear implant patient’s self-programming, audiologist’s programming, and electrical stapedius reflex thresholds. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl. 1995;166:175–176.
    1. Spivak LG, Chute PM, Popp AL, Parisier SC. Programming the cochlear implant based on electrical acoustic reflex thresholds: patient performance. Laryngoscope. 1994;104:1225–1230.
    1. Stephan K, Welzl-Müller K. Post-operative stapedius reflex tests with simultaneous loudness scaling in patients supplied with cochlear implants. Audiology. 2000;39:13–18.
    1. Walkowiak A, Lorens A, Polak M, et al. Evoked stapedius reflex and compound action potential thresholds versus most comfortable loudness level: assessment of their relation for charge-based fitting strategies in implant users. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2011;73:189–195.
    1. Geers A, Brenner C, Davidson L. Factors associated with development of speech perception skills in children implanted by age five. Ear Hear. 2003;24(1 suppl):24S–35S.
    1. Marozeau J, Florentine M. Loudness growth in individual listeners with hearing losses: a review. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007;122:EL81.
    1. Polak M, Hodges AV, King JE, Payne SL, Balkany TJ. Objective methods in postlingually and prelingually deafened adults for programming cochlear implants: ESR and NRT. Cochlear Implants Int. 2006;7:125–141.
    1. Zwolan TA, O’Sullivan MB, Fink NE, Niparko JK; CDACI Investigative Team. Electric charge requirements of pediatric cochlear implant recipients enrolled in the Childhood Development After Cochlear Implantation study. Otol Neurotol. 2008;29:143–148.
    1. Craddock L, Cooper H, van de Heyning P, et al. Comparison between NRT-based MAPs and behaviourally measured MAPs at different stimulation rates–a multicentre investigation. Cochlear Implants Int. 2003;4:161–170.
    1. de Vos JJ, Biesheuvel JD, Briaire JJ, et al. Use of electrically evoked compound action potentials for cochlear implant fitting: a systematic review. Ear Hear. 2018;39:401–411.
    1. Franck KH. A model of a nucleus 24 cochlear implant fitting protocol based on the electrically evoked whole nerve action potential. Ear Hear. 2002;23(suppl 1):67S–71S.
    1. Franck KH, Norton SJ. Estimation of psychophysical levels using the electrically evoked compound action potential measured with the neural response telemetry capabilities of Cochlear Corporation’s CI24M device. Ear Hear. 2001;22:289–299.
    1. Hughes ML, Abbas PJ, Brown CJ, Gantz BJ. Using electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds to facilitate creating MAPs for children with the Nucleus CI24M. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2000;57:260–265.
    1. Jeon EK, Brown CJ, Etler CP, O’Brien S, Chiou LK, Abbas PJ. Comparison of electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds and loudness estimates for the stimuli used to program the Advanced Bionics cochlear implant. J Am Acad Audiol. 2010;21:16–27.
    1. Joly CA, Péan V, Hermann R, Seldran F, Thai-Van H, Truy E. Using electrically-evoked compound action potentials to estimate perceptive levels in experienced adult cochlear implant users. Otol Neurotol. 2017;38:1278–1289.
    1. Smoorenburg GF, Willeboer C, van Dijk JE. Speech perception in nucleus CI24M cochlear implant users with processor settings based on electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds. Audiol Neurootol. 2002;7:335–347.
    1. Buchman CA, Herzog JA, McJunkin JL, et al. Assessment of speech understanding after cochlear implantation in adult hearing aid users a nonrandomized controlled trial. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020;146:916–924.
    1. Ching TY, Dillon H, Byrne D. Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998;103:1128–1140.
    1. Vroegop JL, Goedegebure A, van der Schroeff MP. How to optimally fit a hearing aid for bimodal cochlear implant users: a systematic review. Ear Hear. 2018;39:1039–1045.
    1. Vroegop JL, Homans NC, van der Schroeff MP, Goedegebure A. Comparing two hearing aid fitting algorithms for bimodal cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 2019;40:98–106.
    1. English R, Plant K, Maciejczyk M, Cowan R. Fitting recommendations and clinical benefit associated with use of the NAL-NL2 hearing-aid prescription in Nucleus cochlear implant recipients. Int J Audiol. 2016;55(suppl 2):S45–S50.
    1. Vroegop JL, Dingemanse JG, van der Schroeff MP, Goedegebure A. Comparing the effect of different hearing aid fitting methods in bimodal cochlear implant users. Am J Audiol. 2019;28:1–10.
    1. Digeser FM, Engler M, Hoppe U. Comparison of bimodal benefit for the use of DSL v5.0 and NAL-NL2 in cochlear implant listeners. Int J Audiol. 2020;59:383–391.
    1. Holtmann LC, Janosi A, Bagus H, et al. Aligning hearing aid and cochlear implant improves hearing outcome in bimodal cochlear implant users. Otol Neurotol. 2020;41:1350–1356.
    1. Veugen LC, Chalupper J, Snik AF, Opstal AJ, Mens LH. Matching automatic gain control across devices in bimodal cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 2016;37:260–270.
    1. Dwyer RT, Chen C, Hehrmann P, Dwyer NC, Gifford RH. Synchronized automatic gain control in bilateral cochlear implant recipients yields significant benefit in static and dynamic listening conditions. Trends Hear. 2021;25:23312165211014139.
    1. Ching TY, Psarros C, Hill M, Dillon H, Incerti P. Should children who use cochlear implants wear hearing aids in the opposite ear? Ear Hear. 2001;22:365–380.
    1. Ching TY, Incerti P, Hill M. Binaural benefits for adults who use hearing aids and cochlear implants in opposite ears. Ear Hear. 2004;25:9–21.
    1. Ching TY, Hill M, Brew J, et al. The effect of auditory experience on speech perception, localization, and functional performance of children who use a cochlear implant and a hearing aid in opposite ears. Int J Audiol. 2005;44:677–690.
    1. Aronoff JM, Yoon YS, Freed DJ, Vermiglio AJ, Pal I, Soli SD. The use of interaural time and level difference cues by bilateral cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010;127:EL87–EL92.
    1. van Schoonhoven J, Sparreboom M, van Zanten BG, et al. The effectiveness of bilateral cochlear implants for severe-to-profound deafness in adults: a systematic review. Otol Neurotol. 2013;34:190–198.
    1. Dorman MF, Cook Natale S, Agrawal S. The value of unilateral CIs, CI-CROS and bilateral CIs, with and without beamformer microphones, for speech understanding in a simulation of a restaurant environment. Audiol Neurootol. 2018;23:270–276.
    1. Litovsky R, Parkinson A, Arcaroli J, Sammeth C. Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation in adults: a multicenter clinical study. Ear Hear. 2006;27:714–731.
    1. Wackym PA, Runge-Samuelson CL, Firszt JB, Alkaf FM, Burg LS. More challenging speech-perception tasks demonstrate binaural benefit in bilateral cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 2007;28(suppl 2):80S–85S.
    1. Grantham DW, Ashmead DH, Ricketts TA, Haynes DS, Labadie RF. Interaural time and level difference thresholds for acoustically presented signals in post-lingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants using CIS+ processing. Ear Hear. 2008;29:33–44.
    1. Gifford RH, Dorman MF. The psychophysics of low-frequency acoustic hearing in electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS) and bimodal patients. J Hear Sci. 2012;2:33–44.
    1. Morera C, Manrique M, Ramos A, et al. Advantages of binaural hearing provided through bimodal stimulation via a cochlear implant and a conventional hearing aid: a 6-month comparative study. Acta Otolaryngol. 2005;125:596–606.
    1. Mosnier I, Lahlou G, Flament J, et al. Benefits of a contralateral routing of signal device for unilateral Naída CI cochlear implant recipients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019;276:2205–2213.
    1. Taal CH, van Barneveld DC, Soede W, Briaire JJ, Frijns JH. Benefit of contralateral routing of signals for unilateral cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am. 2016;140:393.
    1. Snapp HA, Hoffer ME, Spahr A, Rajguru S. Application of wireless contralateral routing of signal technology in unilateral cochlear implant users with bilateral profound hearing loss. J Am Acad Audiol. 2019;30:579–589.
    1. Ernst A, Baumgaertel RM, Diez A, Battmer RD. Evaluation of a wireless contralateral routing of signal (CROS) device with the Advanced Bionics Naída CI Q90 sound processor. Cochlear Implants Int. 2019;20:182–189.
    1. van Loon MC, Goverts ST, Merkus P, Hensen EF, Smits C. The addition of a contralateral microphone for unilateral cochlear implant users: not an alternative for bilateral cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol. 2014;35:e233–e239.
    1. Dwyer RT, Kessler D, Butera IM, Gifford RH. Contralateral routing of signal yields significant speech in noise benefit for unilateral cochlear implant recipients. J Am Acad Audiol. 2019;30:235–242.
    1. Deep NL, Spitzer ER, Shapiro WH, Waltzman SB, Roland JT Jr, Friedmann DR. Cochlear implantation in adults with single-sided deafness: outcomes and device use. Otol Neurotol. 2021;42:414–423.
    1. Holder JT, O’Connell B, Hedley-Williams A, Wanna G. Cochlear implantation for single-sided deafness and tinnitus suppression. Am J Otolaryngol. 2017;38:226–229.
    1. Ahmed MFM, Khater A. Tinnitus suppression after cochlear implantation in patients with single-sided deafness. Egypt J Otolaryngol. 2017;33:61–66.
    1. Peter N, Liyanage N, Pfiffner F, Huber A, Kleinjung T. The influence of cochlear implantation on tinnitus in patients with single-sided deafness: a systematic review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019;161:576–588.
    1. Ferguson M, Henshaw H. How does auditory training work? Joined-up thinking and listening. Semin Hear. 2015;36:237–249.
    1. Smith SL, Saunders GH, Chisolm TH, Frederick M, Bailey BA. Examination of individual differences in outcomes from a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing formal and informal individual auditory training programs. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016;59:876–886.
    1. Buchman CA, Gifford RH, Haynes DS, et al. Unilateral cochlear implants for severe, profound, or moderate sloping to profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss: a systematic review and consensus statements. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020;146:942–953.
    1. Goman AM, Lin FR. Prevalence of hearing loss by severity in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2016;106:1820–1822.
    1. Chien W, Lin FR. Prevalence of hearing aid use among older adults in the United States. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:292–293.
    1. iData Research Inc. US Market for Hearing Aids and Audiology Devices. 2010. Available at: . Accessed October 14, 2016.
    1. Sorkin DL. Cochlear implantation in the world’s largest medical device market: utilization and awareness of cochlear implants in the United States. Cochlear Implants Int. 2013;14(suppl 1):S4–12.
    1. Perkins E, Dietrich MS, Manzoor N, et al. Further evidence for the expansion of adult cochlear implant candidacy criteria. Otol Neurotol. 2021;42:815–823.
    1. World Health Organization. Deafness and Hearing Loss. 2021. Available at: . Accessed August 9, 2021.
    1. Prentiss S, Snapp H, Zwolan T. Audiology practices in the preoperative evaluation and management of adult cochlear implant candidates. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020;146:136–142.
    1. Turton L, Souza P, Thibodeau L, et al. Guidelines for best practice in the audiological management of adults with severe and profound hearing loss. Semin Hear. 2020;41:141–246.
    1. Dorman MF, Gifford RH. Combining acoustic and electric stimulation in the service of speech recognition. Int J Audiol. 2010;49:912–919.
    1. Holder JT, Reynolds SM, Sunderhaus LW, Gifford RH. Current profile of adults presenting for preoperative cochlear implant evaluation. Trends Hear. 2018;22:2331216518755288.
    1. Tyler RS, Owen RL, Bridges J, Gander PE, Perreau A, Mancini PC. Tinnitus suppression in cochlear implant patients using a sound therapy app. Am J Audiol. 2018;27:316–323.
    1. Tyler RS, Perreau A, Powers T, et al. Tinnitus sound therapy trial shows effectiveness for those with tinnitus. J Am Acad Audiol. 2020;31:6–16.
    1. van Hoesel RJM. Contrasting benefits from contralateral implants and hearing aids in cochlear implant users. Hear Res. 2012;288:100–113.
    1. Zhang T, Dorman MF, Spahr AJ. Information from the voice fundamental frequency (F0) region accounts for the majority of the benefit when acoustic stimulation is added to electric stimulation. Ear Hear. 2010;31:63–69.
    1. Seeber BU, Baumann U, Fastl H. Localization ability with bimodal hearing aids and bilateral cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004;116:1698–1709.
    1. Tyler RS, Parkinson AJ, Wilson BS, Witt S, Preece JP, Noble W. Patients utilizing a hearing aid and a cochlear implant: speech perception and localization. Ear Hear. 2002;23:98–105.
    1. Crew JD, Galvin JJ III, Landsberger DM, Fu QJ. Contributions of electric and acoustic hearing to bimodal speech and music perception. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0120279.
    1. Dorman MF, Gifford RH, Spahr AJ, McKarns SA. The benefits of combining acoustic and electric stimulation for the recognition of speech, voice and melodies. Audiol Neurootol. 2008;13:105–112.
    1. El Fata F, James CJ, Laborde ML, Fraysse B. How much residual hearing is ‘useful’ for music perception with cochlear implants? Audiol Neurootol. 2009;14(suppl 1):14–21.
    1. Gfeller K, Turner C, Oleson J, Kliethermes S, Driscoll V. Accuracy of cochlear implant recipients in speech reception in the presence of background music. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2012;121:782–791.
    1. Kong YY, Cruz R, Jones JA, Zeng FG. Music perception with temporal cues in acoustic and electric hearing. Ear Hear. 2004;25:173–185.
    1. Kong YY, Mullangi A, Marozeau J. Timbre and speech perception in bimodal and bilateral cochlear-implant listeners. Ear Hear. 2012;33:645–659.
    1. Prentiss SM, Friedland DR, Nash JJ, Runge CL. Differences in perception of musical stimuli among acoustic, electric, and combined modality listeners. J Am Acad Audiol. 2015;26:494–501.
    1. Dorman MF, Cook S, Spahr A, et al. Factors constraining the benefit to speech understanding of combining information from low-frequency hearing and a cochlear implant. Hear Res. 2015;322:107–111.
    1. Buss E, Pillsbury HC, Buchman CA, et al. Multicenter U.S. bilateral MED-EL cochlear implantation study: speech perception over the first year of use. Ear Hear. 2008;29:20–32.
    1. Grantham DW, Ashmead DH, Ricketts TA, Labadie RF, Haynes DS. Horizontal-plane localization of noise and speech signals by postlingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2007;28:524–541.
    1. Loiselle LH, Dorman MF, Yost WA, Cook SJ, Gifford RH. Using ILD or ITD cues for sound source localization and speech understanding in a complex listening environment by listeners with bilateral and with hearing-preservation cochlear implants. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2016;59:810–818.
    1. Potts LG, Litovsky RY. Transitioning from bimodal to bilateral cochlear implant listening: speech recognition and localization in four individuals. Am J Audiol. 2014;23:79–92.
    1. Weissgerber T, Rader T, Baumann U. Effectiveness of directional microphones in bilateral/bimodal cochlear implant users-impact of spatial and temporal noise characteristics. Otol Neurotol. 2017;38:e551–e557.
    1. Liu YW, Tao DD, Chen B, et al. Factors affecting bimodal benefit in pediatric Mandarin-speaking Chinese cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 2019;40:1316–1327.
    1. Luo X, Chang YP, Lin CY, Chang RY. Contribution of bimodal hearing to lexical tone normalization in Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users. Hear Res. 2014;312:1–8.
    1. Yang HI, Zeng FG. Bimodal benefits in Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users with contralateral residual acoustic hearing. Int J Audiol. 2017;56:S17–S22.
    1. Zhou Q, Bi J, Song H, Gu X, Liu B. Mandarin lexical tone recognition in bimodal cochlear implant users. Int J Audiol. 2020;59:548–555.
    1. Yoon YS, Liu A, Fu QJ. Binaural benefit for speech recognition with spectral mismatch across ears in simulated electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2011;130:EL94–E100.
    1. Yoon YS, Shin YR, Gho JS, Fu QJ. Bimodal benefit depends on the performance difference between a cochlear implant and a hearing aid. Cochlear Implants Int. 2015;16:159–167.
    1. Kong YY, Braida LD. Cross-frequency integration for consonant and vowel identification in bimodal hearing. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2011;54:959–980.
    1. Kong YY, Stickney GS, Zeng FG. Speech and melody recognition in binaurally combined acoustic and electric hearing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005;117:1351–1361.
    1. Kong YY, Carlyon RP. Improved speech recognition in noise in simulated binaurally combined acoustic and electric stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007;121:3717–3727.
    1. Sheffield SW, Jahn K, Gifford RH. Preserved acoustic hearing in cochlear implantation improves speech perception. J Am Acad Audiol. 2015;26:145–54.
    1. Shpak T, Most T, Luntz M. Phoneme recognition in bimodal hearing. Acta Otolaryngol. 2020;140:854–860.
    1. Gifford RH, Shallop JK, Peterson AM. Speech recognition materials and ceiling effects: considerations for cochlear implant programs. Audiol Neurootol. 2008;13:193–205.
    1. Nyirjesy S, Rodman C, Tamati TN, Moberly AC. Are there real-world benefits to bimodal listening? Otol Neurotol. 2020;41:e1111–e1117.
    1. Zhang T, Spahr AJ, Dorman MF, Saoji A. Relationship between auditory function of nonimplanted ears and bimodal benefit. Ear Hear. 2013;34:133–141.
    1. Amos NE, Humes LE. Contribution of high frequencies to speech recognition in quiet and noise in listeners with varying degrees of high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007;50:819–834.
    1. Baer T, Moore BC, Kluk K. Effects of low pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in noise for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am. 2002;112:1133–1144.
    1. Hogan CA, Turner CW. High-frequency audibility: benefits for hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998;104:432–441.
    1. Hornsby BW, Johnson EE, Picou E. Effects of degree and configuration of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to bilateral speech understanding. Ear Hear. 2011;32:543–555.
    1. Turner CW. Hearing loss and the limits of amplification. Audiol Neurootol. 2006;11(suppl 1):2–5.
    1. Turner CW, Cummings KJ. Speech audibility for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss. Am J Audiol. 1999;8:47–56.
    1. Vickers DA, Moore BC, Baer T. Effects of low-pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in quiet for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001;110:1164–1175.
    1. Moore BC, Vickers DA, Plack CJ, Oxenham AJ. Inter-relationship between different psychoacoustic measures assumed to be related to the cochlear active mechanism. J Acoust Soc Am. 1999;106:2761–2778.
    1. Dorman MF, Dougherty K. Shifts in phonetic identification with changes in signal presentation level. J Acoust Soc Am. 1981;69:1439–1440.
    1. Hornsby BW, Ricketts TA. The effects of compression ratio, signal-to-noise ratio, and level on speech recognition in normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001;109:2964–2973.
    1. Studebaker GA, Sherbecoe RL, McDaniel DM, Gwaltney CA. Monosyllabic word recognition at higher-than-normal speech and noise levels. J Acoust Soc Am. 1999;105:2431–2444.
    1. Boike KT, Souza PE. Effect of compression ratio on speech recognition and speech-quality ratings with wide dynamic range compression amplification. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2000;43:456–468.
    1. Chung K, Killion MC, Christensen LA. Ranking hearing aid input-output functions for understanding low-, conversational-, and high-level speech in multitalker babble. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007;50:304–322.
    1. Hohmann V, Kollmeier B. The effect of multichannel dynamic compression on speech intelligibility. J Acoust Soc Am. 1995;97:1191–1195.
    1. Alkaf FM, Firszt JB. Speech recognition in quiet and noise in borderline cochlear implant candidates. J Am Acad Audiol. 2007;18:872–882.
    1. Gifford RH, Dorman MF, Shallop JK, Sydlowski SA. Evidence for the expansion of adult cochlear implant candidacy. Ear Hear. 2010;31:186–194.
    1. Mudery JA, Francis R, McCrary H, Jacob A. Older individuals meeting Medicare cochlear implant candidacy criteria in noise but not in quiet: are these patients improved by surgery? Otol Neurotol. 2017;38:187–191.
    1. Sladen DP, Gifford RH, Haynes D, et al. Evaluation of a revised indication for determining adult cochlear implant candidacy. Laryngoscope. 2017;127:2368–2374.
    1. Lupo JE, Biever A, Kelsall DC. Comprehensive hearing aid assessment in adults with bilateral severe-profound sensorineural hearing loss who present for cochlear implant evaluation. Am J Otolaryngol. 2020;41:102300.
    1. Halpin C, Rauch SD. Clinical implications of a damaged cochlea: pure tone thresholds vs information-carrying capacity. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009;140:473–476.
    1. Carlson ML, Driscoll CL, Gifford RH, et al. Implications of minimizing trauma during conventional cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol. 2011;32:962–968.
    1. Skarzynski H, Matusiak M, Lorens A, Furmanek M, Pilka A, Skarzynski PH. Preservation of cochlear structures and hearing when using the Nucleus Slim Straight (CI422) electrode in children. J Laryngol Otol. 2016;130:332–339.
    1. Adunka O, Unkelbach MH, Mack M, Hambek M, Gstoettner W, Kiefer J. Cochlear implantation via the round window membrane minimizes trauma to cochlear structures: a histologically controlled insertion study. Acta Otolaryngol. 2004;124:807–812.
    1. Valente M Guideline for audiologic management of the adult patient. Audiol Online. 2006.
    1. Olsen WO. Average speech levels and spectra in various speaking/listening conditions: a summary of the Pearson, Bennett, & Fidell (1977) report. Am J Audiol. 1998;7:21–25.
    1. Skinner MW, Holden LK, Holden TA. Parameter selection to optimize speech recognition with the Nucleus implant. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;117:188–195.
    1. Roeser C Live voice speech recognition audiometry-- Stop the madness! Audiol Today. 2008;20:32–33.
    1. Uhler K, Biever A, Gifford RH. Method of speech stimulus presentation impacts pediatric speech recognition: monitored live voice versus recorded speech. Otol Neurotol. 2016;37:e70–e74.
    1. Kochkin S MarkeTrak VIII: consumer satisfaction with hearing aids is slowly increasing. Hear J. 2010;63:19–27.
    1. Pearsons KS, Bennett RL, Fidell S. Speech Levels in Various Noise Environments (Report No. EPA-600/1-77-025). Washington DC: Environmental Protection Agency; 1977.
    1. Smeds K, Wolters F, Rung M. Estimation of signal-to-noise ratios in realistic sound scenarios. J Am Acad Audiol. 2015;26:183–196.
    1. Gatehouse S, Noble W. The speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol. 2004;43:85–99.
    1. Firszt JB, Holden LK, Skinner MW, et al. Recognition of speech presented at soft to loud levels by adult cochlear implant recipients of three cochlear implant systems. Ear Hear. 2004;25:375–387.
    1. McRackan TR, Hand BN, Velozo CA, Dubno JR; Cochlear Implant Quality of Life Development Consortium. Cochlear Implant-Quality of Life (CIQOL): development of a profile specific instrument (CIQOL-35 Profile) and a global measure (CIQOL-10 Global). J Speech Hear Res. 2019;62:3554–3563.
    1. Krabbe PF, Hinderink JB, van den Broek P. The effect of cochlear implant use in postlingually deaf adults. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:864–873.
    1. Gifford RH. Cochlear Implant Patient Assessment: Evaluation of Candidacy, Performance, and Outcomes. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing; 2013.
    1. Fayad JN, Wanna GB, Micheletto JN, Parisier SC. Facial nerve paralysis following cochlear implant surgery. Laryngoscope. 2003;113:1344–1346.
    1. Mandour MF, Khalifa MA, Khalifa HMA, Amer MAR. Iatrogenic facial nerve exposure in cochlear implant surgery: incidence and clinical significance in the absence of intra-operative nerve monitoring. Cochlear Implants Int. 2019;20:250–254.
    1. Mikkelsen KS, Ovesen T, Swan CZ. Pre- and post-operative dizziness, tinnitus, and taste disturbances among cochlear implant recipients. J Laryngol Otol. 2017;131:309–315.
    1. Wong DJ, Moran M, O’Leary SJ. Outcomes after cochlear implantation in the very elderly. Otol Neurotol. 2016;37:46–51.
    1. Lloyd S, Meerton L, Di Cuffa R, Lavy J, Graham J. Taste change following cochlear implantation. Cochlear Implants Int. 2007;8:203–210.
    1. Olsen LB, Larsen S, Wanscher JH, Faber CE, Jeppesen J. Postoperative infections following cochlear implant surgery. Acta Otolaryngol. 2018;138:956–960.
    1. Battmer RD, O’Donoghue GM, Lenarz T. A multicenter study of device failure in European cochlear implant centers. Ear Hear. 2007;28(suppl 2):95S–99S.
    1. Kimura KS, O’Connell BP, Nassiri AM, Dedmon MM, Haynes DS, Bennett ML. Outcomes of revision cochlear implantation. Otol Neurotol. 2020;41:e705–e711.
    1. Stakhovskaya O, Sridhar D, Bonham BH, Leake PA. Frequency map for the human cochlear spiral ganglion: implications for cochlear implants. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2007;8:220–233.
    1. Cooper H, Craddock L. Cochlear Implants: A Practical Guide. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2006.
    1. Pierzycki RH, Corner C, Fielden CA, Kitterick PT. Effects of tinnitus on cochlear implant programming. Trends Hear. 2019;23:2331216519836624.
    1. Spahr AJ, Dorman MF. Effects of minimum stimulation settings for the Med El Tempo+ speech processor on speech understanding. Ear Hear. 2005;26(suppl 4):2S–6S.
    1. Davidson LS, Geers AE, Brenner C. Cochlear implant characteristics and speech perception skills of adolescents with long-term device use. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31:1310–1314.
    1. Baudhuin J, Cadieux J, Firszt JB, Reeder RM, Maxson JL. Optimization of programming parameters in children with the advanced bionics cochlear implant. J Am Acad Audiol. 2012;23:302–312.
    1. Holden LK, Firszt JB, Reeder RM, Uchanski RM, Dwyer NY, Holden TA. Factors affecting outcomes in cochlear implant recipients implanted with a perimodiolar electrode array located in scala tympani. Otol Neurotol. 2016;37:1662–1668.
    1. Wolfe J, Kasulis H. Relationships among objective measures and speech perception in adult users of the HiResolution Bionic Ear. Cochlear Implants Int. 2008;9:70–81.
    1. Sainz M, de la Torre A, Roldán C, Ruiz JM, Vargas JL. Analysis of programming maps and its application for balancing multichannel cochlear implants. Int J Audiol. 2003;42:43–51.
    1. Bresnihan M, Norman G, Scott F, Viani L. Measurement of comfort levels by means of electrical stapedial reflex in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127:963–966.
    1. Vaerenberg B, Smits C, De Ceulaer G, et al. Cochlear implant programming: a global survey on the state of the art. ScientificWorldJournal. 2014;2014:501738.
    1. Gajadeera EA, Galvin KL, Dowell RC, Busby PA. The change in electrical stimulation levels during 24 months postimplantation for a large cohort of adults using the Nucleus® cochlear implant. Ear Hear. 2017;38:357–367.
    1. Gajadeera EA, Galvin KL, Dowell RC, Busby PA. Investigation of electrical stimulation levels over 8 to 10 years postimplantation for a large cohort of adults using cochlear implants. Ear Hear. 2017;38:736–745.
    1. Hughes ML, Vander Werff KR, Brown CJ, et al. A longitudinal study of electrode impedance, the electrically evoked compound action potential, and behavioral measures in nucleus 24 cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 2001;22:471–486.
    1. Mosca F, Grassia R, Leone CA. Longitudinal variations in fitting parameters for adult cochlear implant recipients. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2014;34:111–116.
    1. Walravens E, Mawman D, O’Driscoll M. Changes in psychophysical parameters during the first month of programming the nucleus contour and contour advance cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants Int. 2006;7:15–32.
    1. Adunka OF, Gantz BJ, Dunn C, Gurgel RK, Buchman CA. Minimum reporting standards for adult cochlear implantation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018;159:215–219.
    1. Peterson GE, Lehiste I. Revised CNC lists for auditory tests. J Speech Hear Disord. 1962;27:62–70.
    1. Spahr AJ, Dorman MF, Litvak LM, et al. Development and validation of the AzBio sentence lists. Ear Hear. 2012;33:112–117.
    1. Etymotic Research Inc. BKB-SIN Test. Etymotic Research, Inc; 2005.
    1. Balkany TJ, Hodges AV, Buchman CA, et al. Cochlear implant soft failures consensus development conference statement. Otol Neurotol. 2005;26:815–818.
    1. Hemmingson C, Messersmith JJ. Cochlear implant practice patterns: the U.S. trends with pediatric patients. J Am Acad Audiol. 2018;29:722–733.
    1. Scherf FW, Arnold LP; Poster presentation at the 12th International Conference on Cochlear Implants and Other Implantable Auditory Technologies, ESPO 2012, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, SFORL 2012, Paris, France. Exploring the clinical approach to the bimodal fitting of hearing aids and cochlear implants: results of an international survey. Acta Otolaryngol. 2014;134:1151–1157.
    1. Siburt HW, Holmes AE. Bimodal programming: a survey of current clinical practice. Am J Audiol. 2015;24:243–249.
    1. Cochlear Corporation. Cochlear Nucleus Sound Processors Bimodal Fitting Guide: All Hearing Aid Brands. 2017. Available at: . Accessed July 31, 2021.
    1. Oticon Medical. Oticon Bimodal Hearing Aid Fitting Guidelines. 2015. Available at: . Accessed July 31, 2021.
    1. Oticon. Bimodal Hearing Aid Fitting: Benefits and Update in Oticon Genie 2. 2019. Available at: . Accessed July 31, 2021.
    1. Advanced Bionics. Adaptive Phonak Digital Bimodal Fitting Formula: Optimizing Hearing for Listeners With a Cochlear Implant and Contralateral Hearing Aid White Paper. 2016. Available at: . Accessed August 3, 2021..
    1. Warren SE, Noelle Dunbar M, Bosworth C, Agrawal S. Evaluation of a novel bimodal fitting formula in Advanced Bionics cochlear implant recipients. Cochlear Implants Int. 2020;21:323–337.
    1. Zirn S, Angermeier J, Arndt S, Aschendorff A, Wesarg T. Reducing the device delay mismatch can improve sound localization in bimodal cochlear implant/hearing-aid users. Trends Hear. 2019;23:2331216519843876.
    1. Messersmith JJ, Jorgensen LE, Hagg JA. Reduction in high-frequency hearing aid gain can improve performance in patients with contralateral cochlear implant: a pilot study. Am J Audiol. 2015;24:462–468.
    1. Morera C, Cavalle L, Manrique M, et al. Contralateral hearing aid use in cochlear implanted patients: multicenter study of bimodal benefit. Acta Otolaryngol. 2012;132:1084–1094.
    1. Neuman AC, Svirsky MA. Effect of hearing aid bandwidth on speech recognition performance of listeners using a cochlear implant and contralateral hearing aid (bimodal hearing). Ear Hear. 2013;34:553–561.
    1. Potts LG, Skinner MW, Litovsky RA, Strube MJ, Kuk F. Recognition and localization of speech by adult cochlear implant recipients wearing a digital hearing aid in the nonimplanted ear (bimodal hearing). J Am Acad Audiol. 2009;20:353–373.
    1. Ullauri A, Crofts H, Wilson K, Titley S. Bimodal benefits of cochlear implant and hearing aid (on the non-implanted ear): a pilot study to develop a protocol and a test battery. Cochlear Implants Int. 2007;8:29–37.
    1. Neuman AC, Zeman A, Neukam J, Wang B, Svirsky MA. The effect of hearing aid bandwidth and configuration of hearing loss on bimodal speech recognition in cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 2019;40:621–635.
    1. Zhang T, Dorman MF, Gifford R, Moore BC. Cochlear dead regions constrain the benefit of combining acoustic stimulation with electric stimulation. Ear Hear. 2014;35:410–417.
    1. Moore BC, Huss M, Vickers DA, Glasberg BR, Alcántara JI. A test for the diagnosis of dead regions in the cochlea. Br J Audiol. 2000;34:205–224.
    1. Moore BC, Glasberg BR, Stone MA. New version of the TEN test with calibrations in dB HL. Ear Hear. 2004;25:478–487.
    1. Gifford RH. Bimodal hearing: how to optimize bimodal fitting. Hear J. 2019;72:10, 12, 13.
    1. Hua H, Johansson B, Jönsson R, Magnusson L. Cochlear implant combined with a linear frequency transposing hearing aid. J Am Acad Audiol. 2012;23:722–732.
    1. McDermott H, Henshall K. The use of frequency compression by cochlear implant recipients with postoperative acoustic hearing. J Am Acad Audiol. 2010;21:380–389.
    1. Park LR, Teagle HF, Buss E, Roush PA, Buchman CA. Effects of frequency compression hearing aids for unilaterally implanted children with acoustically amplified residual hearing in the nonimplanted ear. Ear Hear. 2012;33:e1–e12.
    1. Perreau AE, Bentler RA, Tyler RS. The contribution of a frequency-compression hearing aid to contralateral cochlear implant performance. J Am Acad Audiol. 2013;24:105–120.
    1. Veugen LCE, Chalupper J, Mens LHM, Snik AFM, van Opstal AJ. Effect of extreme adaptive frequency compression in bimodal listeners on sound localization and speech perception. Cochlear Implants Int. 2017;18:266–277.
    1. Ellis RJ, Munro KJ. Predictors of aided speech recognition, with and without frequency compression, in older adults. Int J Audiol. 2015;54:467–475.
    1. Glista D, Scollie S, Bagatto M, Seewald R, Parsa V, Johnson A. Evaluation of nonlinear frequency compression: clinical outcomes. Int J Audiol. 2009;48:632–644.
    1. Hall MW, Prentiss SM, Coto J, Zwolan TA, Holcomb MA. Decoding billing practices in cochlear implant programs. Ear Hear. 2022;43:477–486.
    1. Peters BR, Wyss J, Manrique M. Worldwide trends in bilateral cochlear implantation. Laryngoscope. 2010;120(suppl 2):S17–S44.
    1. Blauert J Spatial Hearing: The Psychophysics of Human Sound Localization. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1997.
    1. Litovsky RY, Parkinson A, Arcaroli J, et al. Bilateral cochlear implants in adults and children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130:648–655.
    1. Litovsky RY, Parkinson A, Arcaroli J. Spatial hearing and speech intelligibility in bilateral cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 2009;30:419–431.
    1. van Hoesel RJ. Exploring the benefits of bilateral cochlear implants. Audiol Neurootol. 2004;9:234–246.
    1. Desmet J, Bouzegta R, Hofkens A, et al. Clinical need for a Baha trial in patients with single-sided sensorineural deafness. Analysis of a Baha database of 196 patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2012;269:799–805.
    1. Sano H, Okamoto M, Ohhashi K, Iwasaki S, Ogawa K. Quality of life reported by patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss. Otol Neurotol. 2013;34:36–40.
    1. Schrøder SA, Ravn T, Bonding P. BAHA in single-sided deafness: patient compliance and subjective benefit. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31:404–408.
    1. Van Wanrooij MM, Van Opstal AJ. Contribution of head shadow and pinna cues to chronic monaural sound localization. J Neurosci. 2004;24:4163–4171.
    1. Snapp HA, Holt FD, Liu X, Rajguru SM. Comparison of speech-in-noise and localization benefits in unilateral hearing loss subjects using contralateral routing of signal hearing aids or bone-anchored implants. Otol Neurotol. 2017;38:11–18.
    1. Snapp HA, Hoffer ME, Liu X, Rajguru SM. Effectiveness in rehabilitation of current wireless CROS technology in experienced bone-anchored implant users. Otol Neurotol. 2017;38:1397–1404.
    1. Harford E, Barry J. A rehabilitative approach to the problem of unilateral hearing impairment: the contralateral routing of signals CROS. J Speech Hear Disord. 1965;30:121–138.
    1. Niparko JK, Cox KM, Lustig LR. Comparison of the bone anchored hearing aid implantable hearing device with contralateral routing of offside signal amplification in the rehabilitation of unilateral deafness. Otol Neurotol. 2003;24:73–78.
    1. Noble JH, Labadie RF, Gifford RH, Dawant BM. Image-guidance enables new methods for customizing cochlear implant stimulation strategies. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2013;21:820–829.
    1. Schleich P, Nopp P, D’Haese P. Head shadow, squelch, and summation effects in bilateral users of the MED-EL COMBI 40/40+ cochlear implant. Ear Hear. 2004;25:197–204.
    1. Kerber S, Seeber BU. Sound localization in noise by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 2012;33:445–457.
    1. van Hoesel RJ, Tyler RS. Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am. 2003;113:1617–1630.
    1. Arora R, Amoodi H, Stewart S, et al. The addition of a contralateral routing of signals microphone to a unilateral cochlear implant system–a prospective study in speech outcomes. Laryngoscope. 2013;123:746–751.
    1. Adams PF, Hendershot GE, Marano MA; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/National Center for Health Statistics. Current estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, 1996. Vital Health Stat 10. 1999:1–203.
    1. Jalessi M, Farhadi M, Asghari A, et al. Tinnitus: an epidemiologic study in Iranian population. Acta Med Iran. 2013;51:886–891.
    1. Khedr EM, Ahmed MA, Shawky OA, Mohamed ES, El Attar GS, Mohammad KA. Epidemiological study of chronic tinnitus in Assiut, Egypt. Neuroepidemiology. 2010;35:45–52.
    1. KochKin S, Tyler R, Born J. MarkeTrak VIII: the prevalence of tinnitus in the United States and the self-reported efficacy of various treatments. Hear Rev. 2011;18:10–27.
    1. Nondahl DM, Cruickshanks KJ, Wiley TL, Klein R, Klein BE, Tweed TS. Prevalence and 5-year incidence of tinnitus among older adults: the epidemiology of hearing loss study. J Am Acad Audiol. 2002;13:323–331.
    1. Park RJ, Moon JD. Prevalence and risk factors of tinnitus: the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2010–2011, a cross-sectional study. Clin Otolaryngol. 2014;39:89–94.
    1. Quaranta A, Assennato G, Sallustio V. Epidemiology of hearing problems among adults in Italy. Scand Audiol Suppl. 1996;42:9–13.
    1. Shargorodsky J, Curhan GC, Farwell WR. Prevalence and characteristics of tinnitus among US adults. Am J Med. 2010;123:711–718.
    1. Sindhusake D, Mitchell P, Newall P, Golding M, Rochtchina E, Rubin G. Prevalence and characteristics of tinnitus in older adults: the Blue Mountains Hearing Study. Int J Audiol. 2003;42:289–294.
    1. Tyler RS. Patient preferences and willingness to pay for tinnitus treatments. J Am Acad Audiol. 2012;23:115–125.
    1. House WF. Cochlear implants. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1976;85(3 pt 2, suppl 27):1–93.
    1. Baguley DM, Atlas MD. Cochlear implants and tinnitus. Prog Brain Res. 2007;166:347–355.
    1. Di Nardo W, Cantore I, Cianfrone F, Melillo P, Scorpecci A, Paludetti G. Tinnitus modifications after cochlear implantation. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2007;264:1145–1149.
    1. Quaranta N, Wagstaff S, Baguley DM. Tinnitus and cochlear implantation. Int J Audiol. 2004;43:245–251.
    1. Quaranta N, Fernandez-Vega S, D’elia C, Filipo R, Quaranta A. The effect of unilateral multichannel cochlear implant on bilaterally perceived tinnitus. Acta Otolaryngol. 2008;128:159–163.
    1. Yuen E, Ma C, Nguyen SA, Meyer TA, Lambert PR. The effect of cochlear implantation on tinnitus and quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Otol Neurotol. 2021;42:1113–1122.
    1. Vermeire K, Van de Heyning P. Binaural hearing after cochlear implantation in subjects with unilateral sensorineural deafness and tinnitus. Audiol Neurootol. 2009;14:163–171.
    1. Hoth S, Rösli-Khabas M, Herisanu I, Plinkert PK, Praetorius M. Cochlear implantation in recipients with single-sided deafness: audiological performance. Cochlear Implants Int. 2016;17:190–199.
    1. Mo B, Harris S, Lindbaek M. Cochlear implants and health status: a comparison with other hearing-impaired patients. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2004;113:914–921.
    1. Roche JP, Hansen MR. On the Horizon: cochlear implant technology. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2015;48:1097–1116.
    1. Roland JT Jr, Gantz BJ, Waltzman SB, Parkinson AJ; Multicenter Clinical Trial Group. United States multicenter clinical trial of the cochlear nucleus hybrid implant system. Laryngoscope. 2016;126:175–181.
    1. Elg MS, y, Tyler R, Dunn C, Hansen M, Gantz B. A unilateral cochlear implant for tinnitus. Int Tinnitus J. 2018;22:128–132.
    1. Buechner A, Brendel M, Lesinski-Schiedat A, et al. Cochlear implantation in unilateral deaf subjects associated with ipsilateral tinnitus. Otol Neurotol. 2010;31:1381–1385.
    1. Hansen MR, Gantz BJ, Dunn C. Outcomes after cochlear implantation for patients with single-sided deafness, including those with recalcitrant Ménière’s disease. Otol Neurotol. 2013;34:1681–1687.
    1. Kleinjung T, Steffens T, Strutz J, Langguth B. Curing tinnitus with a Cochlear Implant in a patient with unilateral sudden deafness: a case report. Cases J. 2009;2:7462.
    1. Sullivan CB, Al-Qurayshi Z, Zhu V, et al. Long-term audiologic outcomes after cochlear implantation for single-sided deafness. Laryngoscope. 2020;130:1805–1811.
    1. Van de Heyning P, Vermeire K, Diebl M, Nopp P, Anderson I, De Ridder D. Incapacitating unilateral tinnitus in single-sided deafness treated by cochlear implantation. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2008;117:645–652.
    1. Gantz BJ, Turner C, Gfeller KE. Acoustic plus electric speech processing: preliminary results of a multicenter clinical trial of the Iowa/Nucleus Hybrid implant. Audiol Neurootol. 2006;11(suppl 1):63–68.
    1. Tyler RS, Baker LJ. Difficulties experienced by tinnitus sufferers. J Speech Hear Disord. 1983;48:150–154.
    1. Tyler RS, Rubinstein J, Pan T, et al. Electrical stimulation of the cochlea to reduce tinnitus. Semin Hear. 2008;29:326–332.
    1. Garber S, Ridgely MS, Bradley M, Chin KW. Payment under public and private insurance and access to cochlear implants. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002;128:1145–1152.
    1. Carlson ML, Sladen DP, Gurgel RK, Tombers NM, Lohse CM, Driscoll CL. Survey of the American Neurotology Society on Cochlear Implantation: part 1, Candidacy Assessment and Expanding Indications. Otol Neurotol. 2018;39:e12–e19.
    1. Heydebrand G, Mauze E, Tye-Murray N, Binzer S, Skinner M. The efficacy of a structured group therapy intervention in improving communication and coping skills for adult cochlear implant recipients. Int J Audiol. 2005;44:272–280.
    1. Sweetow RW. Aural rehabilitation builds up patients’ communication skills. Hear J. 2015;68:8.
    1. Blamey P, Artieres F, Başkent D, et al. Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants: an update with 2251 patients. Audiol Neurootol. 2013;18:36–47.
    1. Plant G, Bernstein CM, Levitt H. Optimizing performance in adult cochlear implant users through clinician directed auditory training. Semin Hear. 2015;36:296–310.
    1. Loeffler C, Aschendorff A, Burger T, Kroeger S, Laszig R, Arndt S. Quality of life measurements after cochlear implantation. Open Otorhinolaryngol J. 2010;4:47–54.
    1. McRackan TR, Reddy P, Costello MS, Dubno JR. Role of preoperative patient expectations in adult cochlear implant outcomes. Otol Neurotol. 2021;42:e130–e136.
    1. Schumann A, Serman M, Gefeller O, Hoppe U. Computer-based auditory phoneme discrimination training improves speech recognition in noise in experienced adult cochlear implant listeners. Int J Audiol. 2015;54:190–198.
    1. Oba SI, Fu QJ, Galvin JJ III. Digit training in noise can improve cochlear implant users’ speech understanding in noise. Ear Hear. 2011;32:573–581.
    1. Ingvalson EM, Lee B, Fiebig P, Wong PC. The effects of short-term computerized speech-in-noise training on postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant recipients. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2013;56:81–88.
    1. Green T, Faulkner A, Rosen S. Computer-based connected-text training of speech-in-noise perception for cochlear implant users. Trends Hear. 2019;23:2331216519843878.
    1. Ferguson MA, Henshaw H. Auditory training can improve working memory, attention, and communication in adverse conditions for adults with hearing loss. Front Psychol. 2015;6:556.
    1. Frederigue-Lopes NB, Bevilacqua MC, Costa OA. Munich music questionnaire: adaptation into Brazilian Portuguese and application in cochlear implant users. Codas. 2015;27:13–20.
    1. Drennan WR, Rubinstein JT. Music perception in cochlear implant users and its relationship with psychophysical capabilities. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2008;45:779–789.
    1. Dritsakis G, van Besouw RM, Kitterick P, Verschuur CA. A music-related quality of life measure to guide music rehabilitation for adult cochlear implant users. Am J Audiol. 2017;26:268–282.
    1. van Besouw RM, Oliver BR, Grasmeder ML, Hodkinson SM, Solheim H. Evaluation of an interactive music awareness program for cochlear implant recipients. Music Percept. 2016;33:493–508.
    1. Hanna-Pladdy B, MacKay A. The relation between instrumental musical activity and cognitive aging. Neuropsychology. 2011;25:378–386.
    1. Parbery-Clark A, Strait DL, Anderson S, Hittner E, Kraus N. Musical experience and the aging auditory system: implications for cognitive abilities and hearing speech in noise. PLoS One. 2011;6:e18082.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner