单侧耳聋人工耳蜗植入者的听觉定位性能:当前成果指标的挑战和局限性。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Otology & Neurotology Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1097/MAO.0000000000004273
Chioma Anidi, Obada Abdulrazzak, Gerilyn Jones, Madison V Epperson, Nadine I Ibrahim, Renee M Banakis Hartl
{"title":"单侧耳聋人工耳蜗植入者的听觉定位性能:当前成果指标的挑战和局限性。","authors":"Chioma Anidi, Obada Abdulrazzak, Gerilyn Jones, Madison V Epperson, Nadine I Ibrahim, Renee M Banakis Hartl","doi":"10.1097/MAO.0000000000004273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Hypothesis: </strong>Acoustic localization accuracy metrics currently employed in clinical literature both overestimate and underestimate performance benefit of cochlear implantation (CI) for single-sided deafness (SSD).</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Although localization in SSD with CI has been investigated, performance characterization has relied heavily on average error. Although attractively concise, this measure may misrepresent performance. Here, we characterize frequency-specific localization on a granular level in subjects with CI for SSD as a critical analysis of localization outcome metrics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eight CI recipients with SSD were recruited. Stimuli of broadband (BBN) and narrowband noise (NBN) at low (500 Hz), mid (1000 Hz), and high (4000 Hz) frequencies were presented in a semianechoic chamber. Localization accuracy was quantified in mean angular error (MAE) and linear regression slope.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Use of a CI for SSD subjects improved localization performance by slope for all stimuli ( p ≤ 0.0033) to a level that was equal to normal-hearing controls at 1 and 4 kHz ( p ≥ 0.2281). MAE was also significantly improved for SSD subjects using CI for BBN stimuli ( p ≪ 0.0001); however, no statistically significant improvement in MAE was seen for NBN ( p ≥ 0.5773) with CI use. Descriptive analysis of individual subject performance highlights the reasons for contradictory results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is inherent challenge in characterizing localization benefit for individuals with CI for SSD. Our data demonstrate the limitations of utilization of average error as the sole metric for outcome benefit. We emphasize the importance of continued research investigating alternative outcome measures as we work toward a more refined understanding of the potential benefits and limitations of cochlear implantation for SSD.</p>","PeriodicalId":19732,"journal":{"name":"Otology & Neurotology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Auditory Localization Performance in Cochlear Implant Recipients With Single-Sided Deafness: The Challenges and Limitations of Current Outcome Metrics.\",\"authors\":\"Chioma Anidi, Obada Abdulrazzak, Gerilyn Jones, Madison V Epperson, Nadine I Ibrahim, Renee M Banakis Hartl\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MAO.0000000000004273\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Hypothesis: </strong>Acoustic localization accuracy metrics currently employed in clinical literature both overestimate and underestimate performance benefit of cochlear implantation (CI) for single-sided deafness (SSD).</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Although localization in SSD with CI has been investigated, performance characterization has relied heavily on average error. Although attractively concise, this measure may misrepresent performance. Here, we characterize frequency-specific localization on a granular level in subjects with CI for SSD as a critical analysis of localization outcome metrics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eight CI recipients with SSD were recruited. Stimuli of broadband (BBN) and narrowband noise (NBN) at low (500 Hz), mid (1000 Hz), and high (4000 Hz) frequencies were presented in a semianechoic chamber. Localization accuracy was quantified in mean angular error (MAE) and linear regression slope.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Use of a CI for SSD subjects improved localization performance by slope for all stimuli ( p ≤ 0.0033) to a level that was equal to normal-hearing controls at 1 and 4 kHz ( p ≥ 0.2281). MAE was also significantly improved for SSD subjects using CI for BBN stimuli ( p ≪ 0.0001); however, no statistically significant improvement in MAE was seen for NBN ( p ≥ 0.5773) with CI use. Descriptive analysis of individual subject performance highlights the reasons for contradictory results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is inherent challenge in characterizing localization benefit for individuals with CI for SSD. Our data demonstrate the limitations of utilization of average error as the sole metric for outcome benefit. We emphasize the importance of continued research investigating alternative outcome measures as we work toward a more refined understanding of the potential benefits and limitations of cochlear implantation for SSD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Otology & Neurotology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Otology & Neurotology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000004273\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Otology & Neurotology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000004273","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

假设:背景:目前临床文献中使用的声音定位精度指标既高估也低估了人工耳蜗植入术(CI)治疗单侧耳聋(SSD)的效果:背景:尽管已对使用 CI 的单侧耳聋患者的定位情况进行了研究,但其性能特征主要依赖于平均误差。这种方法虽然简洁明了,但可能会误导性能。在此,我们对带有 CI 的 SSD 受试者的频率特异性定位进行了细化,作为定位结果指标的重要分析:方法:我们招募了八名患有 SSD 的 CI 受试者。方法:招募了八名患有 SSD 的 CI 受试者,在半消声室中呈现低频(500 Hz)、中频(1000 Hz)和高频(4000 Hz)的宽带(BBN)和窄带噪声(NBN)刺激。定位精度以平均角度误差(MAE)和线性回归斜率进行量化:结果:对 SSD 受试者使用 CI 后,所有刺激的定位性能均有斜率改善(p ≤ 0.0033),在 1 和 4 kHz 频率下与正常听力对照组相当(p ≥ 0.2281)。使用 CI 的 SSD 受试者对 BBN 刺激的 MAE 也有明显改善(p≪0.0001);然而,使用 CI 对 NBN 刺激的 MAE 没有统计学意义上的明显改善(p≥0.5773)。对单个受试者表现的描述性分析强调了出现矛盾结果的原因:结论:在确定使用 CI 进行 SSD 的个体的定位益处方面存在固有的挑战。我们的数据表明,将平均误差作为衡量结果益处的唯一标准存在局限性。我们强调继续研究其他结果测量方法的重要性,因为我们正致力于更深入地了解人工耳蜗植入术治疗 SSD 的潜在益处和局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Auditory Localization Performance in Cochlear Implant Recipients With Single-Sided Deafness: The Challenges and Limitations of Current Outcome Metrics.

Hypothesis: Acoustic localization accuracy metrics currently employed in clinical literature both overestimate and underestimate performance benefit of cochlear implantation (CI) for single-sided deafness (SSD).

Background: Although localization in SSD with CI has been investigated, performance characterization has relied heavily on average error. Although attractively concise, this measure may misrepresent performance. Here, we characterize frequency-specific localization on a granular level in subjects with CI for SSD as a critical analysis of localization outcome metrics.

Methods: Eight CI recipients with SSD were recruited. Stimuli of broadband (BBN) and narrowband noise (NBN) at low (500 Hz), mid (1000 Hz), and high (4000 Hz) frequencies were presented in a semianechoic chamber. Localization accuracy was quantified in mean angular error (MAE) and linear regression slope.

Results: Use of a CI for SSD subjects improved localization performance by slope for all stimuli ( p ≤ 0.0033) to a level that was equal to normal-hearing controls at 1 and 4 kHz ( p ≥ 0.2281). MAE was also significantly improved for SSD subjects using CI for BBN stimuli ( p ≪ 0.0001); however, no statistically significant improvement in MAE was seen for NBN ( p ≥ 0.5773) with CI use. Descriptive analysis of individual subject performance highlights the reasons for contradictory results.

Conclusion: There is inherent challenge in characterizing localization benefit for individuals with CI for SSD. Our data demonstrate the limitations of utilization of average error as the sole metric for outcome benefit. We emphasize the importance of continued research investigating alternative outcome measures as we work toward a more refined understanding of the potential benefits and limitations of cochlear implantation for SSD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Otology & Neurotology
Otology & Neurotology 医学-耳鼻喉科学
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
509
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​Otology & Neurotology publishes original articles relating to both clinical and basic science aspects of otology, neurotology, and cranial base surgery. As the foremost journal in its field, it has become the favored place for publishing the best of new science relating to the human ear and its diseases. The broadly international character of its contributing authors, editorial board, and readership provides the Journal its decidedly global perspective.
期刊最新文献
Outcomes After Transcutaneous Bone-Conduction Implantation in Adults and Children: Erratum. Mendelian Randomization Study Reveals a Predicted Relationship between Sensorineural Hearing Loss and Mitochondrial Proteins. Cochlear Implantation Outcomes in Patients With Sporadic Inner Ear Schwannomas With and Without Simultaneous Tumor Resection. Fracture of the Promontory Following Myringotomy. Use of Speech-to-Text Translation Resources to Address Communication Barriers in Patients With Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1